Clauses · FAR · Banned sources and products · provision
FAR 52.204-24 Representation Regarding Certain Telecommunications and Video Surveillance Services or Equipment
Does the regulation require it to flow down?
No
No regulatory flow-down: 4.2105(a) addresses the contracting officer and the provision has no subcontracts paragraph. Primes collect it anyway because the clause behind it — 52.204-25 — does have a mandate at paragraph (e) ('the substance of this clause, including this paragraph (e) and excluding paragraph (b)(2), in all subcontracts and other contractual instruments, including subcontracts for the acquisition of commercial products or commercial services'), and a prime cannot make its own 889(a)(1)(A)/(B) representation without the same answer from every supplier. In the corpus it appears as something the sub signs — RankOne attaches it as 'Exhibit M' — not as a performance obligation.
A clause can reach your subcontract without a mandate. Once it is in your document, it is a contract term all the same. The missing mandate is a fact about the regulation. It is not a ruling on your order.
Checked against acquisition.gov on 2026-08-05 · edition NOV 2021 (codified FAR, unchanged through FAC 2026-01, effective 2026-03-13). Under the Revolutionary FAR Overhaul deviation regime the number is [Reserved] and the representation moves to 52.240-90(c) — see changes2025_26. · base v0.9.3 Read the text ↗
What it makes you produce
2 items for your checklist, slowest first.
Something you fill in and send back2
Hours, once you know which one is missing.
Two answers: whether you will provide covered telecommunications equipment or services under an award from this solicitation, and whether, after a reasonable inquiry, you use them anywhere in your company
FAR 52.204-24(d)- FAR 52.204-24(e)
The disclosure — producing entity with unique entity identifier and CAGE code, whether it was the manufacturer or a distributor, brand, model or part number, item description and the proposed use
Owed when either answer at paragraph (d) is 'will provide' or 'does use'
When it is used
FAR 4.2105(a): the contracting officer inserts the provision in ALL solicitations, and under indefinite-delivery contracts in every notice of intent to place an order or order solicitation. No dollar threshold and no commercial or COTS carve-out — subpart 4.21 (4.2100, 4.2102) states none; the only exceptions are substantive ones at 4.2102(b): a service that connects to a third party's facilities (backhaul, roaming, interconnection) and telecommunications equipment that cannot route or redirect user data or see into packets. It is a solicitation provision, so its correct place in the subcontract chain is the prime's RFQ, not the executed PO. Paragraph (d)(1) is skipped if the offeror already answered 'does not provide' in 52.204-26(c)(1) or in 52.212-3(v)(2)(i).
Read closely
The use question is not limited to federal work, so a camera on your own loading dock is inside it; reasonable inquiry means looking at what is in your possession and calls for no internal or third-party audit. Covered entities are Huawei, ZTE, Hytera, Hikvision and Dahua plus their subsidiaries and affiliates. Paragraph (d)(1) is skipped where the same answer was already given in FAR 52.204-26(c)(1) or 52.212-3(v)(2)(i). It is a solicitation instrument, so its place in the chain is the request for quotation rather than the signed order.
The 6 templates that name it, with the line
Source: acquisition.gov, FAR 52.204-24, FAR 4.2105(a), 4.2100, 4.2102, and 52.204-25(e); RFO model text at acquisition.gov/far-overhaul/far-part-deviation-guide/far-overhaul-part-40 and /far-overhaul-part-52; DoD Class Deviations 2026-O0043 and 2026-O0025 Rev. 2 (acq.osd.mil DARS index) (verified 2026-08-05)
This is research, not legal advice. It states what the regulation says about this clause and cites the paragraph behind it. It does not rule on your order, and it does not rule on whether a prime's markings are correct.