FAR 6.3: Exceptions, Justification, and Approval for Sole Source

FAR 6.3 sets out the seven exceptions that let a federal agency award a contract without full and open competition. The Competition in Contracting Act made competition the default for federal purchasing, so the rules on other than full and open competition under FAR 6.3 work as narrow offramps: each exception has its own trigger, its own documentation requirements, and, in almost every case, an approval that must be signed before the contract is awarded.¹

The Seven Exceptions

Only One Responsible Source (6.302-1)

This is the exception agencies use most often. It applies when the supplies or services are available from only one source and nothing else will satisfy the agency’s minimum requirements. A contractor may qualify because it holds unique technical capabilities, patent rights, copyrights, or control over proprietary processes. Intellectual property rights alone do not do the work, though. The agency has to show that those rights actually make the item unavailable from anyone else.²

The authority also covers follow-on contracts for continued development or production of a major system or highly specialized equipment, where switching contractors would likely cause substantial unrecoverable duplication of cost or unacceptable delay. For DoD, NASA, and the Coast Guard, this follow-on logic reaches highly specialized services as well.²

Civilian agencies must show a genuine single source. DoD, NASA, and the Coast Guard get a slightly broader version that allows the authority when only a limited number of responsible sources exist.²

Above the $350,000 simplified acquisition threshold, the contracting officer must conduct market research to determine whether other capable sources exist, and that research has to be described in the justification.³⁴ Thin market research is one of the most common reasons sole-source awards get overturned on protest.

Unusual and Compelling Urgency (6.302-2)

When waiting for a full competition would cause serious financial or operational harm, the agency may limit the number of sources it solicits. The urgency cannot come from the agency’s own lack of advance planning. Even under genuine urgency, the contracting officer still has to solicit offers from as many potential sources as practicable; the goal is limited competition, not zero competition.⁵

Urgency contracts are capped in duration. The performance period may not exceed the time necessary to meet the urgent need and compete a replacement, and above the $350,000 threshold the total period, including options, may not exceed one year unless the agency head documents exceptional circumstances. Extending performance further requires a separate determination at the same level of authority.⁵

Urgency is the one exception where the written justification may be completed after award if preparing it first would unreasonably delay the acquisition.⁶ Every other exception requires the J&A to be approved first. Bridge contracts that keep services running while a competitive replacement is procured are often awarded under this authority; the FAR does not treat them as a separate category, and they need the same full justification as any other noncompetitive award.

Industrial Mobilization, Research Capability, and Expert Services (6.302-3)

This exception covers three unrelated situations grouped under one authority.⁷

Industrial mobilization: keeping a facility, manufacturer, or supplier operational so it can produce essential items in a national emergency, which can include training a supplier or splitting production to maintain a warm production base.
Research and development capability: establishing or maintaining an essential engineering, research, or development capability at an educational institution, nonprofit, or federally funded research and development center.
Expert or neutral services: hiring an expert witness, mediator, arbitrator, or other neutral party for current or anticipated litigation or dispute resolution.

The litigation prong is narrower than it might sound. It reaches neutral third parties needed for specific proceedings, not general consulting that happens to touch on legal topics.

International Agreements (6.302-4)

Competition is not required when an international agreement or treaty precludes competitive procedures. The most common scenario is foreign military sales: when a foreign government reimburses the United States for an acquisition and specifies in writing (for example, in a Letter of Offer and Acceptance) that the product must come from a particular firm, the agency can honor that direction without competing the work.⁸

Authorized or Required by Statute (6.302-5)

Some federal statutes tell agencies to buy from a specific source, overriding the general competition requirement. Two well-known examples are Federal Prison Industries (UNICOR) under 18 U.S.C. 4124 and the AbilityOne program under 41 U.S.C. chapter 85.⁹

SBA 8(a) sole-source awards fall under this authority as well. An 8(a) sole-source contract above $30 million still requires a separate written justification that meets the FAR 6.303 content requirements; the SBA cannot accept an 8(a) sole-source contract above that threshold without one.¹⁰

National Security (6.302-6)

Competition may be limited when disclosing the requirement through standard competitive procedures would compromise national security. The disclosure of the need itself has to pose the risk. A contract does not qualify simply because the work is classified or because contractors would need clearances to bid. Agencies still have to solicit offers from as many cleared sources as practicable.¹¹

Public Interest (6.302-7)

This is the catchall, and it is deliberately hard to use. It applies only when no other exception fits and the agency head personally determines in writing that full and open competition would not serve the public interest for the specific acquisition. Agency head means the Secretary of Defense, the Administrator of NASA, or the equivalent leader. This authority cannot be delegated. The agency must also notify Congress in writing at least 30 days before award.¹²

