Over one year ago, on May 2, 2025, the FAR Council took the first concrete step in the administration’s “Revolutionary FAR Overhaul” (“RFO”) initiative by issuing the initial round of rolling model deviation guidance—a deliberate move to translate reform of the Federal Acquisition Regulation (“FAR”) from an abstract policy goal into acquisition text.  That moment marked the beginning of a new implementation reality: rather than waiting for a single, comprehensive rulemaking, the government began operationalizing the overhaul in increments, part by part, through deviations.  Now, a year later, the question for contractors is no longer whether the overhaul is “coming,” but how it is being implemented across agencies and systems.  This is therefore a good time to take stock of where implementation stands, where friction is emerging, and what sophisticated contractors can do to stay ahead of the curve.  For additional information, our prior coverage of the RFO roll-out can be found here and here.

The RFO’s “Phase 1” Is Not Theoretical—It’s the New Operating System

The RFO was launched under Executive Order 14275, Restoring Common Sense to Federal Procurement (Apr. 15. 2025) and implemented through OMB Memorandum M-25-26, Overhauling the Federal Acquisition Regulation (May 2, 2025), which together direct a streamlined FAR anchored in statutory requirements.  As part of the RFO, many non‑statutory provisions were shifted out of the FAR into non-regulatory resources, including the FAR Companion Guide and Practitioner Album.  The mechanism for making the RFO real—before formal rulemaking—was explicit:  as explained in a FAR Council memorandum, the Council would publish model deviation text by FAR part; agencies were expected to implement the new text within 30 days via class or individual deviations.

For contractors, this means “the FAR” is now increasingly contract‑ and agency‑specific.  Whether your contract is governed by the codified FAR or a deviated RFO version is no longer a given—it is an issue to be verified.

The Patchwork Is Measurable—and Growing

Acquisition.gov now maintains a centralized FAR Parts and Agency Deviations hub, accessible from a dedicated RFO site, listing overhauled parts, updates, and the number of agency deviations associated with each part.  Over the last year, the FAR Council issued model text for all FAR parts in stages.  Even now that the full set has been released, updated iterations may continue to appear on an “as needed” basis in response to executive orders or other regulatory developments—for example, revisions to implement the March 2026 DEI executive order or to reflect updated value thresholds for trade agreements clauses.[1]  Agencies are implementing the model text and subsequent revisions at different speeds, producing a landscape where the “applicable FAR” can differ by agency, bureau, and—in some cases—buying activity.

The bottom line is that RFO implementation is no longer mere background context—it now has concrete implications for which clauses appear in contracts and how clause prescriptions operate.

A Preview of the Practical Friction: “Systems Lag Policy”

One of the most telling implementation notes appears repeatedly across agency deviations: contract writing and registration systems may still prompt for legacy representations and provisions that have been removed or relocated under RFO deviations.  For example, GSA’s August 2025 RFO deviation for FAR Part 4 instructs the workforce to follow RFO text “instead of FAR part 4 and 52 as codified,” and flags that “system updates may lag policy updates,” advising contracting officers to rely on the solicitation’s deviated provisions even if the System for Award Management (“SAM.gov”) prompts for legacy reps.  Similar language is included in the Department of Commerce’s April 2026 deviation, indicating that legacy systems lag is an ongoing issue.

This matters because contractors that rely on “what the system asked for” (SAM.gov, templates, auto‑generated clause lists) risk being disconnected from the agency’s actual expectation.

Defense Is Not Standing Still—DFARS/PGI Alignment Adds Another Layer

The Department of War’s (“DoW”) RFO implementation is not limited to FAR text by design—DoW is subject to its own executive order governing the review and revision of its acquisition regulations and guidance.[2]  DoW has published extensive Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (“DFARS”) RFO Class Deviations, often accompanied by revised Procedures, Guidance, and Information (“PGI”) and “line‑out” documents showing what is being removed or retained.  The DFARS RFO deviations also instruct users to apply RFO definitions in lieu of FAR 2.101 definitions in many contexts—another subtle but consequential shift for compliance and disputes over interpretation.  For contractors operating in defense procurements, the landscape may include deviated FAR parts, deviated DFARS parts, and revised PGI guidance, with the controlling text depending on the specifics of the contract.

What Contractors Should Do Now: A Practical “RFO Readiness” Playbook

Below are concrete steps contractors can take immediately to reduce risk during the RFO transition.

