Competition Requirements

Overview

FAR Part 6 prescribes the policies and procedures essential to promoting "full and open competition" in the federal acquisition process. It establishes the statutory requirement that all responsible sources be permitted to compete for government contracts, while outlining specific frameworks for set-asides and the strictly controlled circumstances where competition may be limited or waived.

Key Rules

• The Default Standard: Contracting Officers (COs) must provide for full and open competition through sealed bidding or competitive proposals unless a specific exception applies.
• Prohibited Justifications: Agencies cannot justify "other than full and open competition" based on a lack of advance planning or concerns regarding the expiration of funds.
• The Seven Exceptions (Subpart 6.302): Competition may only be limited under seven specific statutory authorities:
  1. Only one responsible source (Sole Source).
  2. Unusual and compelling urgency.
  3. Industrial mobilization; engineering, developmental, or research capability; or expert services.
  4. International agreement.
  5. Authorized or required by statute (e.g., Federal Prison Industries, 8(a) awards).
  6. National security.
  7. Public interest (requires Secretarial or Agency Head level approval).
• Set-Asides (Subpart 6.2): Programs for Small Business, 8(a), HUBZone, SDVOSB, and WOSB are considered "full and open competition after exclusion of sources." These do not require a separate Justification and Approval (J&A).
• Brand-Name Restrictions: Using a brand-name specification that limits competition to one manufacturer requires a J&A, even if multiple vendors can provide that specific brand.
• Urgency Limitations: Contracts awarded under "unusual and compelling urgency" are generally limited to a period of performance of no more than one year.

Responsibilities

• Contracting Officers: Responsible for promoting competition, selecting the appropriate competitive procedure, and ensuring any limitation on competition is legally justified and documented.
• Technical and Requirements Personnel: Responsible for providing the necessary data, technical expertise, and rationale to support a recommendation for a sole-source award or the exclusion of a particular source.
• Agency Heads (or Designees): Responsible for signing "Determinations and Findings" (D&F) for establishing alternative sources and approving certain high-level justifications for non-competitive actions.
• Advocates for Competition: Every agency must designate an advocate to challenge barriers to competition, review procurement activities, and report on the agency’s progress in achieving competitive goals.

Practical Implications

• Justification & Approval (J&A) Rigor: When a program office wants to stay with a specific incumbent or brand, they must navigate the J&A process. Because "lack of planning" is an illegal justification, COs will often reject sole-source requests that result from a failure to start the procurement process early enough.
• Market Research is Critical: To utilize the "Only One Responsible Source" authority, the government must prove via market research that no other supplies or services will satisfy the requirement. Contractors should respond to Sources Sought notices to prevent the government from successfully making this claim.
• Task Order Efficiency: Many agencies prefer using IDIQ (Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity) contracts because orders placed against them (under Subpart 16.5) are generally exempt from the full Part 6 competition requirements, as the "competition" was handled during the award of the base contract.
• Brand Name vs. Brand Name or Equal: To avoid the administrative burden of a J&A, requirements owners are encouraged to use "brand name or equal" descriptions, which are considered competitive and do not require a formal justification.