FAR 6.202—Establishing or maintaining alternative sources.
Plain-English Summary
FAR 6.202 explains when an agency may intentionally exclude a particular source from a contract action in order to establish or maintain alternative sources for the same supplies or services. The section is about preserving competition, protecting national defense and industrial mobilization interests, maintaining essential engineering/research/development capability, ensuring continuity of supply, meeting projected high-demand needs, and addressing critical medical, safety, or emergency supply needs. In practice, it gives agencies a limited exception to normal source selection rules when the government has a legitimate strategic reason to keep more than one source available. It also imposes a formal approval requirement: each action must be supported by a written determination and findings signed by the agency head or designee, and the authority cannot be used as a blanket class justification. The section further assigns technical and requirements personnel the job of supplying the data needed to justify the exclusion, and it requires a specific cost analysis when the agency relies on the competition/cost rationale. For contractors, this means a source may be excluded not because it is unqualified, but because the agency has documented a policy or mission-based reason to preserve another source. For contracting officers, it means the exclusion must be carefully justified, documented, and tied to one of the listed statutory-style purposes.
Key Rules
Limited source exclusion authority
Agencies may exclude a particular source from a contract action only to establish or maintain alternative sources for the supplies or services being acquired. This is an exception-based authority, not a general license to bypass competition or favor a different vendor without a documented reason.
Agency head determination required
The agency head must determine that the exclusion will serve one of the listed purposes, such as increasing competition, supporting national defense, ensuring continuity of supply, meeting high-demand needs, or addressing critical medical, safety, or emergency needs. The determination is the core policy judgment that makes the exclusion permissible.
Enumerated justifications only
The section lists specific acceptable bases: reduced overall costs through competition, national defense and mobilization needs, essential nonprofit or FFRDC capability, reliable supply continuity, projected high demand, and critical medical/safety/emergency supply needs. The agency must fit the action within one of these categories; general convenience or preference is not enough.
Written D&F is mandatory
Every proposed contract action under this authority must be supported by a determination and findings (D&F) under FAR subpart 1.7, signed by the head of the agency or a designee. The D&F is the formal record showing the factual basis and rationale for the exclusion.
No class-based use
The D&F may not be made on a class basis. Each proposed action must be individually supported, which prevents agencies from issuing broad, standing approvals that automatically cover multiple acquisitions without specific review.
Technical support must back the decision
Technical and requirements personnel must provide all necessary data to support the recommendation to exclude a particular source. Their role is to supply the factual record, such as demand forecasts, supply risk, capability needs, or cost data, that the contracting and approval officials rely on.
Cost findings needed for competition rationale
If the agency relies on the reduced-costs-through-competition ground in paragraph (a)(1), the findings must describe the estimated reduction in overall costs and explain how the estimate was derived. This requires a defensible cost analysis, not just a conclusory statement that competition will save money.
Responsibilities
Agency Head or Designee
Make the required determination that excluding a source will serve one of the permitted purposes, and sign the D&F supporting the proposed contract action. Ensure the approval is specific to the individual action and not issued as a class-based authorization.
Contracting Officer
Structure the acquisition and document the file so the exclusion is supported by a valid D&F and the required factual basis. Coordinate with technical and requirements personnel, ensure the justification matches one of the permitted grounds, and verify that any cost analysis is complete when paragraph (a)(1) is used.
Technical and Requirements Personnel
Provide the data, analysis, and mission-specific facts needed to support the recommendation to exclude a source. This may include demand history, supply chain risk, capability assessments, national defense needs, or cost estimates and assumptions.
Agency
Use this authority only when the exclusion is needed to establish or maintain alternative sources and the action is properly documented. Maintain records that show the rationale, the approval, and the supporting analysis for audit and review purposes.
Practical Implications
This section is often used to protect supply resilience and competition, so contractors should not assume they will remain eligible for every follow-on action if the agency wants to diversify sources.
The biggest compliance risk is weak documentation: if the D&F does not clearly tie the exclusion to one of the listed reasons, the action may be vulnerable to protest, audit findings, or internal review issues.
Agencies cannot rely on a standing or class-wide approval; each exclusion must be justified for the specific procurement action, which means planning and lead time matter.
When the agency cites the cost-reduction rationale, it must show how the savings estimate was calculated, so unsupported or overly optimistic savings claims are a common pitfall.
For contractors, this rule can mean a source is excluded even if it is performing well, because the government may be intentionally preserving a second source for continuity, emergency readiness, or future competition.
Official Regulatory Text
(a) Agencies may exclude a particular source from a contract action in order to establish or maintain an alternative source or sources for the supplies or services being acquired if the agency head determines that to do so would- (1) Increase or maintain competition and likely result in reduced overall costs for the acquisition, or for any anticipated acquisition; (2) Be in the interest of national defense in having a facility (or a producer, manufacturer, or other supplier) available for furnishing the supplies or services in case of a national emergency or industrial mobilization; (3) Be in the interest of national defense in establishing or maintaining an essential engineering, research, or development capability to be provided by an educational or other nonprofit institution or a federally funded research and development center; (4) Ensure the continuous availability of a reliable source of supplies or services; (5) Satisfy projected needs based on a history of high demand; or (6) Satisfy a critical need for medical, safety, or emergency supplies. (b) (1) Every proposed contract action under the authority of paragraph (a) of this section shall be supported by a determination and findings (D&F) (see subpart 1.7 ) signed by the head of the agency or designee. This D&F shall not be made on a class basis. (2) Technical and requirements personnel are responsible for providing all necessary data to support their recommendation to exclude a particular source. (3) When the authority in paragraph (a)(1) of this section is cited, the findings shall include a description of the estimated reduction in overall costs and how the estimate was derived.