FAR 3.104—Procurement integrity.

Definitions.

FAR 3.104-1 is the definitions section for the procurement integrity rules in FAR 3.104, which govern restrictions on the disclosure and use of contractor bid or proposal information and source selection information, as well as related ethics and post-employment issues. It defines who counts as an agency ethics official, what compensation means, what information qualifies as contractor bid or proposal information, what constitutes a decision to award a subcontract or subcontract modification, what is meant by a Federal agency procurement, how to measure whether a procurement is in excess of $10,000,000, who is an official, what it means to participate personally and substantially in a procurement, and what a source selection evaluation board is. These definitions matter because they determine when the procurement integrity restrictions apply, who is covered, what information is protected, and which actions can create conflicts or trigger reporting and recusal obligations. In practice, the section sets the threshold for ethics reviews, post-government employment analysis, and contractor handling of sensitive proposal data. It also clarifies that certain broad agency announcements and SBIR proposals are treated as separate procurements for these purposes. For contracting officers, source selection personnel, ethics officials, and contractors, these definitions are the foundation for compliance with the rest of FAR 3.104.

General.

FAR 3.104-2 is the general policy section for the procurement integrity rules in FAR 3.104, which implement 41 U.S.C. chapter 21 on restrictions on obtaining and disclosing certain information. It explains that agency supplements to FAR 3.104, including any agency-specific definitions used to identify covered positions under 3.104-3(d)(1)(ii), and any clauses required by this subpart must be approved by the agency’s senior procurement executive unless a higher level of approval is required by law. The section also serves as a reminder that procurement integrity is not governed by FAR alone: it points contracting officials to related criminal, ethics, post-employment, and information-protection statutes and regulations. Those include bribery and gratuity prohibitions, gift rules, seeking-employment conflicts, disqualification requirements, post-employment restrictions, procurement information disclosure limits, Privacy Act and Trade Secrets Act protections, and rules against misuse of nonpublic information. In practice, this section tells agencies to control their own supplements carefully and tells acquisition personnel that procurement integrity problems can arise from ethics, criminal, and disclosure issues before award, during source selection, and after award.

Statutory and related prohibitions, restrictions, and requirements.

FAR 3.104-3 implements the Procurement Integrity Act’s core restrictions on procurement information and post-employment conduct. It covers four main topics: the prohibition on disclosing contractor bid or proposal information and source selection information before award, the prohibition on knowingly obtaining that same information before award, the required actions when an agency official and an offeror discuss possible non-Federal employment, and the one-year ban on certain former officials accepting compensation from a contractor after serving in key procurement roles or making certain high-value decisions. In practice, this section is designed to protect the fairness of the competition, prevent insider access to sensitive source selection data, and reduce conflicts of interest or the appearance of undue influence. It matters both to government personnel, who must safeguard information and report employment contacts, and to contractors, who must avoid improper attempts to obtain protected information and must screen hiring decisions for former officials subject to the compensation ban. The section also points readers to related ethics rules, including 18 U.S.C. 208, agency ethics regulations, and the Standards of Ethical Conduct, because compliance with FAR 3.104-3 is only part of the broader ethics framework.

Disclosure, protection, and marking of contractor bid or proposal information and source selection information.

FAR 3.104-4 explains how the Government must protect, mark, and control disclosure of contractor bid or proposal information and source selection information. It covers the basic prohibition on unauthorized disclosure, the duty to protect these materials under FAR 14.401, 15.207, applicable law, and agency procedures, and the need to consult agency officials when there is uncertainty about whether information is source selection information under FAR 2.101. It also addresses marking requirements for certain source selection information, including the required legend and the expectation to make reasonable efforts to mark all source selection information even when some categories are source selection information by definition whether or not marked. The section further sets out the process for handling allegedly improper markings on proprietary information, contractor bid or proposal information, and information marked under FAR 52.215-1(e), including notice to the contractor, an opportunity to justify the marking, and procedures for technical data marked proprietary under FAR 27.404-5. Finally, it clarifies what this section does not restrict or authorize, including contractor self-disclosure, certain post-cancellation disclosures, permitted meetings, Government use of technical data consistent with Government rights, responses to Congress and oversight bodies, GAO protest access, and the limits on post-award disclosure when another procurement is involved or when disclosure is otherwise prohibited by law.

Disqualification.

