Beginner Track • Topic 15

FAR Part 6: Other Than Full & Open Competition

RFO FAR Part 6 governs when and how you can restrict competition on open-market acquisitions. Most of the time it will not apply to you in operational contracting, but you need to know when it does.

The Basics

Other Than Full & Open Competition

The seven RFO FAR 6.103 authorities, when they apply, and why Part 6 matters less than you think in operational contracting.

1 When Does Part 6 Even Apply?

FAR Part 6 applies to open-market acquisitions unless an exception in FAR 6.001 or another statute takes the action out of Part 6. If you are placing an order against an existing contract, Part 6 usually is not your lane. If you are buying commercial products or commercial services using FAR 12.201-1 simplified procedures, FAR Part 12 has its own streamlined process and authority citations. In operational contracting, many buys will be under the SAT, on existing contracts, or inside the Part 12 simplified procedures lane. So Part 6 applies less often than you might think. But when it does, you need to get it right.

Each FAR Part has its own lane for restricting competition, and each lane has its own name for the sole source document:

FAR Part 6: Justification and Approval (J&A). Open-market procurements using the authorities in FAR 6.103.

FAR Part 8: Limited Sources Justification. Orders from Federal Supply Schedules (GSA).

FAR Part 12: Commercial Sole Source Justification. Commercial buys using FAR 12.201-1 simplified procedures.

FAR Part 16: Exception to Fair Opportunity. Task and delivery orders off IDIQ and requirements contracts.

People use "J&A" interchangeably for all of these. A sharp contracting officer asks which lane applies before picking the template. For the commercial statute breakdown, see Competition Statutes for Commercial Buys.


2 The Seven Exceptions (IOU PAIN)

RFO FAR 6.103 lists seven authorities that allow other than full and open competition. The mnemonic is IOU PAIN:

I - Industrial Mobilization (FAR 6.103-3)

O - Only One Responsible Source (FAR 6.103-1)

U - Unusual and Compelling Urgency (FAR 6.103-2)

P - Public Interest (FAR 6.103-7)

A - Authorized by Statute (FAR 6.103-5)

I - International Agreement (FAR 6.103-4)

N - National Security (FAR 6.103-6)

In practice, the three you will encounter most often in operational contracting are Only One Responsible Source, Unusual and Compelling Urgency, and Authorized by Statute. The rest exist but come up rarely at the base level.


3 The Ones You Will Actually Use

Only One Responsible Source (6.103-1): This is your standard sole source authority. The supplies or services required are available from only one responsible source and no other type of supplies or services will satisfy agency requirements. This is what brand-name J&As typically cite. You need a written justification and approval (J&A) prepared and approved under FAR 6.104.

Unusual and Compelling Urgency (6.103-2): The agency's need is of such an unusual and compelling urgency that the Government would be seriously injured unless the agency is permitted to limit the number of sources. This is not "we forgot to plan." This is genuine urgency. The contracting officer must still request offers from as many potential sources as is practicable under the circumstances.

Authorized by Statute (6.103-5): A statute authorizes or requires that the acquisition be made through another agency or from a specified source. The most common operational example is the 8(a) program. This authority is different from the others because many uses do not require the normal FAR 6.104 J&A. For 8(a), coordinate with the Small Business office and SBA and follow FAR Part 19.


4 J&A Requirements

When you use a Part 6 authority under FAR 6.103, you generally need a Justification and Approval (J&A) document prepared under FAR 6.104. The J&A must include specific elements: a description of what you are buying, why full and open competition is not suitable, the statutory authority being cited, market research results, any actions to remove barriers to competition in future acquisitions, and the contracting officer's certification that the justification is accurate.

There are important exceptions. FAR 6.104 does not require the normal written J&A for 6.103-5 authorized-or-required-by-statute actions or 6.103-7 public-interest actions. But do not stop there. For example, RFO FAR Part 19 still requires a 6.104 justification before SBA may accept a sole-source 8(a) contract over $30 million.

