Interview transcript: 

Eric White Let’s start from the FAR overhaul perspective. They were able to get that out right before the shutdown occurred. I wanted to see what your initial thoughts were and what you’re hearing from industry folks who are going to have to comply with these new rules.

Emily Murphy So it’s really interesting, very last minute, obviously they got everything out, they wanted to meet that deadline. And I’ve got to commend the folks at OFPP, GSA, NASA, DoD, who all got that out and they worked really hard to get that out so that it would be out there before, frankly, many of them ended up getting furloughed. They got Part 15 out, Part 16 out, so they’ve got a lot of stuff out at the very last minute, and there’s a lot there to still digest. Part 16, which is type of contracts, was really interesting because it created BPAs against GWACs, which was something we haven’t seen before. Lots of sections came out with even just PDFs, and they’ve now been updated to include the actual downloadable, the actual text. But there was a lot there. One thing that contractors should be paying attention to right now is that even though these have all gone out, if you go to the Revolutionary Far Overhaul site, you’ll see that not all of them have been adopted at every agency. And so that’s something that you should be very, very aware of, depending on where they’re contracting. So, some of the deviations have only been adopted by two, three agencies. Others have more than 30 agencies that have adopted them. But when you consider how many agencies there are, that still isn’t a very large number, and so it becomes a question of, are the agencies considering these to be just adopted by, in absence of them taking any action, is it that they are still thinking through the deviations, they need to do some additional modifications to a deviation they would be doing, because these were model deviations, they were not agency-specific deviations. And then, this was the FAR Council putting these out with the intention of doing it as a deviation that agencies could adopt and start implementing right away as they started an official rule making process. And the expectation was that official rule making would start sometime mid-November. Now, I don’t know if that’s gotten slowed down by the shutdown or not. But it raises a lot of questions. You still can go on to the acquisition.gov website and give informal comments. And I would suggest anyone who’s thinking of doing so do that, but then start coming up with what they want their real comments, their official comments to be on those rules. What did the FAR Council get right? And then, where are there areas that need changes, that need some adjustments? And I trace it with both, because frequently, at least back in the days when I was actually working on the FAR Council stuff in the Bush administration, we would frequently get comments back from people only about what they disliked. They wouldn’t tell us what was good. And when you don’t tell agencies what is good, they may actually get rid of what it was that you liked in the FAR changes because they’re not hearing people step up and say, that was a good change, that’s going to make things better, please keep that. If all they hear from is people saying we don’t like anything, you never know what’s going to then survive that comment period. So it’s very important to comment, not just on what you think needs to be changed, but also on what needs to be retained.

Eric White I think any Amazon reviewer will cite the same experience if they have that. They only tell me what they don’t like. They titled it the Revolutionary FAR Overhaul. Is that, I want to get your opinion, is that an inappropriate title? Is this really revolutionary or is this a bit of labeling that we’ve seen from the Trump administration in the past?

Emily Murphy I’m not sure that they could be truly and utterly revolutionary in terms, because there were statutory constraints, but they did about everything they could within that statutory framework. They got rid of a third of the clauses that affect commercial contracting. They got rid of the reps and certs, lots of them, and it’s going to be much easier to register as a federal contractor going forward. The commercial type contracting, they broke it down into commercial type contracting for under simplified procedures versus non-commercial, so we’re dividing the world there. It’s the only place where we saw new regulations coming in. Part 15 got rid of the old discussions and replaced it with negotiations. There is a lot of change. Part 8, taking the schedules ordering procedures out of the FAR and putting them back into the GSA Acquisition Regulations, that’s pretty revolutionary. So there’s a lot in there that is very much worth noting and is going to change how agencies operate and how vendors have to comply. It should streamline things, it should speed things up. It really does push decision-making down to the lowest level possible. And it will be interesting to see, since the FAR Council noted on the website that things that require a statutory or regulatory statutory changes or changes to executive order would be addressed with the second round of this, with the official rule making. So whether there’s even more up their sleeve, if there’s going to be more that happens. But I think that they did a lot to make this fairly momentous and they did it really fast. You remember the last time they tried to rewrite Part 15, it took years. They did it this over the course of a summer while they did every other part of the FAR as well.

Eric White We’re speaking with Emily Murphy, former GSA administrator and senior fellow at George Mason University Baroni Center for Government Contracting. Let’s get to the vendors themselves. Shutdown is still ongoing, as of this recording. What are you hearing and seeing from those vendors that have long-term contracts that are coming to a close, or they’re going to need some help operating in this new FAR environment and they may not have the necessary guidance that they could use at a time like this?

