Comment on FR Doc # 2026-12561
Anonymous AnonymousSupportIndividual
Summary: The commenter is requesting the inclusion of a specific exception in the RFO regarding contract actions authorized by statute (such as SBA 8(a) or AbilityOne) to avoid confusion for potential contractors. They suggest that adding this clarity or providing guidance on notice of intent for sole source contracts would benefit the procurement process.
I wanted to reach out regarding the changes under FAR 5.202(a)(4). Previously, there was a clear exception allowing certain contract actions to proceed without public notice if they were expressly authorized by statute, such as acquisitions from the Small Business Administration under section 8(a), or from specific sources like AbilityOne. However, I’ve noticed that this exception no longer appears in the current RFO.
I was curious whether this omission might have been an oversight, as it could create confusion for potential contractors. For example, contractors might see a posting for a procurement that’s actually a sole source 8(a) or an AbilityOne contract, which they would not be eligible to compete for. This could complicate the process and expectations for all involved.
Would it be worth considering the addition of this exception back into the RFO for clarity? If the intent is to maintain the requirement, perhaps it would be helpful to include information about the need for a notice of intent to issue a sole source contract, along with guidance similar to what was provided in earlier versions of the FAR. This area has generated some confusion with the new rules, and clearer guidance could be beneficial.