1. Home
  2. |Insights
  3. |Under the Wire: FAR Council Announces Interim Rule to Implement NDAA Procurement Ban on Huawei and Other Chinese Telecommunications Equipment

Under the Wire: FAR Council Announces Interim Rule to Implement NDAA Procurement Ban on Huawei and Other Chinese Telecommunications Equipment

Client Alert | 1 min read | 08.13.19

On August 13, 2019, the FAR Council published in the Federal Register an interim rule, FAR Subpart 4.21, effective immediately, which implements a portion of section 889 of the FY 2019 National Defense Authorization Act, specifically, the ban on government procurement of any equipment, system or service that uses covered telecommunications equipment or services from certain Chinese companies. The interim rule defines covered telecommunications equipment and services to include any telecommunications equipment or services from Huawei or ZTE (or any affiliate) and certain video surveillance and telecommunications equipment or services from three other Chinese companies (or their affiliates). The interim rule also provides for expanding the ban to other companies that the Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the Director of National Intelligence, reasonably believes to be owned or controlled by, or otherwise connected to, the Chinese government. Unless a waiver is granted, the rule will broadly apply to all contracts including commercial item procurements and acquisitions below the simplified acquisition threshold. The implementing clauses, FAR 52.204-24, Representation Regarding Certain Telecommunications and Video Surveillance Services or Equipment and FAR 52.204-25, Prohibition on Contracting for Certain Telecommunications and Video Surveillance Services or Equipment,must also be added to any existing contracts before those may be extended or renewed.

Insights

Client Alert | 2 min read | 08.14.24

Bid Protests: GAO Reminds Would-Be Protesters – Timing Is Everything

When to file a protest challenging an agency’s corrective action is an issue that has confused protesters for over a decade since GAO’s Domain Name Alliance Registry, B‑310803.2, Aug. 18, 2008, 2008 CPD ¶ 168 decision.  In Domain Name, GAO held where a protester essentially challenges the “ground rules” of corrective action, that protest must be filed pre-award or risk being dismissed as untimely.  This has led to the proliferation of overly cautious protesters bringing pre-award challenges to corrective actions only to have GAO dismiss such protests as merely anticipating improper agency action and therefore premature.  Indeed, the line between a timely and untimely corrective action protest is unclear.  And that confusion persists, as evidenced in two recent GAO dismissals—General Dynamics Information Technology, Inc., B-422421.6, B-422421.7, July 17, 2024, and Peraton Inc., B-422409.2, B‑422409.3, July 22, 2024....