Land Management Integrated Resources BPA Call

Revised 09-28-2026 Page 1 of 15

Issue Date:10/26/2026

Due Date/Time: 11/10/2026, 1400 (PT)

Contractor:

Enter BPA No.

12363N2__A______ Project Name Phase I and II Archaeological Survey for the Lomax

Task 7 Resource Management Project

BPA RFQ or

Call No.

12363N27Q4003 Location Uwharrie National Forest

Set-Aside Small Business_X___ Unrestricted_____

This will only be sent out to the current BPA Award Holders as of Issue Date.

Contractor: Confirm business size by NAICS code below: Small___ Large___ Initial:______

NAICS Code Exception if Applicable:

Award

Information

___x___This is a single award call order. Contractor must provide pricing for all items listed under Box 20.

______This is a multi-award call order. Contractor needs to only provide pricing for all items listed under the specific award(s) they are interested in.

Contractor:

UEI:

Email:

Issuing and Billing Office:

19.

ITEM

NO.

20.

SCHEDULE OF SUPPLIES/SERVICES

NAICS

Code (per Scope of Work)

21.

ESTIMATED

QUANTITY

22.

UNIT OF

MEASURE

23.

UNIT PRICE

24.

AMOUNT

Mandatory Items Item 1: Archaeological Services

1 Background Research and Summary 541620 1 Project $ $

2 NRHP Unevaluated Site Evaluations 541620 37 Project $ $

3 Inventory Survey and Site Recordation 541620 326 Acres $ $

4 Draft Report 541620 1 Project $ $

5 Final Reports 541620 4 Each $ $

Item 2: Project Management

6 Project Management Meetings 541620 3 Each $ $

Remarks: All clauses and provisions in the base BPA award are applicable to call orders, however clauses and/or provisions in BPA Call Orders take precedence. See Attachments for additional terms and conditions. The Period of Performance for this Call Order is from the

Date of Award through September 30, 2027. Specific item due dates or deliverable due dates are mandatory, not arbitrary, and must be met accordingly, regardless of the final period of performance date.

Total Price:

Contractor: (Name, Signature, and Date)

Date:

Requested By: (Name and Signature)

COR: Kim Rust and Nichole Wagner

Ordered By: (Name and Signature)

Breanne Parker

Contracting Officer

Revised 09-28-2026 Page 2 of 15

1. DESCRIPTION/STATEMENT OF WORK

In 2018, the Lomax Resource Management Project (formerly the Footpath Divide Project) was proposed to address insects and disease issues, as well as accelerate longleaf pine restoration on the Uwharrie NF. The purpose of this project is to authorize vegetation treatments on 3,017 acres of pine and/or mixed pine-hardwood stands to decrease susceptibility and increase resilience and resistance to insects and disease in the project area.

The purpose of this solicitation is to secure professional cultural resource services to assist with the

National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) Section 106 compliance needs for 326 acres of phase I archeological survey for the Lomax Resource Management Project (formerly Footpath Divide) and

37 Site Evaluations for the Uwharrie National Forest (UNF), National Forests in North Carolina

(NFsNC).

See Statement of Work for additional information.

2. SPECIFICATIONS:

See Statement of Work for additional information.

2.1 Key Personnel and Required Qualifications or Certifications

The Contractor shall follow the North Carolina Office of State Archeology Archaeological

Investigation Standards and Guidelines for Background Research, Field for Background

Research, Field Methodologies, Technical Reports, and Curation (December 2017, Updated

November 2023). This document is available online at https://archaeology.ncdcr.gov/osa-guidelines.

(a) The Contractor must employ and maintain personnel in the management and key personnel positions who meet the minimum requirements for each of the skill levels to which they are assigned. Contractor personnel must possess the technical, professional, and interpersonal capability of performing the functions described in the Order Proposal

Request in a competent and professional manner.

(b) Contractor Heritage staff must meet the Secretary of Interior’s professional standards as specified in Section 112(a)(1)(A) of the NHPA and in the implementing regulations for

Section 106 of the NHPA at 36 CFR 800.2(a)(1) and 36 CFR 800.2(a)(3).

(c) The Contractor shall furnish a qualified Principal Investigator in accordance with 36

CFR 61.5. The Contractor shall ensure that all approvals, authorities, rights, permits, and easements necessary for conducting the cultural resources survey have been obtained prior to initiating fieldwork.

(d) Any changes to key personnel wil require approval from the Government. The

Contractor shall provide a detailed explanation of the circumstances necessitating the proposed substitutions, complete resumes for the proposed substitutes, and any additional information requested by the BPA or ordering CO. Proposed substitutes should have https://archaeology.ncdcr.gov/osa-guidelines https://archaeology.ncdcr.gov/osa-guidelines

Revised 09-28-2026 Page 3 of 15 comparable qualifications to those of the persons being replaced. The CO will notify the

Contractor within 15 calendar days after receipt of all required information of the decision on substitutions. The order will be modified to reflect any approved changes of key personnel.

