The FAR Council is undertaking a systematic approach to revising the FARs. On August 15, 2025, it released its revisions to FAR Part 9 – Contractor Qualifications, FAR Part 33, Protests, Disputes, and Appeals, FAR Part 46, Quality Assurance, and FAR Part 49, Termination of Contracts.
Redlines showing the additions and deletions to each of these sections of the FAR are available here.
FAR Part 9 – Contractor Qualifications,
FAR Part 9 establishes the standards and procedures for determining contractor responsibility and eligibility for federal contracts. Given that much of FAR Part 9 is statutorily mandated, the FAR Council’s changes are focused on word count, streamlining, and the use of plain language.
Notably, Subparts 9.6 Contractor Team Arrangements and 9.7 Defense Production Pools and Research and Development Pools were removed and will be included in the forthcoming FAR Companion Guide.
The Practitioner Album for FAR Part 9 emphasizes the use of “Qualified Bidders Lists (QBLs),” which are described as “pre-approved lists of contractors, vendors, or suppliers who have met specific qualifications and criteria set by an organization that improve the quality and delivery speed of goods and services procured.” The Practitioner Album recommends the use of QBLs for:
-
- Complex or High-Risk Projects, such as projects “that require specialized expertise, involve significant financial investment, or carry substantial risk, a QBL ensures that only capable and experienced contractors are considered.”
- Recurring Needs for Specific Services, such as when an agency “frequently requires similar services (e.g., maintenance, construction),” and
- Strict Regulatory Compliance where “adherence to specific regulations and standards is critical (for instance, National Institute of Standards and Technology encryption standards FIPS 140-2 & FIPS 197 for tactical communications equipment).”
FAR Part 33, Protests, Disputes, and Appeals
The FAR Council stated that FAR Part 33 was revised to “reflect administration priorities to reduce protests and resolve protests at the lowest level possible.” The FAR Council added a “purpose statement” to FAR Part 33 that “sets forth the objectives of the bid protest process (e.g., promote integrity in the process, deter abuse of the bid protest process), and emphasizes that it is not intended to serve as a way for offerors to get additional insight or be used by incumbents to delay contract transition.”
A focus of the revisions was on agency protests. The FAR Council described its changes as follows:
New requirements applicable to “Protests to the Agency”.
-
- 104-4(a)(4)(ii) – Contracting officers are required to report protests to the head of contracting activity (HCAs) as soon as practicable after filing.
- 104-4(a)(5)(ii) – Protesters electing independent review at a level above the CO must be provided a redacted copy of the source selection decision, and be provided an opportunity to submit a supplemental statement to the independent review official.
- These new requirements are expected to increase confidence in the agency protest process, capture more data at the agency level on protests filed with contracting officers, allow for agency management to respond to procurement issues raised in protests, and resolve more protests at the agency level since protesters will have more information available to them.
The FAR Council significantly reduced FAR 33.105, addressing protests filed with the GAO, as those provisions largely summarize GAO procedures that are already located at 4 CFR Part 21.
Various procedural sections were consolidated into “Postaward” at FAR 33.205, including the following:
-
- Initiation of a claim (former 33.206)
- Contractor certification (former 33.207)
- Interest on claims (former 33.208)
- The contracting officer’s decision (former 33.211)
- Alternative Dispute Resolution (former 33.214)
The FAR Companion Guide includes an emphasis on contracting officers providing transparency regarding award decisions, in hopes of reducing the number of protests that are filed in order to determine the basis for award, as opposed to a claim that the agency did something improper or made a mistake. The FAR Companion Guide addresses contracting officers and states:
While no procurement can be completely protest-proof, protest risks can be reduced through greater transparency in award processes and decisions.
As a practitioner, you play a key role in building trust in the federal acquisition system, supporting both integrity and stakeholder confidence. Transparency fosters engagement, avoids costly delays or re-procurements caused by sustained protests, and ensures better use of taxpayer dollars.
For both government and industry, it creates opportunities to identify improvements in procurement procedures and strengthen future submissions. By remaining open to industry feedback, you can enhance future opportunities and contribute to a more effective acquisition system.
