FAR 1.502—Unsolicited proposed revisions.
Plain-English Summary
FAR 1.502 addresses how the Government should treat unsolicited proposed revisions to the FAR or related acquisition rules. This section is very narrow but important: it says that when someone outside the normal rulemaking process submits a recommendation for a revision, the Government must give it consideration if it is submitted in writing and includes enough data and rationale to evaluate it. In practice, this means contractors, trade associations, agencies, and other stakeholders can influence acquisition policy, but only if they provide a well-supported proposal rather than a bare suggestion. The section is about the threshold for review, not a promise that the recommendation will be adopted. Its practical significance is that it encourages informed participation in acquisition policy development while helping the Government filter out unsupported or incomplete ideas.
Key Rules
Written submission required
An unsolicited recommendation must be submitted in writing. Oral suggestions or informal comments do not trigger the same consideration requirement under this section.
Enough data and rationale
The submission must include sufficient data and rationale to permit evaluation. The recommendation should explain the problem, support the proposed change, and show why the revision is needed.
Consideration is required
If the submission meets the written-and-supported threshold, it must be given consideration. This means the proposal should be reviewed on its merits, though the rule does not require acceptance or adoption.
Applies to unsolicited revisions
The section covers recommendations for revisions that are not part of an agency’s planned or requested rulemaking process. It is aimed at outside proposals that seek to change existing acquisition policy or text.
Responsibilities
Submitter (contractor, trade association, agency employee, or other stakeholder)
Provide the proposed revision in writing and include enough factual support, analysis, and rationale to allow the Government to evaluate the idea.
Government reviewers / acquisition policy officials
Review unsolicited recommendations that are properly supported and consider them on their merits as part of the acquisition policy or FAR revision process.
Contracting community
Use this channel responsibly by submitting clear, evidence-based proposals rather than unsupported complaints or general policy preferences.
Practical Implications
A well-written proposal matters: unsupported ideas are easy to dismiss, while a concise explanation with data, examples, and a clear rationale is more likely to receive attention.
This section does not guarantee a response or a change in the FAR; it only requires that qualifying submissions be considered.
Common pitfall: submitting a recommendation without enough detail to show the problem, the proposed fix, and the expected benefit.
Another pitfall is treating this as a substitute for formal rulemaking comments or agency-specific procedures; the submission still needs to fit the proper policy channel.
For contractors and industry groups, this is a practical way to influence acquisition policy, but success depends on the quality and credibility of the supporting record.
Official Regulatory Text
Consideration shall also be given to unsolicited recommendations for revisions that have been submitted in writing with sufficient data and rationale to permit their evaluation.