(e) The Government will consider noncompliance with the provisions of this clause a material breach of the terms and conditions of the BPA for which the Government may seek any and all appropriate remedies, to include termination for default.

2.2 Government Property FAR 52.245-1 GOVERNMENT PROPERTY (SEP 2021)

See Statement of Work Section 7 for additional information.

3. PROJECT LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION

The Uwharrie National Forest is located in the Piedmont region of central North Carolina and spans approximately 51,546 acres. It lies primarily within Montgomery County, with smaller portions extending into Randolph and Davidson counties. The forest is part of the ancient

Uwharrie Mountain ranges in North America, though today these mountains are more subdued in elevation and can be described as rolling. The forest is about an hour’s drive east of Charlotte and south of Greensboro, making it easily accessible to residents of North Carolina’s major metropolitan areas. Bordered by the Yadkin-Pee Dee River to the west and interlaced with roads like NC-109 and NC 24/27, the Uwharrie contains a blend of rugged terrain, hardwood forests, pine plantations, and a mosaic of public and private land. Project location will be scattered across different units on the Forest, and will require driving to different locations on rugged forest service roads. Some locations may be directly inaccessible by vehicle and will require some walking in to survey units. See SOW for specifics and access.

4. INSPECTION AND ACCEPTANCE:

4.1 FAR 52.246-4 INSPECTION OF SERVICES--FIXED-PRICE (AUG 1996)

a. Definition. “Services”, as used in this clause, includes services performed, workmanship, and material furnished or utilized in the performance of services.

b. The Contractor shall provide and maintain an inspection system acceptable to the Government covering the services under this contract. Complete records of all inspection work performed by the Contractor shall be maintained and made available to the Government during contract performance and for as long afterwards as the contract requires.

c. The Government has the right to inspect and test all services called for by the contract, to the extent practicable at all times and places during the term of the contract. The Government shall perform inspections and tests in a manner that will not unduly delay the work.

d. If the Government performs inspections or tests on the premises of the Contractor or a subcontractor, the Contractor shall furnish, and shall require subcontractors to furnish, at no increase in contract price, all reasonable facilities and assistance for the safe and convenient performance of these duties.

e. If any of the services do not conform with contract requirements, the Government may require the

Contractor to perform the services again in conformity with contract requirements, at no increase in contract amount. When the defects in services cannot be corrected by reperformance, the

Revised 09-28-2026 Page 4 of 15

Government may—

1) Require the Contractor to take necessary action to ensure that future performance conforms to contract requirements; and

2) Reduce the contract price to reflect the reduced value of the services performed.

f. If the Contractor fails to promptly perform the services again or to take the necessary action to ensure future performance in conformity with contract requirements, the Government may—

1) By contract or otherwise, perform the services and charge to the Contractor any cost incurred by the Government that is directly related to the performance of such service; or

2) Terminate the contract for default.

4.2 CONTRACTOR INSPECTION PROCEDURES

(A) General Instructions

1) The Contractor shall conduct inspections of ie. treatment units and record the results using procedures described herein. Inspections shall be maintained concurrent with contract work. Completed inspection forms shall be made available to the Government within 24 hours of completion of each ie. treatment unit and will remain part of the permanent contract file.

2) By submission of inspection forms to the Government, the Contractor is considered to be certifying that the unit is satisfactorily completed and that the inspection forms reflect the work accomplished.

3) The Contractor shall submit legible inspection forms. Illegible and incomplete forms shall be returned to the Contractor for correction and re-submission.

4) In the event the Contractor falsifies inspection results, as determined by the Contracting Officer, the

Government may declare the Contractor to be in default of the contract. Additionally, the Government may refer such falsifications to the US Attorney’s Office for possible prosecution pursuant to 18 U.S.C.

1001 (Falsification of Government Documents) or 18 U.S.C. 287 (Fraud).

4.3 GOVERNMENT INSPECTION PROCEDURES – COMPLIANCE INSPECTION:

(A) Contractor should anticipate meetings to discuss communication plans.

(B) The COR and other Forest Service staff reserve the right to conduct field inspections or hold virtual meetings. The Government reserves the right to use a third party for inspections. Should the

Government use a third party for inspections, the Offeror will be required to work in collaboration with said third party so that meaningful inspections can be concluded.

(C) The Contractor should exchange deliverables and data on a recurrent basis as established in the schedule in the proposal. Scheduled meetings will discuss survey locations and findings.