  • Build a deviation “truth table” for each target agency (and refresh it frequently).  Create a simple internal register that records FAR part deviations for each target agency, including whether the deviation adopts model text verbatim or adds agency‑unique statutory language.
  • Treat clause review as a two‑step: (1) “what’s included” and (2) “what version?”  To understand compliance requirements and minimize compliance gaps, it is important to consider not only whether certain clauses are present, but also which version, and whether they were relocated, consolidated, or replaced.  For a given contract, build an internal checklist that compares the document’s incorporated clauses and (i) the codified FAR, and (ii) the agency’s RFO deviation text for that FAR part. 
  • Ask for the agency’s “authoritative clause set” early and in writing.  Because agencies acknowledge that templates and systems can lag, contractors should not be shy about asking: “Please confirm the authoritative set of provisions/clauses for this contract, including any RFO deviations incorporated.
  • Update your operational documents.  RFO changes reach operational documents, including representations, compliance crosswalks, and subcontract flowdowns.  Regularly updating checklists and templates will ensure better alignment with the new regulatory structure and the agency’s expectations.
  • Monitor the Federal Register.  The RFO will be formally codified through notice-and-comment rulemaking, which could introduce changes to the RFO in its current form.  Contractors would be advised to closely monitor updates on the rulemaking as they develop.

Bottom Line

The RFO is not a distant reform project—it is already changing what clauses mean and what “compliance” looks like in practice.  Contractors that treat RFO implementation status as a living input—rather than a footnote—will be better positioned to avoid preventable missteps during a period of rapid procurement change.


[1] Although the express intent of the RFO is to streamline and remove non-statutory requirements from the FAR, there are instances in which the RFO has been used as a vehicle to implement new requirements stemming from recent executive action, such as RFO 52.222-90, Addressing DEI Discrimination by Federal Contractors.

[2] Executive Order 14265, Modernizing Defense Acquisitions and Spurring Innovation in the Defense Industrial Base (Apr. 9, 2025).

Photo of Stephanie Barna Stephanie Barna

Stephanie Barna draws on over three decades of U.S. military and government service to provide advisory and advocacy support and counseling to clients facing policy and political challenges in the aerospace and defense sectors.

Prior to joining the firm, Stephanie was a senior…

Stephanie Barna draws on over three decades of U.S. military and government service to provide advisory and advocacy support and counseling to clients facing policy and political challenges in the aerospace and defense sectors.

Prior to joining the firm, Stephanie was a senior leader on Capitol Hill and in the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD). Most recently, she was General Counsel of the Senate Armed Services Committee, where she was responsible for the annual $740 billion National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA). Additionally, she managed the Senate confirmation of three- and four-star military officers and civilians nominated by the President for appointment to senior political positions in DoD and the Department of Energy’s national security nuclear enterprise, and was the Committee’s lead for investigations.

Previously, as a senior executive in the Office of the Army General Counsel, Stephanie served as a legal advisor to three Army Secretaries. In 2014, Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel appointed her to be the Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Manpower and Reserve Affairs. In that role, she was a principal advisor to the Secretary of Defense on all matters relating to civilian and military personnel, reserve integration, military community and family policy, and Total Force manpower and resources. Stephanie was later appointed by Secretary of Defense Jim Mattis to perform the duties of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness, responsible for programs and funding of more than $35 billion.

Stephanie was also previously the Deputy General Counsel for Operations and Personnel in the Office of the Army General Counsel. She led a team of senior lawyers in resolving the full spectrum of issues arising from Army wartime operations and the life cycle of Army military and civilian personnel. Stephanie was also a personal advisor to the Army Secretary on his institutional reorganization and business transformation initiatives and acted for the Secretary in investigating irregularities in fielding of the Multiple Launch Rocket System and classified contracts. She also played a key role in a number of high-profile personnel investigations, including the WikiLeaks breach. Prior to her appointment as Deputy, she was Associate Deputy General Counsel (Operations and Personnel) and Acting Deputy General Counsel.

Stephanie is a retired Colonel in the U.S. Army and served in the U.S. Army Judge Advocate General’s Corps as an Assistant to the General Counsel, Office of the Army General Counsel; Deputy Staff Judge Advocate, U.S. Army Special Forces Command (Airborne); Special Assistant to the Assistant Secretary of the Army (Manpower & Reserve Affairs); and General Law Attorney, Administrative Law Division.

Stephanie was selected by the National Academy of Public Administration for inclusion in its 2022 Class of Academy Fellows, in recognition of her years of public administration service and expertise.