Approval thresholds go up with dollar value (FAR 6.104-2):
Up to $900K: Contracting officer's certification is the approval.
$900K to $20M: Competition Advocate for the procuring activity (cannot be delegated).
$20M to $90M ($150M for DoD, NASA, and Coast Guard): Head of the Procuring Activity or designee (general/flag officer or above GS-15).
Over $90M ($150M for DoD/NASA/CG): Senior Procurement Executive. Generally cannot be delegated.
Include the value of all options when determining the approval level.

5 What Goes Into a J&A (FAR 6.104-1)

FAR 6.104-1 lays out exactly what a Justification and Approval must contain. There are 12 listed content elements. Your agency template may organize them differently, but every one of these must be addressed somewhere in the document.

Element 1: Identification. Name the agency, the contracting activity, and label the document as a "Justification for Other Than Full and Open Competition." Sounds obvious, but reviewers need to know who wrote it and what it is.

Element 2: Nature and Description of the Action. Is this a new contract, a modification, a follow-on? Describe what you are doing and why.

Element 3: Description of Supplies or Services. What is the Government buying, and what is the estimated value? Be specific enough that a reviewer who has never seen the requirement can understand it. Include technical specifics, part numbers, building locations, and applicable technical orders where relevant.

Element 4: Statutory Authority. Identify which FAR 6.103 authority applies. This must match the facts in the rest of the document. If you cite 6.103-1 (only one responsible source), every paragraph that follows should prove that claim.

Element 5: Demonstration That the Authority Applies. This is the heart of the J&A. You must demonstrate WHY the contractor's unique qualifications or the nature of the acquisition justifies using the authority you cited. If you cited 6.103-1, you need to prove no other source can do this work. If you cited 6.103-2 (urgency), you need to explain the specific urgency and why the Government would be seriously injured by delay.

Element 6: Efforts to Solicit Offers. Describe what you did to get offers from as many sources as practicable. Even in a sole source, you should be soliciting to the extent possible. Also address whether you published a notice or what exception to the publication requirement applies.

Element 7: Fair and Reasonable Price Determination. The contracting officer must determine that the anticipated cost is fair and reasonable. How will you make that determination? Prior pricing, independent government cost estimate, market comparisons?

Element 8: Market Research. Describe the market research you conducted and what it showed. If you did not conduct market research, explain why not (this better be a very good reason).

Element 9: Other Supporting Facts. Anything else that supports the case. For follow-on actions under 6.103-1, this includes duplicated cost or delay estimates. For urgency under 6.103-2, this includes data, estimated cost, or other rationale explaining whether and how much the Government would be harmed.

Element 10: Interested Sources. List any sources that expressed written interest in the acquisition. If you posted an RFI or sources-sought notice, document the responses.

Element 11: Actions to Remove Barriers. What will the agency do to create conditions for competition in the future? Tie this to something concrete: a lifecycle event, a data rights negotiation, a market survey timeline.

Element 12: Contracting Officer Certification. The CO certifies the justification is accurate and complete to the best of their knowledge and belief. This is your signature on the line. Make sure you believe what is in the document before you sign it.

Team Support: FAR 6.104 also expects technical and requirements personnel to support the contracting officer by providing and certifying the necessary data. The people who generated the technical facts need to stand behind them.

The approval routing matters. After the CO certifies, the J&A routes through the approval chain per FAR 6.104-2. The approval authority depends on dollar value. Make sure the right people are on the routing before you send it up, and verify that Legal has reviewed it.

Check the J&A Examples tab to see how this looks on paper, and how it falls apart when done wrong.


6 The Seven Exceptions: A Deep Dive

Section 2 gave you the mnemonic. Now let's walk through each exception in detail so you understand what it takes to use them, what you have to prove, and where people get it wrong.