(D)The Contractor should anticipate there will be a final meeting to close this process where the exchange of final deliverables and data. Should the Government use a third party for inspections, the

Offeror will be required to work in collaboration with said third party so that meaningful inspections can be concluded.

Key Deliverables/Schedule

Refer to the Schedule of Items (SOI) and SOW for details on key deliverables/schedule. The contractor

Revised 09-28-2026 Page 5 of 15 should include a plan for completing the work in the proposal. The contractor may propose a milestone billing schedule based on partial completion of work however the work must be verifiable. The contractor should describe the milestones and how the work will be verified within the proposal.

Timeline/Schedule

The Contractor shall provide a timeline/schedule that specifies tasks to be completed in order to meet the key deliverables/schedule for the period of performance. The timeline/schedule should be based on the SOI and SOW. The Contractor may provide a Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) to aid in visualizing the timeline/schedule.

5. COMMENCEMENT PROSECUTION, AND COMPLETION OF WORK

The Contractor shall be required to (a) commence work under this contract within 7 calendar days after the date the Contractor receives the notice to proceed, (b) prosecute the work diligently, and (c) complete the entire work ready for use not later than 9 months from Notice to Proceed.

6. POST AWARD CONFERENCE

A post award conference with the successful offeror is required. It will be scheduled within 10 days after the date of contract award. The conference will be held at virtually via Teams or other meeting platform.

7. EVALUATION CRITERIA:

Award of this BPA Call will be made on a Best Value (BV) determination. The award decision will be based on the stated evaluation factors. These factors, when combined, are more important than price.

The Government intends to award a BPA Call resulting from this solicitation to the responsible offeror whose offer conforms to these evaluation factors based on Best Value. The Government will evaluate based on Technical Capability, Relative Experience/Past Performance, and Price

Reasonableness/Realism that is the most advantageous to the Government. The Government reserves the right to award to other than the low-price offeror. The Government will assess its level of confidence that the Offers will be capable of successfully performing all requirements in regard to the previously mentioned evaluation factors in relation to the quoted price.

Quotes Proposals will be evaluated in two steps. The first step will evaluate the Technical

Approach and the Relative Experience/Past Performance without knowledge of the Contractor’s

Offeror’s pricing. The technical proposals will be evaluated and ranked according to the following criteria. Technical ratings and Past Performance ratings will be as follows:

Outstanding, Satisfactory, Marginal, Unacceptable. Ratings of ‘Marginal’ or ‘Unacceptable’ will not be evaluated further. The second step will evaluate the Price Realism and Reasonableness.

Pricing information is not to be included in the technical documents. Once the price has been evaluated, the overall technical proposal rating and the price proposal rating will be considered in concert to determine an overall proposal rating to determine the proposal that offers the best value to the Government.

Factor 1: Technical Approach

Revised 09-28-2026 Page 6 of 15

Contractors must provide a comprehensive technical proposal that thoroughly addresses the contractor’s business and strategies to accomplish required services, as outlined in the attached

Statement of Work. Minimally, the contractor must submit a PROPOSAL based on the project needs outlines in the SOW. The PROPOSAL must clearly establish clear lines of communication and state how they intend to complete this contract as far as time frame, personnel, and deliverables as well as explaining experience in survey work in accordance with the tasks outlined. The contractor must provide a Performance Requirement Summary/Quality Control

Plan and a Projected Schedule based on the PROPOSAL.

Submission document for the Technical Approach:

-Proposal/Performance Work Statement

(PROPOSAL) This evaluation factor shall focus on the following:

1. Proposed Key Personnel who will supervise the work, complete the surveys and reports, and who will be the primary point(s) of contact for the COR as well as qualifications/resumes.

2. Submission of a complete proposal which demonstrates an understanding of the project needs as described in the SOI and SOW including a safety plan

3. Approach to Survey and Reporting - Approach to survey, including but not limited to proposed number of surveyors, the plan for accomplishing survey for individual and/or multiple projects, and writing and submitting timely reports.

4. Capacity for Project Management – Approach to project management, including how to track project work, run meetings, send updates, and how to regularly report progress.

5. Approach to the Safety Plan

6. Submission of a complete Performance Requirement Summary/Quality Control based on the proposal.

7. Submission of a completed Timeline/Schedule within the proposal that support contractors’ ability to complete the project within the period of performance.

RATINGS/DEFINITIONS: The Technical Approach will be rated for the seven sub-factors indicated. Each sub-factor will be weighted evenly. The following is a guide of how each sub-rating will be evaluated and determine the overall evaluation of the Technical Approach.

