Restore Fair Access | Crisis Management Center
Rules Erased. Rights Lost.
The Restore Fair Access™ real-time resource cataloguing the assault on fair access for small businesses in taxpayer-funded federal contracting. We provide the transparency the current regulatory process has abandoned.
III. The Doctrine: A Forensic Analysis of the Attack
The Two-Part Strategy: Systematic Deletion and Unlawful Creation
The dismantling of small business protections has been achieved through a structural strategy—a new method of regulatory control that replaces rules with guidance and transparency with discretion. This Deviation Doctrine is executed through a two-part process:[1]
- The Systematic Deletion of Enforceable Procedures: The process begins by removing the legal infrastructure. Key procedural safeguards in the FAR that required public comment (FAR 1.5) and justified disclosure of deviations (FAR 1.404) were the first to be eliminated.[2]
- The Unlawful Creation of New "Principles": The void left by the deleted regulations was then filled with vague, unregulated "principles" like "mission-first thinking" and "commercial awareness."[3] These new frameworks, inserted via internal memos and not authorized by any statute, now govern acquisition strategy.
Case Study: The Procedural Annihilation of the Rule of Two
The attack on the Rule of Two serves as the primary case study for how the Deviation Doctrine works in practice:
Step 1: Delete the Trigger (FAR Part 10). The mandatory requirement for contracting officers to use market research to identify at least two capable small businesses was deleted. Without the trigger, the rule cannot be invoked.[4]
Step 2: Remove the Enforcement Clauses (FAR Part 52). Specific, mandatory contract clauses that gave small businesses legal standing to protest non-compliance were deleted or "[Reserved]," making the rule unenforceable even if it were triggered.[5]
The Rule of Two was not repealed by Congress; it was procedurally neutralized. The law remains, but the mechanisms that gave it force have been surgically removed from the operational code of federal procurement.
A Patchwork Regime That Cannot Be Protested
By replacing the uniform FAR with a system of agency-specific class deviation memos, the administration has shattered regulatory consistency.[6] Protections now differ by agency, and often by sub-agency. Crucially, the
Section III: Footnotes
[1] OFPP/OMB Implementation Memo, M-25-25, Overhauling the FAR, May 2025. https://www.acquisition.gov/far-overhaul
[2] FAR Council, Deviation Guidance on FAR Overhaul, May 2, 2025. https://www.acquisition.gov/sites/default/files/page_file_uploads/FAR-Council-Deviation-Guidance-on-FAR-Overhaul.pdf
[3] Holland & Knight, Executive Orders Issued to Overhaul FAR, Apr. 18, 2025. https://www.hklaw.com/en/insights/publications/2025/04/executive-orders-issued-to-overhaul-far
[4] FAR Case 2023-003, Market Research - Streamlining, 89 FR 38872 (May 12, 2025). https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2025-05-12/pdf/2025-08023.pdf
[5] FAR Part 52 Line Out Document, showing deletion of clauses in the 52.219 series. https://www.acquisition.gov/sites/default/files/page_file_uploads/Part%2052%20Line%20Out%20Document.pdf
[6] Department of Defense, Integrated Class Deviations PDF (FY25v05), Apr. 2025. https://www.dau.edu/sites/default/files/2025-04/DoD%20Class%20Deviations%20Integrated%20pdf%20file_FY25v05.pdf
[7] GAO Decision, Knudsen Systems, Inc., B-421248 (Aug. 2024). https://www.gao.gov/products/b-421248