Photo of Scott A. Freling Scott A. Freling

Scott Freling co-chairs the firm’s Government Contracts practice and is recognized by Chambers USA as a leading practitioner. He divides his practice between representing civilian and defense contractors in traditional government contracts matters and guiding buyers and sellers—including a number of leading private…

Scott Freling co-chairs the firm’s Government Contracts practice and is recognized by Chambers USA as a leading practitioner. He divides his practice between representing civilian and defense contractors in traditional government contracts matters and guiding buyers and sellers—including a number of leading private equity firms—through the regulatory aspects of complex M&A deals involving government contractors.

Chambers USA ranks Scott as a Band 1 lawyer for Government Contracts M&A. Scott is sought after for his regulatory expertise and his ability to apply that knowledge to the transactional environment. He has extensive experience leading classified and unclassified due diligence reviews of government contractors, negotiating transaction documents, and assisting with integration and other post-closing activities. He has served as the lead government contracts lawyer in dozens of M&A deals, with a combined value of more than $80 billion. Scott’s notable transactions include Warburg Pincus and Berkshire Partners’ take-private acquisition of TRIUMPH for $3 billion, Advent International’s take-private acquisition of Maxar Technologies for $6.4 billion, Aptiv’s acquisition of Wind River for $3.5 billion, and Veritas Capital’s sale of Alion Science and Technology to Huntington Ingalls Industries for $1.65 billion.

Scott also represents contractors at all stages of the procurement process and in their dealings with federal, state, and local government customers. He handles a wide range of government contracts matters, including compliance counseling, contract terminations, claims, disputes, audits, and investigations. Scott frequently advises contractors on organizational conflicts of interest and government intellectual property rights. He also counsels clients on risk mitigation strategies, including obtaining SAFETY Act liability protection for anti-terrorism technologies.

Law360 has recognized Scott as a MVP in Government Contracts. He was a founding co-chair of the Mergers and Acquisitions Committee of the ABA’s Public Contract Law Section.

Photo of Sarah Schuler Sarah Schuler

Sarah Schuler is an associate in the firm’s Government Contracts Practice Group, advising clients across a broad range of government contracting compliance issues. Her areas of expertise include advising on intellectual property and data rights issues under the Federal Acquisition Regulation, including obligations…

Sarah Schuler is an associate in the firm’s Government Contracts Practice Group, advising clients across a broad range of government contracting compliance issues. Her areas of expertise include advising on intellectual property and data rights issues under the Federal Acquisition Regulation, including obligations imposed by the Bayh-Dole Act; application of the Freedom of Information Act to government contracts and related records; domestic sourcing requirements imposed under the Buy American Act and Trade Agreements Act; pricing and other compliance related issues arising under Federal Supply Schedule contracts; small business affiliation and certification analyses; the scope of flow-down requirements for subcontractors; and federal grant compliance under the Uniform Guidance and agency supplements. Sarah also counsels clients to navigate time-sensitive inquiries arising from contract compliance-related issues.

Sarah also maintains an active pro bono practice, providing counsel to U.S. service members with respect to the correction of military records and discharge upgrade requests.

Photo of Daniel Raddenbach Daniel Raddenbach

Daniel Raddenbach assists clients in navigating the complex regulatory regimes that apply to federal contractors. In addition to providing regulatory advice, he routinely works with clients in the government contracts M&A space to provide regulatory reviews and risk analyses of potential transactions. He…

Daniel Raddenbach assists clients in navigating the complex regulatory regimes that apply to federal contractors. In addition to providing regulatory advice, he routinely works with clients in the government contracts M&A space to provide regulatory reviews and risk analyses of potential transactions. He also represents contractors in complex disputes, including litigation and claims against the federal government and prime-sub disputes.

Most recently, Daniel has specialized in assisting clients in the semiconductor industry to apply for and negotiate CHIPS Act funding awards to construct or modernize semiconductor fabrication facilities. He regularly advises clients on the ramifications of applying for funding under the CHIPS Act programs, providing analysis on topics including CHIPS programmatic requirements, the national security guardrails, and federal labor law requirements (including Davis-Bacon), among others.

Photo of Victoria Skiera Victoria Skiera

Victoria Skiera is an associate in the firm’s Government Contracts Practice Group, advising contractors on a range of regulatory and compliance issues. She has experience assisting clients with unique issues arising in government contracts transactions and related due diligence processes, as well as…

Victoria Skiera is an associate in the firm’s Government Contracts Practice Group, advising contractors on a range of regulatory and compliance issues. She has experience assisting clients with unique issues arising in government contracts transactions and related due diligence processes, as well as in compliance counseling, investigations, and disputes. Victoria also has experience assessing the impact of executive order and litigation activity in the context of federal procurement and financial assistance. Victoria maintains an active pro bono practice.