OUTSTANDING (O) The proposal exceeds the requirements of the RFQ and provides an exceptional or outstanding approach that fully satisfies the Government’s requirements. The proposal is very comprehensive, providing in-depth, clear, and uniformly outstanding quality.

Consistently high-quality performance can be anticipated from the offeror. The proposal, as written, exceeds the requirement and no unacceptable items are identified.

SATISFACTORY (S)

The proposal fully satisfies the requirements of the RFQ and demonstrates a good understanding of the solicitation. The response meets all minimum requirements and generally is of high quality. Deficiencies are minor and easily corrected. Proposal is acceptable as written.

Satisfactory performance can be expected.

Revised 09-28-2026 Page 7 of 15

MARGINAL (M)

The proposal does not fully meet the requirements of the RFQ. Weaknesses are identified which would indicate an insufficient understanding of the RFQ requirements. With minor revisions or clarifications, the proposal has a reasonable chance of becoming technically acceptable.

UNACCEPTABLE (U)

The proposal fails to satisfy requirements of the RFQ and the approach contains an unacceptable level of risk to the Government. The proposal is lacking minimum technical detail and omissions are apparent. Major deficiencies have been identified in the proposal which are either not correctable or would require major revision/rewrite to the proposal, without which the proposal doesn't have a reasonable chance of becoming technically acceptable.

Factor 2: Relative Experience/Past Performance

The Government will consider the relevance of past performance information obtained in relation to the scope of this RFQ with respect to both similar efforts, and the length and scope, number, complexity, and diversity of contracts completed by the offeror. Past performance, either positive or negative, which is considered by the Government to be more closely related to the scope of this project will be given additional weight in the evaluation process.

Submission document for the Relative Experience/Past Performance:

- Relative Experience (Past Performance) Questionnaire

This evaluation factor shall focus on the following:

1. Contract Performance for projects of the same and size scope

2. Experience in similar Piedmont North Carolina archeological landscapes

3. Quality of Service/Control

4. Timeliness of Service

Relative experience is defined as experience in performing services as the same or similar to those in the Statement of Work (SOW) contained in this solicitation. Past performance is based on references provided by offerors and may be selected and confirmed by the Government. Any derogatory past performance information obtained will be presented to the affected offeror and that offeror will have an opportunity to respond with any mitigating facts. The final determination of past performance ratings shall rest with the Contracting Officer.

Offerors shall provide a list of contracts, Letters of Agreement, or similar documentation that prove these types of services have been provided that are similar in size and scope to this solicitation’s SOW during the past three years utilizing the attached Relative Experience/Past

Performance Questionnaire. The list should not exceed more than five (5) contracts for either

Government or private sector. The Government will then evaluate the Contractor’s past performance on those relative contracts by confirming the information provided as well as using any past performance evaluations, such as CPARS, available. The bidder could be the primary or sub-contractor on these past projects.

Revised 09-28-2026 Page 8 of 15

The Government will use information provided by the offerors and information obtained from other sources in the development of the performance confidence assessments. Additional information may be submitted to supplement this form, as necessary.

Government evaluators may avail themselves of various federal, state, and local past performance databases. The Government may research offeror performance on any federal, state, local, and commercial contract performance of the offeror that is known to the Government, but not included on the submitted performance information. Additionally, the personal experience and evaluator knowledge of offeror performance may be utilized.

RATINGS/DEFINITIONS:

The sub-factors will each be rated based on the definitions below. Each of the four sub-factors will be weighted evenly.

OUTSTANDING (O)

The information supplied by the Offeror/References reflects a thorough understanding of the project and level of coordination required for work of this nature in and around ongoing office operations. The offeror has demonstrated strong relationships with other Government and/or

Private Sector customers. The references report effectiveness in managing projects, including identification and prevention of deficiencies.

SATISFACTORY (S)

The information supplied by the Offeror/References reflects a good understanding of the project and level of coordination required for work of this nature in and around ongoing office operations. The offeror has demonstrated strong relationships with other Government and/or

Private Sector customers. The references report effectiveness in managing projects, including identification and prevention of deficiencies.

MARGINAL (M)

The information supplied by the Offeror/References reflect little understanding of the project and level of coordination required for work of this nature in and around ongoing office operations.

The offeror has l demonstrated weak relationships with other Government and/or Private Sector customers. The references report ineffectiveness in managing projects, identification and preventing deficiencies.

UNACCEPTABLE (U)

The information supplied by the Offeror/References reflects poor understanding of the project and level of coordination required for work of this nature. The offeror does not demonstrate strong relationships with other Government and/or Private Sector customers. The references report risk to the government and would require major revisions to become technically acceptable. Insufficient information was provided by the Offeror.

NO RATING

No experience is available for evaluation. Proposal receives no merit or demerit for this factor.