FAR 6.103-1: Only One Responsible Source
This is the most common Part 6 authority at the base level. It covers supplies or services available from only one responsible source, follow-on contracts where switching would cause substantial duplicated cost or unacceptable delay, and brand-name descriptions that prevent full and open competition. For DoD, NASA, and the Coast Guard, this authority also reaches situations where only a limited number of responsible sources can satisfy the requirement.

What you must prove: That no other source can satisfy the requirement. Not that you prefer this source. Not that this source is the best. That this source is the ONLY one. Your demonstration must include verifiable facts: proprietary data rights, unique tooling, sole manufacturer status. Market research must document the search for alternatives and explain why each one fails.

Common mistakes: Confusing "best source" with "only source." Asserting sole source status without market research. Citing past performance or familiarity instead of technical exclusivity.
FAR 6.103-2: Unusual and Compelling Urgency
The agency's need is so urgent that the Government would be seriously injured unless it limits the number of sources. This is a high bar. The urgency must be unusual (not routine) and compelling (not just inconvenient).

What you must prove: That the urgency is genuine and unforeseen. That full competition would cause serious injury to the Government (operational impact, safety risk, financial harm). You must still request offers from as many sources as practicable under the circumstances.

The period of performance trap: You can only sole source for the period covered by the urgency itself, plus a reasonable transition period to get a competitive follow-on in place. If an oil spill creates an urgent need for cleanup services that will take four months, you cannot write a five-year contract off that urgency. For a contract greater than the SAT, the total period of performance may not exceed the time necessary to meet the urgent need and enter into another contract through competitive procedures, and it may not exceed one year including options unless the head of the agency determines exceptional circumstances apply.

Common mistakes: Using urgency to cover poor planning. "We forgot to start the acquisition on time" is not urgency. Writing a multi-year contract off a short-term emergency. Failing to solicit from any other sources at all when other vendors were available and could have responded quickly. Not building a bridge to competition once the urgent period ends.
FAR 6.103-3: Industrial Mobilization, Engineering, Developmental, or Research Capability, or Expert Services
This authority has three prongs, and the first one is the most interesting.

Prong 1: Industrial mobilization. The government needs to keep certain manufacturers alive and capable even when there is no immediate need for their product. Think of a small company that makes a specialized component for missile guidance systems. The DoD does not need that component today, but if a conflict breaks out, they need that factory tooled up and ready to produce. If nobody buys from them during peacetime, they close up shop or pivot to purely commercial work. Then the emergency hits and the production capability is gone. It takes years to rebuild. So the government sole sources contracts to that manufacturer specifically to keep them in business as a defense supplier. You are not buying because they are the only source. You are buying because you need them to still BE a source when it matters.

Prong 2: Research and development capability. This is about keeping essential R&D capabilities alive at specific institutions. Maybe MIT has the only wind tunnel in the country that can simulate hypersonic conditions, or Johns Hopkins APL has a unique radar testing facility. The government sole sources to that institution not because they are the cheapest option, but because the capability itself needs to exist and they are where it lives. This applies to educational institutions, nonprofits, and Federally Funded Research and Development Centers (FFRDCs).

Prong 3: Expert services. Acquiring expert services for use in litigation or disputes. When the government needs a specific expert witness or technical consultant for a legal proceeding, this authority allows sole sourcing to that individual or firm.

How often you will see it: You will not see this in operational contracting. Industrial mobilization is major command and depot-level territory. R&D capability lives at agencies funding FFRDCs. Expert services come up when legal gets involved at levels well above the base. Know it exists so you recognize the reference, but this is not one you will ever write.
FAR 6.103-4: International Agreement
The terms of an international agreement or treaty between the United States and a foreign government or international organization require or restrict the use of other than competitive procedures. This shows up in Foreign Military Sales (FMS), NATO cooperative programs, and international partnerships where a treaty or agreement dictates who can perform the work or supply the goods.

