While set-aside may sometimes be required and permitted, there may also be circumstances where set-aside is prohibited. Such a situation would most likely occur due to the legal requirements for the purchase of certain goods or services by certain agencies, or, in the case of Set-A branches for 8-a companies, due to court orders. For example, until its repeal in 2010,181 the Small Business Competitiveness Demonstration Program Act, 1988 required the Department of Defense (DOD) to “fully obtain contracts valued at more than $25,000 for the procurement of services in industries” in which the DOD had met the annual target of allocating at least 40% of its contract dollars to small businesses.182 The call on an “unrestricted basis” The use of set-aside for small businesses, as a set-aside for small businesses, results in the “restriction of demand to small businesses”. 183 Similarly, in several cases, agencies were prohibited from cancelling certain purchases for small type 8(a) undertakings on the basis of challenges brought by non-minority contractors who claimed that that programme unduly discriminated against them. The U.S. Department of Defense, the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, found that Program 8(a) was unconstitutional as applied in the military simulation and training industry, with the Department of Defense (DOD) admitting that there was “no evidence of discrimination, whether in the public or private sector, in the simulation and training industry”. 188 The Court therefore ordered SBA and the DOD to `award contracts for military simulators under the Article 8(a) programme, without first creating a solid basis for proof of that`. 189 Comment: Several respondents stated that because the Kingdomware court found that a mission order was a contract, the term “contract” as set out in Section 15 U.S.C.
644(j), which includes mission contracts issued on the basis of multiple award contracts, so that the submission of contracts for multiple award contracts is mandatory and not discretionary in the application of the `rule of two`. The “rule of two” refers to the requirement of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 644(j)(1)), which requires the termination of a contract whose expected value is between the micro-purchase threshold and the simplified acquisition threshold for small businesses, unless two or more small businesses are not expected to submit price bids, Quality and delivery are competitive. Respondents also cited Aldevra, B-406205, 2012 CPD ¶ 112 (Comp. Gen. Mars. 14, 2012) and noted that the SBA has clarified that orders under $150,000 should be reserved exclusively for small businesses, including Federal Supply Schedule (FSS) orders and commercially available standard items (COTS). In addition, one respondent explained that booking orders exclusively at or below the simplified acquisition threshold for multiple orders will increase economic opportunities for small businesses. On December 6, 2016, the DoD, GSA and NASA published a proposed rule in the Federal Register under 81 FR 88072 to revise the FAR to implement the regulatory changes made by the Small Business Administration (SBA) in its final rule in 78 FR 61114 of October 2, 2013 regarding the use of small businesses partially set aside, Reserves and set aside of orders placed in the context of multiple orders. As part of the implementation of multiple supply contract reserves, the proposed rule removed the term “reserve” from the FAR if it does not refer to multiple supply contract reserves. The SBA`s final regulations implement the legal requirements set out in Section 1331 of the Small Business Jobs Act of 2010 (15 U.S.C. 644(r)).
This final FAR rule also concludes the provisional FAR rule published on 2 November 2011 under 76 FR 68032 in FAR 2011-024. The GSA, as the manager of the HSP/Multiple Award Schedule program, is responsible for ensuring that tenders and resulting contracts under this program comply with FAR requirements for NAICS code assignment. The GSA will take sufficient time to implement the requirement to ensure that industry partners are aware of upcoming changes and, if necessary, have the opportunity to provide feedback during the process. The Boards note that the basic premise for assigning NAICS codes to the requirements is that the selected NAICS code best describes the primary purpose of the supply or service purchased. (f) Notwithstanding paragraph (c) of this clause, offers by Federal Prison Industries, Inc. for set-aside and non-set-aside portions of this requirement shall be sought and considered. Small businesses are of constant interest to Congress because they play a role in implementing Congress policy to support small businesses. For example, the 112th Congress passed a law (P.L. 112-239), which expanded the agency`s power to conduct competitions for WOSBs, while the 113th Congress passed laws authorizing sole-source assignments to these companies (P.L. 113-291).
In addition, on February 22, 2016, the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in Kingdomware Technologies, Inc. v. United States, a case in which an SDVOSB challenges the acquisition of certain supplies and services by the Department of Veterans Affairs through federal supply schedules and not through set-aside for SDVOSB or VOSB. For more information on this case, see crS WSLG1322`s legal box, UPDATE: Supreme Court moves oral arguments in challenging veterans Affairs` practices regarding Kate M. Manuel`s “set aside” contracts to small veteran-owned businesses. These “exceptions” are not explicitly provided for in the Small Business Act, although it can be argued that they fall within the jurisdiction of the FAR Council, since the FAR Council has established the requirement that small business contracts must be terminated if the bipartite rule is respected. One could also say that they agree with the law that Congress intended to grant set aside to certain types of small businesses, and that intention would be difficult to achieve if agencies were to use set-asides in which small businesses could participate whenever they reasonably expected offers from at least two small businesses. However, the existence of such `exceptions` highlights the differences between Article 15(a) and its implementing rules.
In particular, paragraph 15(a) requires that small businesses receive a contract or part of it that the SBA and the Procurement Agency deem to be in the interest of ensuring that a reasonable proportion of federal contracts are awarded to small businesses, among others;121 It does not require organizations to conduct competitions in which only small businesses are allowed to compete in any procurement; where the rule of two is respected.