What is used to limit competition in order to maintain an alternative source?

The correct choice, "Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources," is utilized in contracting to maintain an alternative source of supply while controlling competition in specific cases. This approach allows agencies to seek bids or proposals from selected sources only, typically when it is determined that full competition would compromise the integrity of the procurement process or when there are limited suppliers capable of fulfilling a specific need.

In scenarios where an agency has a legitimate reason to exclude certain sources—such as proprietary considerations, past performance issues, or competitive advantages—it can invoke this method. By doing so, the agency ensures that it preserves the option of working with a particular supplier or group of suppliers while also adhering to regulatory requirements regarding competition. This can potentially balance the need for competition with the necessity of ensuring continued access to critical services or products.

The other options highlight different competitive scenarios. An exclusion clause generally refers to a stipulation that limits specific obligations or risks, while full and open competition implies inviting all qualified vendors to participate without restrictions. Competitive bidding involves soliciting bids from numerous suppliers, which does not directly account for preserving alternative sources in the same way the selected option does. Therefore, the choice reflects a nuanced understanding of managing supplier relationships in a competitive environment.