The IACR process: This is where it gets different from the other exceptions. RFO FAR 6.103-4 says DoD, NASA, and Coast Guard contracts using this authority do not require the written justification and approval described in FAR 6.104. Under DFARS 206.302-4, the Head of the Contracting Activity (or a delegate no lower than the chief of the contracting office) prepares a document titled "International Agreement Competitive Restrictions" (IACR). The IACR describes the terms of the agreement, treaty, or Letter of Offer and Acceptance (LOA) that require non-competitive procedures. The contract file must include the IACR plus a copy of the associated LOA or other international agreement.

Key detail: The IACR can be used even when the agreement does not name a specific source, as long as the agreement contains enough information to explain why competition is not possible. For example, a bilateral MOU might require that work be performed by companies from the two signatory nations, which restricts the competitive pool without naming a single vendor.

How often you will see it: You will not. This is systems-level contracting. Program offices managing international cooperative development, FMS cases, and NATO agreements are the ones dealing with IACRs. It is not going to land on your desk in operational contracting.
FAR 6.103-5: Authorized or Required by Statute
A statute expressly authorizes or requires the acquisition to be made through another agency or from a specified source. The most common use in operational contracting is the 8(a) Business Development Program. When SBA accepts a requirement into the 8(a) program, the acquisition is being handled under a statutory program, not because the agency independently proved only one source can do the work. Other examples include SBIR/STTR follow-on authorities and brand-name commercial products for authorized resale.

What you must prove: That a statute specifically authorizes or requires the approach. For 8(a), that means the requirement was properly offered to and accepted by SBA, and any Part 19 competitive-threshold rules were handled correctly. Do not use this authority as a shortcut for ordinary brand-name preferences or customer favorites.

Common mistakes: Assuming 8(a) sole source means no documentation or coordination is required. RFO FAR Part 19 still matters. Above the 8(a) competitive thresholds, SBA may accept a sole-source 8(a) only after the contracting officer has complied with other-than-full-and-open requirements in accordance with 6.103, and SBA may not accept a sole-source 8(a) contract over $30 million unless the agency has completed a justification under 6.104.
FAR 6.103-6: National Security
Disclosure of the agency's needs would compromise national security unless the acquisition is limited to a specific number of sources. This is about keeping the requirement itself classified or sensitive, not about the end item being classified.

What you must prove: That disclosing the requirement through full and open competition procedures would compromise national security unless the agency limits the number of sources from which it solicits bids or proposals. This is not a convenience tool for sensitive-but-unclassified discomfort. It needs a real security basis.

How often you will see it: You will not see this in operational contracting. This is intelligence community and special access program territory.
FAR 6.103-7: Public Interest
The agency head determines that it is not in the public interest to compete the requirement. This is the most restrictive authority. It requires a written determination by the agency head (not a delegate), and Congress must be notified at least 30 days before contract award.

What you must prove: That full and open competition is not in the public interest. The agency head makes this determination personally. This cannot be delegated.

How often you will see it: Essentially never at the base level. This authority is used for extraordinary circumstances at the highest levels of the agency. If you ever encounter it, you will know because senior leadership and Congress are involved.
Bottom line for operational contracting: You will spend 95% of your time with 6.103-1 (only one source), 6.103-2 (urgency), and 6.103-5 (statutory authority like 8(a)). Know those three cold. Be aware the other four exist so you can recognize them if they come up, and know to get help when they do.
Interactive Tool

J&A Examples

Same scenario, two very different justifications. A base needs specialized aircraft engine test cell calibration services. Click highlighted sections for coaching notes. Blue borders highlight what makes a justification strong. Red borders flag problems.