Revised 09-28-2026 Page 9 of 15

*Lack of relative experience will be considered as no experience and the offeror will be rated as

Neutral.

OVERALL TECHNICAL PROPOSAL (Combination of Factors 1 and 2- Tech approach and relative experience/ past performance)

Technical Proposals will receive the following rating for the factors indicated. The following should be used as a guide in determining the rating of each factor and the overall evaluation of each technical proposal.

OUTSTANDING (O)

The proposal exceeds the requirements of the RFQ and provides an exceptional or outstanding approach that fully satisfies the Government’s requirements. The proposal is very comprehensive, providing in-depth, clear, and uniformly outstanding quality. Consistently high-quality performance can be anticipated from the offeror. The proposal, as written, exceeds the requirement and no unacceptable items are identified.

SATISFACTORY (S)

The proposal fully satisfies the requirements of the RFQ and demonstrates a good understanding of the solicitation. The response meets all minimum requirements and generally is of high quality. Deficiencies are minor and easily corrected. Proposal is acceptable as written.

Satisfactory performance can be expected.

MARGINAL (M)

The proposal does not fully meet the requirements of the RFQ. Weaknesses are identified which would indicate an insufficient understanding of the RFQ requirements. With minor revisions or clarifications, the proposal has a reasonable chance of becoming technically acceptable.

UNACCEPTABLE (U)

The proposal fails to satisfy requirements of the RFQ and the approach contains an unacceptable level of risk to the Government. The proposal is lacking minimum technical detail and omissions are apparent. Major deficiencies have been identified in the proposal which are either not correctable or would require major revision/rewrite to the proposal, without which the proposal doesn't have a reasonable chance of becoming technically acceptable.

Factor 3: Price Reasonableness and Realism (separate and independent of the technical proposal evaluation):

The price proposals will be evaluated for completeness and reasonableness to ensure the offer is fair and reasonable. The proposal will be evaluated to ensure it covers all requirements of the specifications, including all pricing information required by the solicitation are completed as required. Moreover, prices are reasonable in comparison to estimates; prior prices paid, competition, and can be supported by suitable estimating techniques. Plus, the price proposal will be evaluated for realism. The Government may, in its discretion, provide for a price realism analysis for the purposes of assessing whether an offeror’s price is so low as to reveal a lack of

Revised 09-28-2026 Page 10 of 15 understanding of the contract requirements or for assessing risk inherent in the offeror’s approach, and as such be deemed not realistic.

Submission document for the Price Reasonableness and Realism:

- Schedule of Items (SOI)

OUTSTANDING (O)

The price proposal provided by the Offeror reflects a thorough understanding of the project and the level of effort required to fully complete the specifications as outlined. All required pricing information was provided and left the Government essentially no doubt that this is a reasonable and realistic proposal.

SATISFACTORY (S)

The price proposal provided by the Offeror reflects a good understanding of the project and the level of effort required to satisfactorily complete the specifications as outlined. All required pricing information was provided and left the Government with some doubt that this is either a reasonable or realistic proposal.

MARGINAL (M)

The price proposal provided by the Offeror reflects little understanding of the project and the level of effort required to satisfactorily complete the specifications as outlined. All required pricing information was provided but left the Government with substantial doubt that this is either a reasonable or realistic proposal.

UNACCEPTABLE (U)

The price proposal provided by the Offeror reflects a poor understanding of the project and the level of effort required to satisfactorily complete the specifications as outlined. All required pricing information was provided but left the Government with extreme doubt that this is either a reasonable or realistic proposal.

OVERALL PROPOSAL RATINGS/DEFINITIONS:

Proposals, technical and price combined, will be evaluated utilizing the following ratings/definitions.

OVERALL PROPOSAL (Technical & Price Combined)

OUTSTANDING (O)

The proposal exceeds the requirements of the RFQ and provides an exceptional or outstanding approach that fully satisfies the Government’s requirements. The proposal is very comprehensive, providing in-depth, clear, and uniformly outstanding quality. Consistently high-quality performance can be anticipated from the offeror. The proposal, as written, exceeds the requirement and no unacceptable items are identified.

Revised 09-28-2026 Page 11 of 15

SATISFACTORY (S)

The proposal fully satisfies the requirements of the RFQ and demonstrates a good understanding of the solicitation. The response meets all minimum requirements and generally is of high quality. Deficiencies are minor and easily corrected. Proposal is acceptable as written.

Satisfactory performance can be expected.

MARGINAL (M)

The proposal does not fully meet the requirements of the RFQ. Weaknesses are identified which would indicate an insufficient understanding of the RFQ requirements. With minor revisions or clarifications, the proposal has a reasonable chance of becoming technically acceptable.

