- with readers working within the Aerospace & Defence industries
Holland & Knight's Government Contracts Group continues its review of proposed revisions of key parts of the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR). This post reviews revised Part 33, which addresses protests, disputes and appeals released by the FAR Council on Aug. 21, 2025. To date, 15 agencies have adopted the revised Part 33 as a "deviation," including the U.S. Departments of Treasury, State, Education, Transportation, Veterans Affairs (VA), Health and Human Services (HHS), Justice (DOJ) and Agriculture (USDA), as well as the General Services Administration (GSA). Notably, neither the U.S. Departments of War, Homeland Security (DHS) nor Energy (DOE) have adopted the revised Part 33 yet. The proposed revised Part 33 will be included as part of a formal rulemaking process published in the Federal Register and likely updated next year in a final rule after consideration of public comments.
The Trump Administration's "Revolutionary FAR Overhaul" brought a handful of targeted updates to FAR Part 33 – protests, disputes and appeals – but the substance of the protest and dispute process remains fundamentally unchanged. Part 33 was updated in an attempt to reduce the volume of protests and resolve protests at the lower levels of appeal. However, most requirements are still dictated by statute, and the recent revisions primarily reorganize existing rules, clarify language and add a few procedural steps.
The most notable change is the new requirement for agencies to provide protesters with a redacted source selection decision during higher-level agency review, offering slightly more transparency. Other adjustments include notification requirements, minor edits for plain language and the removal of duplicative or nonessential guidance. Contractors and practitioners should be aware of these tweaks but should not expect a major shift in how protests or disputes are handled under the revised FAR Part 33. Below is a summary of some key changes.
Key Changes to FAR Part 33
Agency-Level Protests
a. Contracting Officers (COs) Must Now Report Protests to the Head of Contracting Activity (HCA) as Soon as Practicable After a Protest is Filed. Previously, no notification requirement existed. This new requirement presumably helps to streamline government responses to protest filings and decrease response time by notifying higher-level personnel as soon as a protest is filed. This could also allow more high-level tracking of protest filings.
b. In Agency-Level Protests Above the CO, Protesters Have an Opportunity to Access a Source Selection Decision and Submit a Supplemental Statement. A criticism of the current agency-level protest process is that it provides no opportunity for access to decision documents or to submit supplemental protest grounds. The proposed Part 33 attempts to address this in some way. Protesters who request independent review above the CO are now entitled to a redacted copy of the source selection decision and may submit a supplemental statement to the reviewing official. The source selection decision is the agency's formal documentation of the rationale used to make the contract award. It contains explanations for any business judgments, tradeoffs and other evaluation factors considered by the agency in their decision such as best value, technical merit, price and past performance.
Streamlined References
The proposed new FAR Part 33 points directly to U.S. Government Accountability Office's (GAO) Bid Protest Regulations (4 C.F.R. Part 21) rather than duplicating those procedures in the FAR text. For example, FAR 33.104 now simply instructs practitioners to consult 4 C.F.R. Part 21 for the governing rules on filing, timing and handling of protests at GAO and notes that if there is any conflict between the FAR and GAO regulations, the provisions of the latter will prevail.
New Objective of the Protest System: Deter and Discourage Protest Abuse
The proposed new Part 33 adds a new section addressing the "objectives of the protest system." Many of these objectives are consistent with well-established policies for having a bid protest system, including correction of errors, mistakes and violations of procurement law and ensuring the promotion of integrity, competition, accountability and public confidence in the federal acquisition system. However, the FAR Council included a provision that an objective of the protest system is to "deter and discourage abuse of the bid protest process by requiring clear and substantiated allegations of procurement impropriety." This objective appears in alignment with GAO's recent decision in August 2025 to clarify its pleading standards for bid protests to require "credible allegations that are supported by evidence and are sufficient."
Disputes and Appeals: Defective Certification Clarified
The proposed new Part 33 largely leaves the provisions addressing contract disputes, claims and appeals untouched. One helpful update is a provision clarifying that a failure to certify a claim is no longer considered a "defective certification" and such defects do not deprive a court or the Board of Contract Appeals (BCAs) of jurisdiction. This brings FAR Part 33 in line with a 2023 decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit holding that proper Contracts Dispute Act (CDA) certifications is not a jurisdiction requirement. This reduces the risk of dismissal on technical grounds and focuses dispute resolution on substantive issues.
Minor Changes to Part 33
Other nonmaterial changes to Part 33 include a new purpose statement emphasizing the goal to promote integrity and efficiency, organizational edits to visually categorize the types of protests into pre- and post-award actions, and wording tweaks throughout to improve plain language and readability.
Best Practices and Practitioner Resources
In tandem with the revised FAR Part 33, the FAR Council has issued a FAR Companion Guide to "help acquisition officials exercise their discretion." Specific to FAR Part 33, the Companion Guide offers practical advice for protest defense, documentation and strategic management of debriefings and protest windows. It also emphasizes clear solicitation language, robust evaluation records and timely debriefings to reduce protest risk.
Additionally, the FAR Council has developed a Practitioner Album that (as is relevant to FAR Part 33) encourages agencies and contractors to learn from prior protest decisions and adopt "smart accelerators" such as early sharing of draft solicitations and proactive debriefings.
Takeaways
In short, while the recent FAR Part 33 revisions introduce some procedural tweaks – such as requiring agency notification of protests, providing limited access to redacted source selection decisions for higher-level agency review and streamlining references to GAO protest procedures – the core protest and dispute resolution processes remain largely unchanged. Contractors should be aware of these incremental adjustments – which are intended to improve transparency and internal agency tracking – but should not expect a fundamental shift in how protests or disputes are handled. The most practical takeaway is to stay current on procedural requirements, leverage new opportunities for transparency at the agency level and consult resources such as the FAR Companion Guide and Practitioner Album for best practices and implementation tips as the regulatory landscape continues to evolve.
Also in This Series
- FAR Overhaul Series: FAR Part 17 – Special Contracting Methods, Oct. 2, 2025
- FAR Overhaul Series: FAR Part 19 – Promoting Small Business Participation, Sept. 26, 2025
- FAR Overhaul Series: What Contractors Need to Know, Sept. 24, 2025
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