Justification for Other Than Full and Open Competition

FAR 6.104-1
Section I: Agency and Contracting Activity
Contracting Activity: 96 TW/PKC, Eglin Air Force Base, FL
Action Type: New Contract
Estimated Value: $485,000
Section II: Nature and Description of the Action
New fixed-price contract for specialized calibration services. The requirement stems from the 96 Test Wing's continued operation of the F110-GE-129 engine test cell facility in Building 990, Test Cell 3. Annual recurring requirement with emergency on-call support capability.
Section III: Description of Supplies or Services
Specialized calibration services for the F110-GE-129 engine test cell data acquisition system located in Building 990, Test Cell 3, Eglin AFB. Scope includes: (1) Annual calibration cycle (two calendar events per fiscal year); (2) Emergency on-call calibration support (as requested); (3) All work must meet tolerances specified in T.O. 33-1-28 (Aircraft Engine Technical Order). Calibration must verify accuracy of pressure transducers, temperature sensors, and data logging interface across the full operating range of the test cell.
Authority
FAR 6.103-1, Only One Responsible Source
Section V: Demonstration of Unique Qualifications
The F110-GE-129 engine test cell uses a proprietary data acquisition system manufactured by Acme Calibration Services (ACS). Calibration of this system requires direct access to ACS's proprietary software algorithms and calibration reference standards, which ACS does not license to third parties. The Government does not own rights to this technical data. Contract FA8101-20-C-0001 (existing ACS calibration services contract) is governed by DFARS 252.227-7013, which specifies that rights to the technical data remain with the contractor. Without access to the proprietary software and calibration reference data, no other contractor can perform calibrations to the tolerances specified in T.O. 33-1-28. Replacing the entire data acquisition system to enable competition would cost approximately $2.3M and require 8 months of test cell downtime during which the 96 Test Wing could not conduct engine performance evaluations. This is not operationally acceptable.
Section VI: Market Research
Market research conducted January 2026 per FAR 10.001. Searched SAM.gov using NAICS 334515 (Instrument Manufacturing, Measuring and Testing). Also searched GSA Schedule 84 (IT Professional Services) for alternative calibration capabilities. Contacted two qualified calibration services firms: (1) Beta Test Services, phone 850-555-0142, confirmed they cannot access ACS's proprietary calibration system and cannot provide compatible services; (2) Gamma Precision LLC, phone 850-555-0198, confirmed same limitation. Both potential competitors explicitly stated they lack access to ACS's proprietary technical data. See attached market research summary and vendor contact documentation.
Section VII: Actions to Remove Barriers to Competition
The F110-GE-129 test cell data acquisition system is planned for replacement in FY29 based on current equipment lifecycle projections. The replacement specification will require open-architecture data interfaces and Government ownership of technical data rights per DFARS requirements. This will enable future competition for calibration services. Additionally, the Air Force will explore alternative test cell configurations during the FY27-FY28 planning cycle that may reduce dependence on proprietary systems.
Contracting Officer Certification: I have determined that only one responsible source exists for these specialized calibration services due to proprietary technical data restrictions. This determination is based on documented market research and the technical requirements of the existing test cell facility.
Reference

Look It Up

The regulations and guidance you need.

RFO FAR Part 6

Competition Requirements. Start here for the current RFO Part 6 structure, including applicability, full and open competition, other than full and open competition, J&A content, approvals, and posting.

Read RFO Part 6

FAR 6.103

Other Than Full and Open Competition. This is where the seven authorities now live: only one source, urgency, industrial mobilization, international agreement, statute, national security, and public interest.

Read RFO Part 6

FAR 6.104-1

Justification content. The current RFO list of what must be included in a J&A for other than full and open competition.

Read RFO Part 6

FAR 6.104-2

Approval of the justification. The current RFO approval table, including the $900K, $20M, $90M, and DoD/NASA/Coast Guard $150M breakpoints.

Read RFO Part 6

FAR 6.301

Availability of the justification. The postaward posting rule, including the different timing for urgency and brand-name justifications.

Read RFO Part 6

RFO FAR Part 19

Small business and 8(a) rules. Use this with FAR 6.103-5 when the restriction is based on a statutory small business program.

Read RFO Part 19