Emily Murphy So the first thing I’d say to companies that are operating, have a contract that’s about to lapse, read your contract, make sure you know what’s in it. Most contracts have a provision in there — it’s usually in 52.217, sometimes dash eight, sometimes dash nine — on how to extend that work. Make sure you know which clause you have or what clauses you have, what options are there. I’m hearing some talks about taking a no-cost extension. And that’s a decision agencies and vendors are going to have to make. But the vendors should be aware of when they do that, they’re performing at risk. That there is a good chance that they may not ever have that option exercise. They may not have that ability to get reimbursed for that. They certainly won’t get reimbursed for a no-cost extension, but they may not have something happen once the government shutdown is over. So it’s got to be a business decision they’re making at that point in time. But ultimately, know what’s in your contract, know to the greatest extent possible who it is you’re dealing with at the agency, what set of rules they’re following at this point in time, and have options in a strategy you’re willing to propose to the government to make it easier for them, because whether we’re back from the shutdown by the time this airs or we’re still on a shutdown, you’ve got a very small workforce dealing with a lot of work. And the easier you can make it for them, the better it’s going to be.

Eric White We’ve seen these shutdowns now popping up every couple of years or so, usually right around this time of year. Do you see any adjustments coming down the pipeline by vendors of putting provisions into contracts or taking necessary precautions, maybe waiting until they are messing with the extensions or deadlines before they hear whether or not there is going to be one or not? Especially, like I said, around this time of year when shutdowns seem to occur.

Emily Murphy Well, the last major shutdown that happened happened December of 2018, and it went through January of 2019, so it was the 35-day shutdown, it was the longest shutdown we’ve ever had. So while in the past it was fairly, you thought right after the fiscal year there being a risk of shutdown, the fact that it was a long shutdown that didn’t start until just before Christmas, I remember because I was at GSA at the time and people had gone home for the holiday before the shutdown happened. That made it a tough time. There’s never a good time for a shutdown, so I shouldn’t say that, but that was a tough time for people to be shutdown on Christmas. I don’t know that they’re trying to time a shutdown. It’s sort of reading tea leaves or trying to do some fortune telling. I think that smart companies, though, are planning to know that government shutdowns do happen and they have a plan for their workforce when that’s going to happen, whether it’s mandatory training that they need their employees to be taking, to maintain certifications, to comply with a government requirement, whether its the upskilling of that workforce, whether it’s working on strategic planning documents or other things, they’ve thought about how they’re going to use their workforce if the workforce isn’t able to show up. We talk a lot about what’s going to happen to federal employees and will they be paid for the work for this time that they have been furloughed. The contractors don’t get paid, and good contractors try to do everything in their power to keep paying their employees, but they’re never going to be made whole for that. And there’s a limit to how long a small business and midsize business can continue to pay people to not work. And we need to be very aware that this hits the industrial base, not just the federal employee base, and that both sides of this are feeling a lot of tension right now and a lot stress.

Eric White Wanted to finish up here by getting your thoughts on the East Wing renovation happening at the White House. People were obviously going back and forth about the actual move itself, but people like you and I were probably thinking, huh, I wonder how that contract was structured. What are your thoughts, and who do you think was handling it? We’ve got really three choices, the Executive Office of the President, GSA, your former camp, or even the Park Service, as the White Houses i actually designated as a national park.

Emily Murphy It is, and what’s interesting is when I was the GSA administrator, we were looking at doing renovations in the West Wing and that very much would have been a GSA contract. It would have in the Public Building Service doing that work. The East Wing, though, probably it’s going to fall into either the National Park Service or the [Executive] Office of the President that would be doing that work. It’s not a GSA building once you hit the East Wing. It’s fascinating when you look at the White House complex. There is an agreement that tells you down to what brick along the sidewalk is managed by GSA versus by Interior versus whoever else and who’s got responsibility for what. East Wing would definitely be either the, what they call room one or would be a National Park Service.

Eric White And when a private donor enters the picture, I imagine that that can add some complications to the paperwork, as you shake in your head now for those of us not watching on video. What does that entail, and did you ever have any experience with a private donor paying for something that the government usually does?

Emily Murphy I never had that experience at GSA. When I was at SBA, SBA had a lot of gift authority and we did occasionally get sponsorships or things along those lines that would come into play. It will allow them to go a lot faster because they’ve got private funds. But my recollection is that when they did the renovation at the White House years ago under Jackie Kennedy, that that was also funded a lot through private donations. And so there is precedent for private donations going in and assisting with paying for these things. And it’ll be interesting to see when the contract details come out, and I’m sure they will, how it’s all been structured and how it’s proceeding. And you look forward to getting a chance to look through those documents someday.

