Comment on FR Doc # 2026-12560
Brian McCabeOpposeIndividual
Summary: A Contracting Officer argues that the proposed changes to the FAR are inefficient, vague, and create unnecessary complexity by removing explicit text and replacing it with links to external documents. The commenter specifically criticizes the move toward oral acquisition plans, the consolidation of emergency acquisitions, and the lack of clarity regarding agency-specific requirements.
It is clear while the intent is to streamline the FAR, like the previous updates that were clearly not written to streamline anything, have made things more difficult. While extra text was in the FAR that apparently the administration does not like, that extra text prevented us from going back and forth to multiple documents, which the RFO does in many cases now. Often with links to US Code that comes from Congress, and depending on the given day you cannot access the, well. It was much easier when the text was included. The more clicks you make on anything the slower you go, and is not efficient.
RFO 7
Why on earth do you say this under 7.102
(a) Agencies must perform acquisition planning for all acquisitions. Agencies should establish procedures to determine when a written or oral acquisition plan is required (see 7.103). The record of the acquisition plan must be appropriate for the type of acquisition and document decisions and actions to ensure—
Seriously oral acquisition plans first of all, second why leave up to the agency to decide? It was very clear and explicit under the original FAR, not it is vague, and is going to create far more efficiencies then before leaving it up to the agency.
Then you say this?
1) Information is available for making informed decisions at each step in the acquisition process;
(2) There is clear support for all actions taken;
(3) Necessary information is available for reviews or investigations; and
(4) Essential facts are available in case litigation arises.
What you going brain prob someone if the agency elects to do an oral acquisition plan? Oral, anything in contracting should never be allowed or implied on a contract, any lawyer should no that. Document, document, document. The second of this with the 1-4 basically says you need to write it down, but will not say explicitly like before. You asking for trouble with that.
Why on earth would you combine emergency acquisitions under 26. That should be separate and stand alone, and honestly bloody clear. Every agency does emergencies different, and are limited from even following that because agency systems prevent agencies from following what is allowed under the old 18. Further this is another example of making CO look somewhere else for information that was clearly in FAR 18 before under 26.201
a)
General flexibilities.
Use the flexibilities included in the FAR to respond quickly for an emergency or urgent need. See the list of FAR flexibilities available at
https://acquisition.gov/emergency-procurement.
The acquisition flexibilities in this subpart are not exempt from the requirements and limitations set forth in part 3, Improper Business Practices and Personal Conflicts of Interest.
Plus there are Intergency Incident Management regulations outside the FAR that really need to be tied in to the FAR better and vice versa.
I will say the way part 6 is written now, is much better than the way it is now in the RFO that agencies have stupidly implemented.
All these updates, you know what the biggest problems are is the agencies implementing their own supplements, the agency supplements make things worse and even less efficient then even the original FAR. A text that says, “up to agency” or sometime similar, is going to make these updates less efficient. Either be explicit in what is required or allow the CO to make decisions that they are allowed to make, do not be vague, refer back to statues with multiple links. Plus now agencies have to go through and up those anyway.
Overall, thus such a waste and clearly being put together by people that actually do not have to follow them, or comprehend them at all. This is all high level people, that have not actually put a contract together in decades but still pretend they know what would make it better. Try working with some lower level people to get proper input on this. I dare someone from FAR Council and the people putting this together to actually reach out. It will surprise me entirely if I actually see you make these changes, I am a Contracting Officer that works with this stuff everyday.