What the Justification and Approval Must Contain

Every noncompetitive award outside simplified acquisition procedures and certain micro-purchase thresholds must be supported by a written Justification and Approval document, the J&A. The contracting officer cannot start sole-source negotiations or make the award until the J&A is completed and approved at the required level.⁶

The document has to contain enough facts and rationale to justify the specific authority being cited. Required content includes:⁴

Identification of the agency and contracting activity, with a header labeling the document a “Justification for other than full and open competition.”
A description of the requirement and its estimated value.
The specific statutory authority (which of the seven exceptions) and why it applies.
The contractor’s unique qualifications or the nature of the acquisition that requires this authority.
What the agency did to solicit as many offers as practicable, including whether a notice was published.
The contracting officer’s determination that the anticipated cost is fair and reasonable.
A description of the market research conducted and its results, or an explanation of why none was performed.
A list of any sources that expressed written interest in the acquisition.
Actions the agency may take to remove barriers to competition before the next procurement for the same requirement.
The contracting officer’s signed certification that the justification is accurate and complete.

Follow-on justifications under 6.302-1 must also estimate the duplicated costs the government would incur by switching contractors and explain how that estimate was derived. Urgency justifications under 6.302-2 must include data on the nature and extent of the harm the government would suffer from delay.⁴

Who Has to Approve It

Approval authority climbs with dollar value, and the estimated value of all options counts toward the threshold.¹³

Up to $900,000: the contracting officer’s own certification in the J&A serves as approval, unless the agency has set a higher internal level.
Over $900,000 to $20 million: the competition advocate for the procuring activity. This authority cannot be delegated.
Over $20 million to $90 million (or $150 million for DoD, NASA, and the Coast Guard): the head of the procuring activity, or a designee who is a general or flag officer for the military or above GS-15 for civilians.
Over $90 million (or $150 million for DoD, NASA, and the Coast Guard): the agency’s senior procurement executive. This authority cannot be delegated, with the sole exception of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment acting as the DoD senior procurement executive.

Public interest determinations under 6.302-7 skip this tiered structure. At any dollar amount, the justification is considered approved when the agency head makes the written determination.¹³

Public Posting After Award

Approved justifications are not confidential. The agency must post the J&A on SAM.gov (the Government Point of Entry) and on its own website, and the posting must remain available for at least 30 days.¹⁴

Standard awards: within 14 days after award.
Urgency awards under 6.302-2: within 30 days after award.
Brand-name justifications under 6.302-1(c): posted with the solicitation itself, before award.

Before posting, the contracting officer scrubs the document for contractor proprietary data and redacts material protected under FOIA or FAR 24.202. If the justification appears to contain proprietary information, the contractor should be given a chance to review and flag it, though that review cannot delay the posting timeline. Justifications for acquisitions where disclosure would compromise national security are exempt from posting.¹⁴

Challenging a Noncompetitive Award

Competitors who believe an agency improperly bypassed competition can protest to the Government Accountability Office. A protest filed within 10 days of award triggers the automatic CICA stay, and the agency generally cannot allow work to begin until the protest is resolved.

GAO has sustained protests where agencies could not show the awardee was genuinely the only capable source. Common weak points are thin market research, unsupported claims that a contractor’s qualifications are unique, and urgency the agency created through its own planning failures. In one case, GAO sustained a protest after finding the record did not support the agency’s conclusion that the awardee’s proposal was unique or proprietary, and that nothing actually precluded a competitive procurement.¹⁵ Inconvenience is not enough. The agency has to show competition was genuinely impracticable, not merely harder than a direct award.

1
Acquisition.GOV. 48 CFR Subpart 6.3 – Other Than Full and Open Competition
2
Acquisition.GOV. 48 CFR 6.302-1 – Only One Responsible Source and No Other Supplies or Services Will Satisfy Agency Requirements
3
Acquisition.GOV. Part 10 – Market Research
4
Acquisition.GOV. 6.303-2 Content
5
Acquisition.GOV. FAR 6.302-2 – Unusual and Compelling Urgency
6
Acquisition.GOV. 6.303-1 Requirements
7
Acquisition.GOV. Federal Acquisition Regulation 6.302-3 – Industrial Mobilization; Engineering, Developmental, or Research Capability; or Expert Services
8
Acquisition.GOV. FAR 6.302-4 – International Agreement
9
Acquisition.GOV. 48 CFR 6.302-5 – Authorized or Required by Statute
10
Acquisition.GOV. 19.808-1 Sole Source
11
Acquisition.GOV. FAR 6.302-6 – National Security
12
Acquisition.GOV. FAR 6.302-7 – Public Interest
13
Acquisition.GOV. 6.304 Approval of the Justification
14
Acquisition.GOV. 6.305 Availability of the Justification
15
U.S. Government Accountability Office. Protest of Sole-Source Contract Award