FAR 3.104-5 explains what happens when a procurement integrity issue requires an agency official to be disqualified from further participation in a procurement. It covers three main topics: employment contacts made through agents or other intermediaries, the required written notice of disqualification, and the conditions for resuming participation after a disqualification period. It also ties the FAR procurement integrity rules to other legal authorities, including 18 U.S.C. 208 and 5 CFR part 2635, which may independently restrict or prohibit participation. In practice, this section is about protecting the fairness and appearance of fairness in federal source selections when an official has had employment-related contacts with an offeror. It gives agencies a process for documenting the disqualification, deciding when the official may return to the procurement, and ensuring that any return is consistent with ethics law and executive branch standards of conduct. For contractors, it signals that indirect recruiting or employment discussions can still create serious procurement integrity consequences even if the contact is not face-to-face or direct.

Ethics advisory opinions regarding prohibitions on a former official’s acceptance of compensation from a contractor.

FAR 3.104-6 explains how an official or former official can seek an ethics advisory opinion before accepting compensation from a contractor when there is uncertainty about the post-employment compensation ban in 41 U.S.C. 2104, as referenced in FAR 3.104-3(d). It covers who may request advice, when advice should be sought, what the written request must contain, what information the agency ethics official may gather or rely on, the timing for issuing an opinion, and the legal effect of relying on that opinion in good faith. In practice, this section is designed to help current and former federal personnel avoid prohibited compensation arrangements and to give contractors some protection when they rely on a written ethics opinion. It also creates a process for resolving close questions by requiring a complete factual record about the procurement, the individual’s participation, and the contractor involved. The section matters because it can prevent an inadvertent violation, but only if the requester provides accurate, complete information and the opinion is followed in good faith.

Violations or possible violations.

FAR 3.104-7 explains what happens when a contracting officer learns of an actual or possible violation of the procurement integrity rules in 41 U.S.C. 2102, 2103, or 2104. It covers the contracting officer’s initial duty to assess whether the reported conduct affects the pending award or contractor selection, the required escalation path to the agency’s designated official or the head of the contracting activity (HCA), and the HCA’s authority to review the matter and choose an appropriate response. The section also addresses possible actions before award and after award, including continuing the procurement, investigating, referring the matter for criminal investigation, finding that a violation occurred, canceling the procurement, disqualifying an offeror, applying contractual remedies such as profit recapture, voiding or rescinding a contract, and referring the matter to suspension and debarment officials. It further covers the HCA’s ability to request additional information before making a violation determination, the use of remedies proportionate to the seriousness of the misconduct, emergency or best-interest authority to proceed with an award despite the issue, and delegation of HCA authority to a senior official. In practice, this section is the decision-and-escalation roadmap for protecting the integrity of federal procurements while preserving the Government’s ability to act quickly when necessary.

Criminal and civil penalties, and further administrative remedies.

FAR 3.104-8 explains the consequences for violating the procurement integrity rules in FAR 3.104-3 and related restrictions on employment discussions. It covers criminal, civil, and administrative penalties under 41 U.S.C. chapter 21 and 41 U.S.C. 2105, the special bid protest rules in 33.102(f), and additional administrative remedies tied to contracts in FAR 3.104-7. The section specifically addresses three situations: an official who knowingly fails to comply with the procurement integrity requirements, an offeror who knowingly engages in employment discussions with a restricted official who has not complied with the required notice/disqualification steps, and an official who refuses to terminate employment discussions when required. In practice, this section is the enforcement backbone for procurement integrity: it makes clear that violations are not just ethics issues but can trigger serious legal and administrative consequences. For contractors, it creates a duty to avoid improper hiring discussions with covered officials; for government personnel, it reinforces the need to follow disclosure, recusal, and termination-of-discussions rules exactly. For agencies, it provides a basis for discipline and other remedies when procurement integrity is compromised.

Contract clauses.

FAR 3.104-9 tells contracting officers which anti-corruption contract clauses must be included when the procurement is above the simplified acquisition threshold and is not for commercial products or commercial services. Specifically, it requires insertion of FAR 52.203-8, Cancellation, Rescission, and Recovery of Funds for Illegal or Improper Activity, and FAR 52.203-10, Price or Fee Adjustment for Illegal or Improper Activity. This section is part of the Procurement Integrity framework and is designed to protect the Government’s ability to cancel, rescind, or recover funds if illegal or improper conduct affects the procurement process. In practice, it means the solicitation and resulting contract must put contractors on notice that improper conduct can lead to serious remedies, including contract price or fee adjustments and recovery actions. The rule applies only to noncommercial acquisitions above the simplified acquisition threshold, so contracting personnel must check both the dollar threshold and the commercial-item/commercial-service status before deciding whether to include these clauses. For contractors, the clauses create real financial and legal exposure if procurement integrity violations occur; for agencies, they are mandatory safeguards that support enforcement and deterrence.