Browse regulations

This FAR regulation mandates contracting officers to use cost-sharing in R&D contracts where contractors stand to benefit from the research (e.g., commercial products, technical know-how). Cost-sharing amounts should be proportional to anticipated contractor gains, with flexibility for adjustments and waivers when inappropriate. It prevents double-charging and allows consideration of key personnel.

Deleting this would permit full taxpayer subsidization of private R&D that primarily benefits contractors, creating corporate welfare and inefficient resource allocation. The requirement aligns incentives through market-based negotiation, promotes fiscal responsibility, and would be difficult to achieve through alternative means without adding complexity.

Mandates earned value management systems for large federal contracts, with varying requirements based on contract value and type, and establishes procedures for independent cost estimate reviews

Ensures federal contractors have standardized project management systems that prevent cost overruns and schedule delays, protecting taxpayer dollars on large contracts where mismanagement would be extremely costly

Establishes internal HHS procedures for handling contract protests, disputes, fraud reporting, and mandates specific contract clauses for overseas and certain contract types, creating multiple bureaucratic layers.

Adds unnecessary delays and administrative costs to federal procurement, disproportionately burdens small businesses that lack resources to navigate complex protest procedures, and restricts freedom of contract through mandatory clauses. Existing legal frameworks (GAO, Contract Disputes Act) already provide sufficient oversight without these redundant agency-specific requirements.

HHS procurement regulation governing advanced payments, incremental funding for severable services, electronic invoice submission, and Anti-Deficiency Act compliance requirements for cost-reimbursement contracts. Establishes HCA approval thresholds, funding increment limitations (1 year max), and electronic payment processing through Treasury's platform with specific exceptions.

Deletion would dismantle critical safeguards against unconstitutional spending and fiscal malfeasance. The Anti-Deficiency Act reporting requirements and incremental funding rules prevent agencies from committing unfunded liabilities, protecting Congress's power of the purse. Electronic submission standardizes payment processing, reducing administrative overhead long-term. Without these procedural guardrails, the unseen costs include rampant unauthorized commitments, wasted taxpayer funds, and the collapse of transparent contracting—harms far exceeding the modest compliance burden.

Congressional mandate caps the direct salaries of individual contractor employees funded by HHS appropriations, with annual rate limits published by OPM. Applies to cost-reimbursement and certain other contract types, requiring contracting officers to insert a specific salary rate limitation clause.

Price controls distort labor markets, add compliance burdens, and likely reduce service quality by limiting HHS's ability to attract top contractor talent. The cap incentivizes gaming through subcontracting and cost-shifting rather than genuine cost control. Spending discipline is better achieved through competitive bidding, appropriation limits, and outcome-based contracting.

Centralizes all procurement waiver decisions in the Senior Procurement Executive, requiring Operating and Staff Divisions to forward requests rather than deciding locally.

Creates bureaucratic bottlenecks, delays procurement, and removes discretion from officials with on-the-ground knowledge. This increases hidden compliance costs and reduces government efficiency, imposing a waste tax on taxpayers.

Procedural directive for HHS contracting officers requiring insertion of specific patent, data, and publication clauses (352.227-11, 352.227-70, 352.227-14) when a Determination of Exceptional Circumstances (DEC) exists, with reference to the DEC in solicitations and attachment to contracts.

Ensures consistent application of intellectual property provisions in federal contracts; deletion would create arbitrary contract terms, deter private sector R&D collaboration, and undermine contractors' rights to innovations, harming innovation incentives and government contracting efficiency.

Federal regulations establishing Indian preference programs for federal contracts, requiring preferential treatment for Indian organizations and Indian-owned businesses in contract awards, employment, and subcontracting on or near Indian reservations.

Creates unconstitutional racial preferences in federal contracting that violate equal protection principles, distorts free market competition, and establishes a system of racial classification that undermines the colorblind constitutional ideal.

This regulation establishes Privacy Act and HIPAA compliance requirements for federal contracts involving systems of records on individuals or protected health information, mandating specific clauses, system notices, and data handling procedures.

Americans would be worse off if this regulation was deleted because it protects sensitive personal and health information from unauthorized access, use, and disclosure. The criminal penalties and strict compliance requirements create necessary safeguards for medical records and personal data that citizens entrust to the government through federal contracts.

This subpart establishes procedures for federal contracting officers to include safety and health clauses in contracts involving hazardous materials/operations, and to implement sustainable acquisition requirements by mandating evaluation factors for Sustainable Action Plans when acquiring designated environmentally preferable products and services.

The sustainable acquisition requirements distort market competition by forcing federal contractors to prioritize non-price environmental attributes, increasing contract costs and administrative burdens. This represents an improper use of procurement power to advance policy goals better left to states and private markets. The compliance costs fall disproportionately on small businesses, and the evaluation factor requirement reduces the emphasis on price and quality that should govern government contracting. The safety provisions, while potentially reasonable, could be handled more efficiently through existing OSHA regulations without creating this separate bureaucratic subpart.

A FAR procedural rule requiring contracting officers to include a clause in contracts that obligates contractors to cooperate with EEOC investigations when the contract already contains the equal opportunity clause.

It adds regulatory complexity, forces contractors to bear investigation costs, and enables federal intrusion into private employment decisions, distorting hiring incentives and burdening small businesses.

This regulation establishes the framework for HHS's small business program management, including delegation to OSDBU Director, review requirements for acquisitions, and mentor-protégé program provisions for contracts with small business subcontracting plans.

Creates unnecessary bureaucratic overhead for small business contracting without clear evidence of improving outcomes. The multi-layered review process and mentor-protégé requirements add compliance costs that disproportionately burden small contractors themselves while providing no demonstrated benefit beyond what the FAR already requires.

Regulation governing multi-year contracting procedures for HHS, including cancellation ceiling limits (20% of contract value or $12.5M), approval hierarchies requiring Senior Procurement Executive approval for large commitments, congressional notification requirements, and a 5-year limit on contract options with special rules for IT contracts.

The rule provides essential fiscal controls on multi-year spending, ensuring proper oversight of large commitments, preventing wasteful long-term obligations, and maintaining constitutional checks through congressional notification. Removal would increase taxpayer risk of unconstrained multi-year contracting with limited accountability, potentially leading to billions in imprudent obligations. The administrative burden is modest relative to the billions at stake and could not be easily replicated through market mechanisms given the government's monopoly on public goods and services.

This regulation modifies federal acquisition regulations for hospital research and development contracts, replacing FAR cost principles with HHS-specific rules and establishing oversight mechanisms for contract types and ombudsman functions.

Americans would be worse off if deleted because specialized cost principles for hospitals ensure proper reimbursement for complex medical research, while ombudsman oversight prevents unfair contract practices in critical healthcare research funding.

HHS-specific procurement procedures covering evaluation factors, statutory peer review mandates, Section 508 accessibility compliance, use of non-Federal evaluators, field pricing support waivers, warranty requirements for unsolicited proposals, and handling of grant-originated proposals.

Imposes substantial compliance costs and bureaucratic complexity on contractors, particularly small businesses, while stifling innovation through rigid procedures and fear of rule violations. Creates hidden tax burden on taxpayers through inflated contract prices and delays. Unnecessary regulatory layering that could be replaced with simpler, principle-based contracting standards and market-driven accountability.