UNACCEPTABLE (U)

The proposal fails to satisfy requirements of the RFQ and the approach contains an unacceptable level of risk to the Government. The proposal is lacking minimum technical detail and omissions are apparent. Major deficiencies have been identified in the proposal which are either not correctable or would require major revision/rewrite to the proposal, without which the proposal doesn't have a reasonable chance of becoming technically acceptable.

7. CONTRACTING OFFICER’S REPRESENTATIVE:

Name: Kimberly Rust

Email Address: Kimberly.rust2@usda.gov

Name: Nichole Wagner

Email Address: Nichole.wagner@usda.gov

8. LIST OF ATTACHMENTS

The following attachments are made a part of this solicitation and any resultant contract.

Title Pages

Statement of Work- Lomax-106 26

Maps- 5 total .zip file Survey Units Lomax Task 7_Shapefiles .zip file

Relative Experience (Past Performance)

Questionnaire_LomaxTask7Survey

Wage Determinations

WD_2015-4381 Rev. 33 8.22.2026

WD_2015-4399 Rev. 32 8.27.2026

WD_2015-5899 Rev. 6 8.22.2026

FAR Class Deviations and Updates (at end of this document) 2

Notice for Filing Agency Protests (at end of this document) 2

Revised 09-28-2026 Page 12 of 15

March 2025 Class Deviation

This Call Order incorporates two FAR class deviations to ensure compliance with Executive Orders

14148, 14173, 14168, and 14208, issued since January 20, 2025. It also removes references to AGAR clauses and provisions that have been rescinded. These updates reflect recent policy changes and remove outdated requirements, as detailed below.

The following FAR provisions and clauses are hereby removed in their entirety from the LMIR BPA:

• 52.222-21 Prohibition of Segregated Facilities

• 52.222-26 Equal Opportunity

• 52.222-55 Minimum Wages for Contractor Workers Under Executive Order 14026/1

1/This provision was removed to comply with the Executive Order 14236 titled "Additional

Rescissions of Harmful Executive Orders and Actions," dated March 14, 2025.

The following FAR clauses now include deviations to align with recent Executive Orders:

• 52.212-3 Offeror Representations and Certifications—Commercial Products and Commercial

Services (MAY 2024) (DEVIATION FEB 2025)

• 52.212-5 Contract Terms and Conditions Required To Implement Statutes or Executive Orders—

Commercial Products and Commercial Services (JAN 2025) (DEVIATION FEB 2025)

• 52.223-1 Biobased Product Certification (MAY 2024) (DEVIATION FEB 2025)

• 52.223-2 Reporting of Biobased Products Under Service and Construction Contracts (MAY

2024) (DEVIATION FEB 2025)

Ther following references to AGAR Clauses and provisions are hereby removed to comply with AGAR

Rule 2024-22463 (89 FR 81014):

• AGAR 452.211-74 Period of Performance (FEB 1988)/2

• AGAR 452.215-73 Post Award Conference (NOV 1996) /2

• AGAR 452.219-70 Size Standard and NAICS Code Information (SEP 2001) /2

• AGAR 452.236-72 Use of Premises (NOV 1996) /2

• AGAR 452.236-77 Emergency Response (NOV 1996)

• AGAR 452.236-78 Fire Suppression and Liability (MAY 2014)

• AGAR 452.237-74 Key Personnel (FEB 1988) /2

2/AGAR clauses and provisions that were included in full text have been retained, with only the AGAR reference removed.

The following AGAR clauses is hereby included:

• AGAR 452.236-70 Emergency Response, Fire Suppression and Liability (NOV 2024)

The following FAR and AGAR clauses have been added, effective April 2026:

• FAR 52.222-90, Addressing DEI Discrimination by Federal Contractors (APR 2026).

• AGAR Clause 452.203-72 Unenforceable Supplier Terms (APR 2026)

The following AGAR provisions and clauses have been added, effective August 2026, and apply as follows:

• 452.237-70 Employment Certification Requirements for H-2B and Migrant/Seasonal

Agricultural Workers (Aug 2026) for manual forestry or agricultural work including, but not

Revised 09-28-2026 Page 13 of 15 limited to, tree planting, brush cleaning, pre-commercial tree thinning, noxious weed spraying in connection with the growing of crops/trees, and forest firefighting.

• 452.237-71 Qualifications of Contractor Employees (Aug 2026) where contractor employees will have access to Government facilities and sensitive information, including proprietary data and/or resources.

• 452.237-72 Key Personnel – Qualification Verification, Contractor Responsibility, and

Substitutions (Aug 2026) where successful performance is dependent on the expertise of specific key personnel.

All call orders will incorporate these changes by reference at award.

