Recent changes to the regulations and procedures governing the security of certain unclassified contractor information systems have ushered in a new era for U.S. federal government contractors. In particular, a new version of a Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (“DFARS”) clause, effective November 10, 2025, began the implementation of a phased roll-out of the most fully developed cyber- and information security regulations protective of controlled unclassified information ever imposed on contractors.  In addition, on January 5th, 2026, the General Services Administration (“GSA”) issued a new “IT Security Procedural Guide” that will govern information security on certain GSA contracts that require processing, storage or transmission of such information or security protection for such transactions. The impacts are being felt not only by virtually all defense contractors, but also by any company desiring to do business with the Department of Defense (“DoD”) or with its prime contractors, as well as with other agencies or primes whose information systems can be expected, as a result of such business, to traffic in some amount of official U.S. government information. Correspondingly, the changes brought by this new era have posed novel challenges for legal, contract management, and information technology professionals supporting contractor compliance programs.

The Trump Administration is in the throes of a “revolutionary” overhaul to the Federal Acquisition Regulation (“FAR”). President Trump launched the project on April 15, 2025, when he issued Executive Order No. 14275, “Restoring Common Sense to Federal Procurement” (the “Order”), and since then the Administration has been busy implementing the Order. In short, the Order requires the deregulation of the federal procurement enterprise and the empowering of agencies to act nimbly and effectively in the best interests of the nation. To achieve this, the Order directed the Administrator of the Office of Federal Procurement Policy (“OFPP”), in coordination with the Federal Acquisition Regulatory Council (the “FAR Council”) and various agency officials, to take action within 180 days to amend the FAR so that it “contains only provisions that are required by statute or essential to sound procurement.”

The Office of Management and Budget (“OMB”) instructed the cognizant officials to implement the Order in two phases. Phase I, which is complete, involved leveraging agency authority in FAR Subpart 1.4 to issue FAR deviations ahead of formal rulemaking. In this phase, the FAR Council issued, on a rolling basis, guidance to the agencies with model deviation text by FAR part. Agencies then had thirty days to adopt the FAR deviations based on the model text. As of September 30th, 2025, the FAR Council had issued model deviation text with changes to all of the 53 sections of the FAR and most of the major agencies, with the notable exception of the Department of Defense, were in the process of adopting those deviations. In Phase II, leveraging the work done in Phase I, the FAR Council will undertake formal rulemaking to change the FAR and deregulate federal procurement across all agencies.

This article summarizes the FAR deviations issued by the FAR Council, previews “coming attractions” in the project and provides recommendations to contractors on how to respond to the “revolution.”

Co-authored with Gillian M. Fenton

Published in Les Nouvelles, the journal of the Licensing Executives Society International (LESI), June 2024

The Bayh-Dole Act (“Bayh-Dole” or the “Act”) governs the licensing of federally funded and federally owned inventions. A key requirement, referred to as the “Domestic Manufacturing Requirement”, is that the licensing of such inventions to private sector entities should benefit U.S. industry, specifically by requiring manufacture of products that embody or are made through such inventions “substantially in the United States”. Unfortunately, the plain language of the Act and its implementing regulations does not provide any definition or other guidance on what if any threshold should be exceeded in order for manufacturing to be deemed “substantially in the United States.” Further, the legislative history is only minimally helpful in the interpretation of the language and, as of the writing of this article, there are no published decisions providing guidance on the proper interpretation of this language. This article proposes that, in the absence of a specific binding statutory regulatory, or judicial definition, it is appropriate to look to analogous US government acquisition statutes and their implementing regulations for a workable definition.

Engaging with Mr. Bouquet is a strategic move toward success for businesses looking to navigate the intricacies of government contracts. The Law Office of Christopher C. Bouquet, PLLC, invites you to discuss your requirements with him and learn how his legal expertise can benefit your company’s government contracting endeavors.

 

Mr. Bouquet’s law office provides comprehensive specialized support to government contractors and other companies seeking to obtain government contracts. His expertise encompasses a wide range of sub-specialties within the field of government contracts law, including contract formation, cost accounting and recovery, compliance programs, intellectual property protections and subcontracts and teaming agreements.

Mr. Bouquet’s practice extends to clients throughout the United States and internationally in diverse industries. His keen understanding of the nuanced requirements of government contracts law allows his clients to achieve and maintain compliance while strategically positioning themselves for success.

Christopher C. Bouquet is an experienced lawyer with a business background, offering a unique blend of skills to his clientele. His transition from a successful businessman to an accomplished government contracts lawyer gives him a deep understanding of both the legal and commercial aspects of government contracting. 

Learn more about attorney Christopher C. Bouquet’s areas of specialization.