FAR 14.404—Rejection of bids.

Cancellation of invitations after opening.

FAR 14.404-1 explains when and how a contracting activity may cancel an invitation for bids after bid opening, and it is built around protecting the integrity of sealed bidding. It covers the general rule that award should go to the responsible bidder submitting the lowest responsive bid unless there is a compelling reason to reject all bids, the duty to anticipate and communicate changes before opening, and the general prohibition on cancelling and resoliciting solely because requirements increased. It also addresses mandatory cancellation when required specifications/identification requirements were not met, and lists the specific grounds that can justify cancellation and rejection of all bids, including ambiguous or revised specifications, no longer needed requirements, failure to consider all cost factors, lower-cost alternatives, unreasonable prices, collusion or bad faith, no responsive bid from a responsible bidder, an A-76 cost comparison favoring Government performance, and other public-interest reasons. The section further covers extending bid acceptance periods to avoid resolicitation when award is delayed, and it explains when the agency may complete the acquisition by negotiation after cancellation versus when a new acquisition is required. In practice, this section is the main safeguard against arbitrary post-opening cancellation and the main roadmap for deciding whether to award, cancel, resolicit, or negotiate after sealed bids are opened.

Rejection of individual bids.

FAR 14.404-2 explains when a contracting officer must reject an individual bid under sealed bidding. It covers nonconforming bids, including bids that fail to meet the invitation’s essential requirements, specifications, delivery schedule, or permissible alternates; bids that impose objectionable conditions or limit the bidder’s liability; bids with unreasonable prices; materially unbalanced bids; bids from suspended, debarred, proposed-debarment, or ineligible firms; bids from nonresponsible bidders; bids lacking a required bid guarantee; and bids affected by post-bid-opening asset transfers. It also addresses the limited ability to ask a low bidder to delete a non-substantive objectionable condition, and it requires preservation of rejected bids and written findings. In practice, this section protects the integrity of sealed bidding by ensuring that all bidders compete on the same terms and that the Government does not accept a bid that changes the solicitation, creates unfairness, or presents unacceptable risk. It is a strict rule set: if a bid is nonresponsive or otherwise disqualified under these standards, the contracting officer generally must reject it rather than cure the defect after opening.

Notice to bidders of rejection of all bids.

FAR 14.404-3 addresses the notice that must be given when a contracting officer decides to reject all bids in a sealed bidding procurement. The section covers two core topics: the decision to reject all bids and the required communication to bidders after that decision is made. Its purpose is to ensure transparency, fairness, and accountability when an award will not be made from the submitted bids, and to give bidders a clear explanation for the cancellation so they understand what happened to the competition. In practice, this means the contracting officer must not only decide to reject all bids, but also promptly inform each bidder that all bids were rejected and state the reason for the action. This notice requirement helps reduce confusion, supports the integrity of the sealed bidding process, and creates a record that can be important for protests, audits, and future procurement planning.

Restrictions on disclosure of descriptive literature.

FAR 14.404-4 addresses when a bidder’s restriction on the public disclosure of descriptive literature can make an otherwise submitted sealed bid nonresponsive. It focuses on bids accompanied by descriptive literature, the bidder’s attempt to limit disclosure, and the key test for responsiveness: whether the restriction prevents disclosure of enough information for competing bidders to understand the essential nature and type of the offered products and the bid elements tied to quantity, price, and delivery terms. The section also carves out an important exception for unsolicited descriptive literature that is not used to qualify the bid, cross-referencing FAR 14.202-5(e). In practice, this rule protects the integrity of sealed bidding by ensuring competitors can evaluate what is being offered and by preventing bidders from using confidentiality restrictions to hide material bid information. For contracting officers, it is a responsiveness issue that must be resolved at bid opening and before award; for bidders, it is a warning that overbroad confidentiality restrictions can cause bid rejection.

All or none qualifications.

FAR 14.404-5 addresses how contracting officers should treat "all or none" bid qualifications in sealed bidding. It covers two related issues: first, whether a bid remains responsive when the bidder says it will accept award only if all items, or a specified group of items, are awarded together; and second, whether that qualification can be withdrawn or changed after bid opening. The rule exists to preserve fairness and integrity in the competitive bidding process by making clear when a bidder’s condition is part of the bid and when it becomes fixed. In practice, this section helps contracting officers decide whether to reject or accept a bid that contains an all-or-none condition, and it protects other bidders by preventing post-opening changes that could alter the competitive standing of bids. The practical effect is that an all-or-none condition may be acceptable if the solicitation allows it, but once bids are opened the bidder cannot use that condition as a basis to revise the bid.