Industry groups and other comments highlight the difficulty of complying with a provision of last year’s defense authorization act that requires the removal of products from companies including Huawei and ZTE.
The broad, ambiguous language of Congressionally-mandated rule for government contractors to remove products and services from companies that pose threats to national security is complicating implementation, according to public comments.
The comment period for the interim Federal Acquisition Rule implementing Part B of Section 889 — a provision of the 2019 National Defense Authorization Act — closed last week, and the more than 30 comments submitted raise questions related to fundamental compliance issues.
While in general, commenters agree with the rule’s intent, groups representing industry, including the National Defense Industrial Association, BSA | The Software Alliance, the Coalition for Government Procurement and the Internet Association submitted detailed letters to Regulations.gov outlining compliance challenges. Nearly all asked for extended timelines for implementation and better definitions for key terms and phrases used in the regulation.
Keep reading this article at: https://www.nextgov.com/cybersecurity/2020/09/comments-government-supply-chain-rule-push-better-definitions-and-more-time/168460/
This easily could be the story to focus on with Small Business Administration’s Certify.SBA.gov project.
I believe there is nothing wrong with making a profit. I do not believe that contractors typically spend their days dreaming up ways to cheat the government. Indeed, I even believe that many contractor employees and managers believe deeply in the missions of organizations they work for, and get satisfaction from helping citizens and society through their organizations’ efforts — an observation I 
At the federal level, contract managers develop and manage contract vehicles between both parties; interpret and implement the myriad laws and regulations required for inclusion; 