Disclaimer: System updates may lag policy updates. The System for Award Management (SAM) may continue to require entities to complete representations based on provisions that are not included in agency solicitations. Examples include 52.222-25, Affirmative Action Compliance, and paragraph (d) of

52.212-3, Offeror Representations and Certifications—Commercial Products and Commercial Services.

Contracting officers will not consider these representations when making award decisions or enforce requirements. Entities are not required to, nor are they able to, update their entity registration to remove these representations in SAM.

In advancement of Section 2 of Executive Order 14208, the removal of requirements related to Executive

Order 14057 eliminates all non-statutory sustainability requirements or preferences in purchases of food service wares, including paper straws. In addition to removing requirements related to Executive Order

14057, the attachment also reflects recent updates to Code of Federal Regulation citations for the U.S.

Department of Agriculture’s BioPreferred® Program, a statutory purchasing preference program.

These class deviations will remain in effect until rescinded or incorporated into the FAR.

Revised 09-28-2026 Page 14 of 15

As prescribed in AGAR 433.104-4 (a)(5)(ii), the following Notice for Filing Agency Protests shall be included in every solicitation.

NOTICE FOR FILING AGENCY PROTESTS

United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Ombudsman Program

The USDA is committed to issuing solicitations and awarding contracts in a fair and prompt manner. The Ombudsman Program for Agency Protests (OPAP) was established to address protest issues within the agency, providing an alternative to costly and time-consuming litigation. Operating independently, OPAP offers relief comparable to that granted by the

Government Accountability Office (GAO). Interested parties are encouraged to resolve concerns through USDA’s internal Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) process before pursuing external forums such as the GAO. Concerns may be addressed informally or through a formal agency protest filed with either the Contracting Officer or the Ombudsman.

Informal Forum with the Ombudsman

1. Initial Point of Contact: Interested parties who believe a specific USDA procurement is unfair or otherwise defective should first direct their concerns to the applicable

Contracting Officer.

2. Escalation: If the Contracting Officer is unable to address their concerns, interested parties are encouraged to contact the USDA Ombudsman for Agency Protests. Under this informal process, the agency is not required to suspend contract award performance. Utilization of the informal forum does not suspend any time requirement for filing a formal protest with the agency or other forums.

3. Required Information: To ensure a timely response, interested parties should provide the following information to the Ombudsman: solicitation/contract number, contracting office, Contracting Officer, and solicitation closing date (if applicable).

Formal Agency Protest with the Ombudsman

1. Effort to Resolve: Prior to submitting a formal agency protest, protesters must first use their best efforts to resolve their concerns with the Contracting Officer through open and frank discussions.

2. Independent Review: If the protester’s concerns remain unresolved, an Independent

Review is available by the Ombudsman. The protester may file a formal agency protest with either the Contracting Officer or, alternatively, with the Ombudsman under the OPAP program. Contract awards or performance will be suspended during the protest period unless justified in writing for urgent and compelling reasons or determined in writing to be in the best interest of the Government.

3. Resolution Timeline: The agency’s goal is to resolve protests within 35 calendar days from the date of filing.

4. Required Information: Protests shall include the information set forth in FAR

33.104(a)(3). Failure to submit the required information may result in a delay or dismissal of the protest.

5. Timeliness: Protests must be filed within the timeframes specified in FAR 33.104.

6. Submission: Formal protests under the OPAP program should be submitted electronically to SPE.inquiry@usda.gov and the Contracting Officer.

Election of Forum. By initiating a protest with the USDA, the protester agrees not to pursue the same matter with the Government Accountability Office (GAO) or any other external forum while the agency protest is pending. If a protest is filed externally, the agency protest will be dismissed.

Page last modified on October 15, 2025 mailto:SPE.inquiry@usda.gov

Revised 09-28-2026 Page 15 of 15

FAR Overhaul | FAR Companion Guide

Oct 30, 2025

The Federal Acquisition Regulatory Council has released an update to the FAR Companion as part of the ongoing Revolutionary FAR Overhaul (RFO) Initiative, in accordance with Executive

Order 14275 and OMB Memorandum M-25-26.

The following RFO update was posted on October 30, 2025:

• FAR Companion, Version 2.0, includes the initial release of FAR Companion (FC) parts

2, 3, 7, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 27, 30, 32, 37, 41, 42, 44, 45, 47, 48, 52, and 53.

