FAR 11.104—Use of brand name or equal purchase descriptions.
Plain-English Summary
FAR 11.104 explains when and how agencies may use a brand name or equal purchase description instead of a performance specification. It states the general policy preference for performance specifications because they encourage offerors to propose innovative solutions, but recognizes that brand name or equal descriptions can be useful in certain circumstances. The section also requires that any brand name or equal description identify the brand name item and describe the salient physical, functional, or performance characteristics that an “equal” product must meet to be acceptable for award. In practice, this section is about balancing competition and innovation against the need to define firm requirements clearly enough for vendors to know what they must match. It matters because poorly written brand name or equal descriptions can restrict competition, create ambiguity about what counts as “equal,” and lead to protests, evaluation disputes, or the purchase of items that do not actually satisfy the Government’s needs.
Key Rules
Performance specs are preferred
The FAR states that performance specifications are the preferred approach because they encourage offerors to propose innovative solutions. Brand name or equal descriptions should not be the default when the requirement can be expressed in terms of the outcome or performance needed.
Brand name or equal may be useful
A brand name or equal purchase description may be advantageous in certain circumstances. This approach can be appropriate when the Government needs to identify a known product as a reference point but still wants to allow competition from equivalent items.
Salient characteristics are required
A brand name or equal description must include the brand name plus a general description of the salient physical, functional, or performance characteristics that an equal item must meet. These characteristics define the minimum acceptable features of the item being acquired.
Equal items must meet firm requirements
Use brand name or equal descriptions when the salient characteristics are firm requirements. In other words, the listed characteristics are not suggestions; an offered equal product must satisfy them to be eligible for award.
Clarity drives acceptability
The description must be specific enough for vendors to understand what they must match and for evaluators to determine whether an offered item is equal. Vague or incomplete salient characteristics undermine fair competition and consistent evaluation.
Responsibilities
Contracting Officer
Decide whether a performance specification or a brand name or equal description is appropriate for the acquisition. If using brand name or equal, identify the brand name item and clearly state the salient physical, functional, or performance characteristics that an equal product must meet.
Requiring Activity / Technical Personnel
Help define the Government’s actual needs and identify the essential characteristics that are truly mandatory. Ensure the salient characteristics reflect firm requirements rather than preferences or unnecessary brand-specific features.
Offerors / Contractors
Review the brand name or equal description carefully and propose only products that meet all stated salient characteristics if offering an equal item. Be prepared to show how the offered product satisfies each required characteristic.
Agency
Support acquisition planning and specification development so requirements are written in a way that promotes competition while still protecting mission needs. Ensure the chosen description method is consistent with the policy preference for performance-based requirements when feasible.
Practical Implications
This section is often used when the Government knows exactly what product it wants but still wants to allow equivalent alternatives. The key is to describe the minimum essential features clearly enough that vendors can compete on an equal basis.
A common pitfall is listing a brand name without enough salient characteristics. If the Government does not explain what makes the item acceptable, it may unintentionally limit competition or make evaluation subjective.
Another risk is over-specifying features that are not truly essential. That can exclude capable alternatives, reduce competition, and increase the chance of protest or higher prices.
Contracting officers should make sure the evaluation team uses the salient characteristics as the acceptance standard, not informal preferences or unstated assumptions. If a feature is not listed as salient, it generally should not be treated as mandatory.
Contractors should not assume that a product is acceptable just because it is similar to the brand name item. They should map their product against each salient characteristic and confirm compliance before submitting an offer.
Official Regulatory Text
(a) While the use of performance specifications is preferred to encourage offerors to propose innovative solutions, the use of brand name or equal purchase descriptions may be advantageous under certain circumstances. (b) Brand name or equal purchase descriptions must include, in addition to the brand name, a general description of those salient physical, functional, or performance characteristics of the brand name item that an "equal" item must meet to be acceptable for award. Use brand name or equal descriptions when the salient characteristics are firm requirements.