FAR 9.109—Prohibition on contracting with an entity involved in activities that violate arms control treaties or agreements with the United States.

Authority.

FAR 9.109-1 is a short authority provision that tells readers where the rule comes from and what legal basis supports it. It states that this section implements 22 U.S.C. 2593e, which means the FAR coverage in this area is grounded in statute rather than being a purely discretionary policy choice. In practical terms, the section signals that contracting officers and agencies must follow the requirements in the surrounding FAR subpart because they are tied to a specific congressional mandate. For contractors, the section matters because it indicates that any procedures, restrictions, or determinations in the related provisions are not optional internal guidance; they have statutory backing. Although this particular section does not itself impose detailed operational steps, it establishes the legal authority for the rules that follow and helps users understand the source and enforceability of the subpart.

Prohibition.

FAR 9.109-2 establishes a mandatory prohibition on federal contracting with certain excluded entities. It tells contracting officers that they may not award, renew, or extend a contract for products or services to an entity that is identified in the System for Award Management (SAM) as excluded for purposes of this subpart because of involvement in activities that violate arms control treaties or agreements with the United States. In practice, this section is about screening for a specific exclusion category before taking contract action, and it applies to new awards as well as continuation actions such as renewals and extensions. Its purpose is to protect the government from doing business with entities whose conduct has triggered this treaty-related exclusion and to ensure contracting decisions comply with the governmentwide debarment/exclusion framework. For contracting officers, the section creates a hard stop: if the entity is listed in SAM for this reason, the contract action is prohibited. For contractors and offerors, it means eligibility can be affected by exclusion status, and they must ensure their registration and representations do not conflict with SAM exclusion records.

Exception.

FAR 9.109-3 creates a narrow exception to the general prohibition in FAR 9.109-2. It addresses contracts for the procurement of products or services along a major route of supply to a zone of active combat or a major contingency operation, and it ties that exception to either a statute or a determination by the cognizant Combatant Commander, made in consultation with the Chief of Mission. The section also identifies, as of May 10, 2018, the countries recognized as along the major route of supply supporting operations in Afghanistan: Afghanistan, Georgia, the Kyrgyz Republic, Pakistan, the Republic of Armenia, the Republic of Azerbaijan, the Republic of Kazakhstan, the Republic of Tajikistan, the Republic of Uzbekistan, and Turkmenistan. In practice, this provision matters because it tells contracting personnel when the otherwise applicable prohibition does not apply, allowing procurement actions to proceed in certain operationally sensitive locations. It is important for acquisition planning, source selection, and compliance screening because the exception is location- and mission-specific, not a blanket waiver. Users should read this section together with FAR 9.109-2 and any applicable statute, Combatant Commander guidance, and mission-specific country determinations.

Certification by the offeror.

FAR 9.109-4 sets out the certification requirement for offerors seeking contract award when the government is screening for certain foreign policy and national security concerns tied to arms control, nonproliferation, and disarmament obligations. It explains what an offeror must certify about its own conduct and the conduct of any entity it owns or controls, and it also allows an alternative to certification if the offeror provides information showing that the President has issued a waiver or determined that the relevant entity has stopped the covered activities. The section also addresses how the certification is submitted, making clear that it must accompany the offer and is not part of the standard SAM annual representations and certifications. In addition, it tells contracting officers when they may rely on the certification and when they should question it. Finally, it describes the consequences of a false certification, including remedies such as suspension or debarment and a minimum debarment period of two years if suspension precedes debarment. In practice, this section is about ensuring offerors are not tied to prohibited conduct or entities and giving contracting officers a clear, limited basis for award eligibility decisions.

Solicitation provision.

FAR 9.109-5 tells contracting officers when they must insert the solicitation provision at 52.209-13, "Violation of Arms Control Treaties or Agreements-Certification." Its focus is narrow but important: it applies to solicitations for the acquisition of products or services, including construction, when the value exceeds the simplified acquisition threshold, unless the exception in 9.109-3 applies. It also makes clear that the provision is not used for commercial products or commercial services solicitations. In practice, this section is a pre-award screening tool that requires offerors to certify whether they are aware of violations of arms control treaties or agreements, helping the Government assess responsibility and compliance risk before award. For contracting officers, the rule is a mandatory solicitation-inclusion requirement; for offerors, it creates a certification obligation tied to eligibility for award. The section matters because missing the provision can create a solicitation defect, while mishandling the certification can affect responsibility determinations, award timing, and post-award compliance review.