• Version 2.0 also includes updates to previously released content: update to FC 8.104 pertaining to “required use” contracts and providing more information and resources on

Category Management, including beta version content of the Category Management

Buying Guide; update to FC 8.401 pertaining to evaluation factors; updates to FC

8.401(b) and FC 12.301 removing references to debriefings; new annotation under FC

8.401(b) related to sole source justification content for FSS orders; new annotation under

FC 12.001 related to contracting methods for commercial construction; update to FC

11.204 to clarify brand name or equal as distinct from brand name justifications under

FAR 6.104; updates to thresholds referenced due to the October 1, 2025 inflation adjustment rule; various citation corrections throughout; and changed “Reserved” to “No additional guidance” when the FAR Companion does not provide any practice recommendations for that associated FAR part.

• FAR Companion, Version 2 is posted on www.acquisition.gov/far-overhaul.

To view the FAR Companion, Version 2.0. inclusive of all parts and updates, visit: https://www.acquisition.gov/sites/default/files/page_file_uploads/far-companion.pdf

To view all available rewritten FAR Parts and agency deviations, visit: https://www.acquisition.gov/far-overhaul/far-part-deviation-guide.

Stay informed. View the latest FAR Overhaul news and announcements at: https://www.acquisition.gov/far-overhaul.

https://links-2.govdelivery.com/CL0/https:%2F%2Flinks-2.govdelivery.com%2FCL0%2Fhttps:%252F%252Fwww.whitehouse.gov%252Fpresidential-actions%252F2025%252F04%252Frestoring-common-sense-to-federal-procurement%252F%2F1%2F0101019a2c554a32-f0246afd-e2b4-418c-817b-e6a76b6d073a-000000%2FUX8vjw5CHuC8f77RXf4Fu_Fb-_GNv8DPn3ftoPjCF5w=428/1/0101019a2c60554d-c2540c50-6d63-472c-95dc-38b51df370df-000000/iQRSADqlGWrqB7R_fB5Wg3JNajtZsj28p5OVudC_BNc=428 https://links-2.govdelivery.com/CL0/https:%2F%2Flinks-2.govdelivery.com%2FCL0%2Fhttps:%252F%252Fwww.whitehouse.gov%252Fpresidential-actions%252F2025%252F04%252Frestoring-common-sense-to-federal-procurement%252F%2F1%2F0101019a2c554a32-f0246afd-e2b4-418c-817b-e6a76b6d073a-000000%2FUX8vjw5CHuC8f77RXf4Fu_Fb-_GNv8DPn3ftoPjCF5w=428/1/0101019a2c60554d-c2540c50-6d63-472c-95dc-38b51df370df-000000/iQRSADqlGWrqB7R_fB5Wg3JNajtZsj28p5OVudC_BNc=428 https://links-2.govdelivery.com/CL0/https:%2F%2Flinks-2.govdelivery.com%2FCL0%2Fhttps:%252F%252Fwww.acquisition.gov%252Fsites%252Fdefault%252Ffiles%252Fpage_file_uploads%252FM-25-26-Overhauling-the-Federal-Acquisition-Regulation-002.pdf%2F1%2F0101019a2c554a32-f0246afd-e2b4-418c-817b-e6a76b6d073a-000000%2FV2fElIf9f7QdG6m5Ww5jhArdcb1aIH_aeS4ElUjVmc4=428/1/0101019a2c60554d-c2540c50-6d63-472c-95dc-38b51df370df-000000/xV7YtpptB-6N9VpzH2pxYTGN8LdN8SNn64No6C5amvE=428 http://www.acquisition.gov/far-overhaul https://www.acquisition.gov/sites/default/files/page_file_uploads/far-companion.pdf https://links-2.govdelivery.com/CL0/https:%2F%2Flinks-2.govdelivery.com%2FCL0%2Fhttps:%252F%252Fwww.acquisition.gov%252Ffar-overhaul%252Ffar-part-deviation-guide%2F1%2F0101019a2c554a32-f0246afd-e2b4-418c-817b-e6a76b6d073a-000000%2F5uwlAI9fF6_-jn5dDrAJ48p0ONjbyVaveJ8mw6NFErg=428/1/0101019a2c60554d-c2540c50-6d63-472c-95dc-38b51df370df-000000/hKblUJZVwmanVmACgNxzdtGcTCp_8oeUkYIXHQ6RvZg=428 https://links-2.govdelivery.com/CL0/https:%2F%2Flinks-2.govdelivery.com%2FCL0%2Fhttps:%252F%252Fwww.acquisition.gov%252Ffar-overhaul%2F1%2F0101019a2c554a32-f0246afd-e2b4-418c-817b-e6a76b6d073a-000000%2FukMJUCl7XyhWDI2ryQDSaDkjAdvpP13mSWTjRrsTJgw=428/1/0101019a2c60554d-c2540c50-6d63-472c-95dc-38b51df370df-000000/swhJC4pXT7o0UtFbXNL-dK3Q6ehR3wIq3ZsJ5q7R3-s=428