The broad, ambiguous language of Congressionally-mandated rule for government contractors to remove products and services from companies that pose threats to national security is complicating implementation, according to public comments.
The comment period for the interim Federal Acquisition Rule implementing Part B of Section 889—a provision of the 2019 National Defense Authorization Act—closes Monday, and the more than 30 comments submitted raise questions related to fundamental compliance issues.
While in general, commenters agree with the rule’s intent, groups representing industry, including the National Defense Industrial Association, BSA | The Software Alliance, the Coalition for Government Procurement and the Internet Association submitted detailed letters to Regulations.gov outlining compliance challenges. Nearly all asked for extended timelines for implementation and better definitions for key terms and phrases used in the regulation.
The Timeline
The condensed timeline for implementation frustrated stakeholders. The final language of the interim rule was not released until July 14, less than a month before it went into effect August 13. That turnaround left federal contractors scrambling to determine what they need to do and how they need to do it in order to avoid getting cut out of the federal acquisition process.
In its letter, the Internet Association outlined several issues and unanswered questions related to the interim rule. Above all, it asked the Federal Acquisition Regulation Council to consider delaying implementation.
“To do otherwise would result in a severe economic penalty to the [defense industrial base] and federal contractor ecosystem,” the letter reads.
Kea Matory, legislative policy director for NDIA, told Nextgov companies need a delay of a year in order to be able to digest the rule and determine paths forward. The NDIA letter said if the FAR Council cannot delay implementation, then it should work with ..
Support the originator by clicking the read the rest link below.
