An Army contracting officer is managing a commercial item contract for base ambulance services that had been awarded pursuant to FAR Part 12. The contract is for one year and four one year options. The contractor is in the first year of performance, of which six months remain, when the contracting officer receives a whistleblower complaint that the contractor is not complying with the contract statement of work. The whistleblower claims that the contractor is using expired medications, is saving and using bandages from packages that had been previously opened, and is using ambulance vehicles that are not properly maintained, all in violation of express requirements in the statement of work. A surprise inspection reveals that the whistleblower complaint is true, and the contracting officer determines that the failure to comply with the statement of work is unacceptable and dangerous. When confronted, the contractor asserts that the complaints are about standard industry practices. But the chief of the installation's medical service, deeply upset, states that the contractor's performance is unacceptable and that he does not want to the installation to rely on the contractor any longer. He demands that the contracting officer replace the contractor immediately After discussing the matter with her superior and contracts attorney, the contracting officer decides that termination for cause is the proper course of action. The contract contains the clause at FAR 52.212-4, Contract Terms and ConditionsCommercial Items, in which paragraph (m) addresses the Government's right to terminate for cause. The contracting officer has never terminated a commercial item contract for cause, so she consults FAR 49.607, which is about delinquency notices: (a) Cure notice. If a contract is to be terminated for default before the delivery date, a "Cure Notice" is required by the Default clause. Before using this notice, it must be ascertained that an amount of time equal to or greater than the period of "cure" remains in the contract delivery schedule or any extension to it. If the time remaining in the contract delivery schedule is not sufficient to permit a realistic "cure" period of 10 days or more, the "Cure Notice" should not be issued. The contracting officer thinks that the requirement for a cure notice is strange. The contractor has already breached the contract and may have put lives at risk by doing so. Why should she have to give the contractor a chance to "cure" something that has already happened? The chief of the base medical service is outraged at the prospect of a cure notice and demands that the contracting officer terminate the contract immediately based on the contractor's past failures to perform. The contracting officer's superior agrees that termination for cause is proper.

A. Must the contracting officer issue a cure notice and give the contractor time to take corrective action before terminating the contract for cause? Yes or No?

B. What FAR citation (be specific and complete) supports your answer?

C. Show a deductive (syllogistic) argument that supports the answer to B above.