Subpart 11.1 - Selecting and Developing Requirements Documents

Overview

FAR Subpart 11.1 prescribes policies and procedures for selecting and preparing requirements documents to ensure they satisfy agency needs while promoting full and open competition. It establishes a clear order of precedence for document types, favoring performance-based specifications and voluntary consensus standards over restrictive, government-unique, or design-specific requirements.

Key Rules

• Order of Precedence: Agencies must follow a specific hierarchy when selecting requirements documents:
  1. Documents mandated by law.
  2. Performance-oriented documents (e.g., Performance Work Statement (PWS) or Statement of Objectives (SOO)).
  3. Detailed design-oriented documents.
  4. Standards and specifications issued outside the Defense/Federal series for non-repetitive items.
• Standardization: Agencies are required to use voluntary consensus standards (e.g., ISO or IEEE) rather than government-unique standards unless doing so is impractical or prohibited by law, in accordance with OMB Circular A-119.
• Market Acceptance: Agencies may require evidence that an item has achieved commercial market acceptance or has been successfully supplied to the government, provided this is supported by market research and is not used as the sole evaluation criterion.
• Brand Name or Equal: While performance specs are preferred, "brand name or equal" descriptions may be used if the solicitation lists the "salient physical, functional, or performance characteristics" that an alternative product must meet.
• Restrictive Specifications: Requirements must not be written to favor a specific manufacturer unless the brand name or unique feature is essential to the government's needs and is supported by a formal Justification and Approval (J&A) for acquisitions over $25,000.
• Service Contracts: Purchase descriptions must not assign "inherently governmental functions" to contractors. They must also require contractor personnel to identify themselves in meetings, on the phone, and in reports.

Responsibilities

• Requiring Activity / Program Managers:
  • Developing PWS, SOO, or design specifications.
  • Ensuring requirements do not include inherently governmental functions.
  • Identifying salient characteristics for "brand name or equal" requirements.
  • Conducting market research to justify specific product features.
• Contracting Officers (CO):
  • Ensuring requirements documents follow the proper order of precedence.
  • Documenting the contract file to justify the use of market acceptance criteria.
  • Ensuring J&As for brand-name-only requirements are properly approved and posted publicly when required.
  • Inserting mandatory provisions (e.g., FAR 52.211-6 for brand name or equal) into solicitations.
• Head of Agency:
  • Establishing procedures for requiring market acceptance demonstrations from offerors.

Practical Implications

• Avoids "Gold-Plating": By prioritizing performance-oriented documents (PWS/SOO), the FAR encourages agencies to describe what is needed rather than how to build it, which invites innovative and cost-effective solutions from the private sector.
• Reduced Administrative Burden for Industry: The requirement to use voluntary consensus standards (like ISO) means commercial companies do not have to overhaul their manufacturing processes to meet niche government-only specifications.
• Heightened Transparency: The requirement to post justifications for "brand name" items over $25,000 ensures that the government is held accountable for potentially restrictive requirements that might limit competition.
• Ethical Safeguards in Services: For professional services, the requirement for contractors to identify themselves (e.g., via email signatures or phone greetings) is critical in preventing "organizational blurring," where the public or other agencies might mistake a contractor's opinion for official government policy.