Reviewing RFO Proposed Rules: Parts 5, 24, 29, and 52

Posted on August 21, 2026 by Shane McCall

In June 2026, the FAR Council released its first batch of proposed rules in the Federal Register to implement the changes to the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR). We recently covered the first of those proposed rules, which amended language in FAR Parts 1, 2, 4, 33, 39, 40, 52, and 53. In this post, we will review how the RFO is being implemented regarding FAR Parts 5, 24, 29, and 52. From a general perspective, it looks like the proposed regulation tracks with the proposed language already issued under the RFO.

We’ve posted quite extensively about the Revolutionary FAR Overhaul (RFO) project in past blog posts. For some background info, check out these posts: Executive Order, Overview of FAR 2.0, FAR 2.0: Deviations and Companion Guide, FAR Part 6, FAR Part 19 (and the Once 8(a) Rule in that part), FAR Part 12, FAR Part 15, and FAR Part 33.

SmallGovCon Week in Review: August 17-21, 2026

Posted on August 21, 2026 by Shane McCall

Happy Friday! I recently returned from the 2026 National APEX Accelerator Alliance – NAPEX conference in Orlando. It’s always a great event and this year was no exception. The venue was wonderful and a great space for interacting with many enthusiastic NAPEX counselors and people in the procurement industry. I was able to say hi to a lot of the great NAPEX folks. And I presented on the complex topic of domestic preference rules. Thanks to the NAPEX team for a great event!

This week in federal contracting news included a proposed SBA rule to revamp size standards and some thoughts on a revised GSA AI clause.

It Wasn’t a Catch-22: GAO Finds the File Naming Conventions Were Clearly Stated in the Solicitation

Posted on August 18, 2026 by Jordan Akins

A catch-22 is an impossible, no-win situation where you are caught between two conflicting requirements, and complying with one makes it impossible to comply with the other. When a bid protest turns on whether an agency’s instructions were clear or whether a contractor was put in a catch-22, the solicitation is often the best place to look for the answer. However, a recent GAO decision illustrates that not every difficult or unfavorable outcome constitutes a catch-22, and that sometimes the answer to a contractor’s problems is right in front of them.

OHA: Venturer Not Affiliated with Joint Venture, SBA Has No Duty Explore Outside Size Protest Record

Posted on August 14, 2026 by Nicole Pottroff

Affiliation is a notorious term in the world of federal procurement, especially when it comes to SBA size determinations. And affiliation analyses can be even more confusing when it comes to joint ventures. A recent SBA OHA decision, however, answered some common questions regarding joint ventures and affiliation. It also reiterated some fundamental standards of a size determination and OHA size determination appeal.

SmallGovCon Week in Review: August 10-14, 2026

Posted on August 14, 2026 by Shane McCall

Happy end of week to our SmallGovCon readers. Hard to believe, but it’s halfway through August. The heat has been unrelenting, but it has to break soon, right. Arounder here, kids are heading back to school and our college town is buzzing with activity. The school year always brings a new level of energy after the slower pace of summer. It’s one of those times of year that reminds us just how special it is to live in a college town. We hope you are looking forward to a great weekend.

This week in federal government contracting saw stories about increased production of key systems, continued funding of the government, and updates on various large contracts.

Not Quite Tribally Owned: A Lesson on Tribally-Owned Entities and the 8(a) Program

Posted on August 13, 2026 by John Holtz

Not every participant in the 8(a) Business Development Program is owned by socially and economically disadvantaged individuals. There are also a sizable number of entities that are owned by Native American tribes, Native Alaskan entities, Native Hawaiian organizations, either directly or through other entities (collectively, we’ll call them Tribally-Owned Entities). While the presumption of social disadvantage for 8(a) eligibility for members of certain ethnic and racial minorities was found unconstitutional (and is formally being removed), Tribally-Owned Entities go by a different set of rules that makes admission into the 8(a) Program easier. That does not, however, mean that these rules apply to any and all entities owned by a Native American or even where actions are supposedly taken on behalf of a Native American tribe. A company learned this the hard way in a recent SBA Office of Hearings and Appeals (OHA) decision that we’ll explore today.

Breaking: SBA Finalizes Rule to Remove Social Disadvantage Presumption for 8(a) Program

Posted on August 11, 2026 by Shane McCall

SBA has issued a final rule to revamp the social disadvantage rule for the 8(a) Program. We wrote about SBA’s proposed rule from June 11, 2026 that would “remove the rebuttable presumption that individuals belonging to certain designated groups are socially disadvantaged and set forth revised standards for individuals establishing social disadvantage.” The SBA has now issued a final rule that would do just that. The rule continues the trend of the Ultima decision in 2023, which ruled that the rebuttable presumption of social disadvantage under the 8(a) is unconstitutional as it violates the right to equal protection. Based on that decision, SBA stopped relying on the presumption of social disadvantage. Now, SBA has formally issued a rule to eliminate any mention of the presumption from the regulations. SBA’s rule replaces the individual social disadvantage narrative with a test that looks to whether a person experienced discrimination on the basis of race through programs like affirmative action. Here are some details.