As part of this, the FAR Companion Guide recommends the following:
-
- “Complex evaluation schemes with multiple factors, subfactors, and unclear evaluation criteria carry higher protest risk. When determining your evaluation method, consider how you can be fair and reasonable while maintaining appropriate flexibility to select the best vendor to support your mission requirement.”
- “If using adjectival ratings, align them with the solicitation and support findings with clear, adequate rationale to strengthen the evaluation record.”
- “Keep decision documents brief, focused on material elements, and useful for post-award communications.”
- “Document the government’s decisions—not its deliberations.”
- “Provide timely debriefings or brief explanations—benefiting both government and industry.”
- “When debriefings are requested, consider sharing redacted decision and evaluation documents—already discoverable in protests—to improve transparency.”
For contract claims, i.e., disputes arising after award, the FAR Companion Guide points contracting officers to various resources that may be of interest and assistance to contractors who are considering or litigating claims:
DAU Acquipedia – Contract Claims: Acquipedia is an online encyclopedia of defense acquisition topics, providing definitions, context, and links to relevant policies, guidance, tools, practices, and training. Check out Contract Claims.
DCMA Manual Contract Claims and Disputes: The Contract Claims and Disputes Manual from the Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA) provides high-level information on types of disputes and claims and defines procedures for contract claims and disputes within the DCMA environment.
FAI Contracting Professionals Smart Guide: The Contracting Professionals Smart Guide offers a structured approach to contracting, divided into Contract Formation and Administration sections. Check out FAI Activity 49 on Resolving Disputes.
United States Space Force Negotiation & Dispute Resolution Learning Resources: Negotiation and conflict management tools, which can be valuable in resolving contract disputes and lead to high-performing teams.
FAR Part 46, Quality Assurance
FAR Part 46 prescribes policies and procedures to ensure that supplies and services acquired under a government contract conform to the contract’s quality and quantity requirements. Included are inspection, acceptance, warranty, and other measures associated with quality requirements.
The revisions to FAR Part 46 are largely focused on streamlining and use of plain language.
The FAR Companion Guide to FAR Part 46 explains that :
Quality assurance is an opportunity for real-time performance monitoring and collaborative oversight for both government and industry. Performance monitoring is an ongoing activity.
Evolving from periodic checkpoints to continuous, real-time performance monitoring engages vendors early, gains valuable insights into industry standards, explores innovative quality control techniques, and anticipates potential challenges unique to the government environment.
If using a formal quality assurance and surveillance plan (QASP), remember it is a living document and it is more than just words on paper. Move beyond just traditional check-box compliance to where government and industry work together to identify and address performance gaps in real-time.
These smart accelerators provide resources to explore a culture of continuous improvement that enhances the overall contract performance, from pre-award to post-award administration. By embedding real-time performance monitoring into your construct structure, you can maintain visibility into outcomes and rapidly respond to changing requirements and potential challenges.
FAR Part 49, Termination of Contracts
FAR Part 49 covers the policy and procedures for terminating contracts early.
The revisions to FAR Part 49 are largely focused on streamlining and use of plain language. The FAR Council summarized the changes:
-
- Section 49.000 Scope of Part is simplified and retains the core scope of establishing policies and procedures for terminating contracts early.
- Section 49.001 Definitions is retained and updated for plain language.
- Section 49.002 Applicability is retained and updated for plain language with a simpler structure.
- Subparts 49.1, 49.2, 49.3, 49.4, 49.5, 49.6 and the sections therein, remain mostly intact and are streamlined. Some shifting and reorganizing of sections and subsections throughout.
- All existing clauses are retained with no changes to the text.
For terminations for convenience, the FAR Council identified helpful checklists maintained by the Defense Contract Audit Agency that can be used by contracting officers and contractors, to determine the adequacy of a termination settlement proposal:
The opinions expressed herein are solely those of the author. This article does not constitute legal advice. For legal advice for your situation, you should contact an attorney.
Sign up