The post When the FAR gets a revolutionary overhaul and the government shuts down, who’s reading the fine print? first appeared on Federal News Network.

Federal contractors finally have clarity on a question that has created protest risk over the past few years: When, exactly, must an offeror be “active” in the System for Award Management (SAM) to be eligible for award?

The answer is now straightforward, clarifying award eligibility for every entity competing for federal contracts. An offeror must be active at “two-points,” the moment an offer is submitted and at the time of award. A temporary lapse in registration will no longer result in disqualification.

Background on FAR confusion

The clarification about SAM registration corrects a practical problem created by a September 2018 amendment to Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 52.204-7 that many read as requiring continuous registration between the time of proposal submission and the time of award, a period that can stretch months and sometimes years. That amendment tried to harmonize inconsistent phrasing across the FAR by saying an offeror must be registered at submission and “shall continue to be registered until time of award.”

Bid-protest forums such as the Government Accountability Office and the Court of Federal Claims read that as a literal, continuous requirement. A brief mid-evaluation lapse could render an otherwise qualified offeror ineligible. For years, contractors worried about this technical hiccup. This outcome did not enhance the government’s ability to select best-value solutions but rather rewarded diligence in website maintenance at the expense of competition and, in some cases, small-business participation.

The FAR Council saw the problem and stepped in with an interim rule in November 2024 that stated, “the offeror must be registered at time of offer submission and at time of contract award but would not be required at every moment in between those two points.”

Two-point clarification in FAR final rule

A final rule issued on Aug. 7, 2025, adopts that approach without change, making clear that offerors need to be actively registered in SAM at “two points” only — when they submit an offer and when the government makes the award. No continuous pre-award monitoring is required (although offerors have a continuing obligation to ensure that the representation and certifications in SAM are accurate).

If registration becomes “inactive” during evaluations, that midstream lapse is no longer automatically disqualifying so long as the offeror was active at submission and is active again at award. This important change means businesses no longer risk wasting precious business capture dollars for a fleeting registration oversight and the government will no longer lose the ability to award contracts to competitive bids due to a contractor’s administrative error.

By fixing the timing rule, the FAR now aligns the compliance burden with decision points that matter in procurement. This change is particularly welcome for small businesses, which deal with ownership transitions, banking changes and certification updates more frequently than large companies.

Importantly, this clarification applies to the pre-award stage only. It does not change the fact that contractors must keep their SAM registration active during performance and all the way through final payment.

Staying compliant with the two-point rule

Think of the “two-point” rule as the pre-award guide and the “keep it active” rule as the post-award guide. Both requirements are distinct but equally important. Contractors should not view the “two-point” rule as permission to allow registrations to lapse after award. Letting registration slip during performance can result in delays and headaches that are entirely avoidable.

As noted above, accuracy in representations and certifications remains a separate, ongoing obligation. The “two-point” timing rule does not soften responsibilities related to size status, affiliation, domestic-content and country-of-origin certifications, exclusions, or responsibility-related disclosures. A SAM record that is “active” but inaccurate creates a different kind of risk.

Two clear takeaways emerge from the new rule. The first is that protest risk over mid-evaluation lapses is now over, as long as contractors can show they were “active” at submission and award. The key is documentation. Taking a quick screenshot or PDF of the SAM “active” page on submission day and another close to or at award, would be prudent. If eligibility is challenged, those records give agencies and protest forums exactly what they need to confirm compliance.

Second, the rule shifts the focus from continuous monitoring to disciplined internal timing and coordination. The rule creates an opportunity to reinforce coordination between business development and compliance functions. Capture teams should communicate anticipated submission and award windows, compliance should identify any upcoming changes that might disrupt validation, and both should ensure the two required records are in place to demonstrate compliance. When those pieces align, a regulatory tweak becomes operational clarity and attention stays on winning and performing contracts, not chasing SAM status in the background.

The rule provides a clear and lasting answer to what had previously resulted in punitive exclusion from competitions due to brief registration lapses. Eligibility now hinges on a “two-point” gate, submission and award, while contract performance continues to require uninterrupted registration. With basic internal controls, contractors of all sizes can reliably satisfy these obligations, minimize protest risk, and allow acquisition teams to concentrate on substantive procurement decisions.

Richard Arnholt is a member of the Washington, D.C.-based government contracts practice at the law firm Bass, Berry & Sims PLC. He advises companies as they navigate the contracting process with federal, state, and local governments.

The post FAR Council finalizes ’two-point’ SAM registration rule, ending years of confusion first appeared on Federal News Network.