FAR 6.401—Sealed bidding and competitive proposals.
Plain-English Summary
FAR 6.401 explains the two basic competitive source-selection methods that may be used under the competition requirements in FAR Part 6: sealed bidding and competitive proposals. It points the reader to the detailed procedures in FAR Part 14 for sealed bidding and FAR Part 15 for competitive proposals, and it clarifies when each method is appropriate. The section is important because it helps contracting officers choose the right acquisition method based on the nature of the requirement, the need for discussions, the basis for award, and the likelihood of receiving multiple bids. It also addresses a special practical issue for contracts performed outside the United States and its outlying areas, where discussions are generally necessary because of differences in law, regulations, and business practices. In practice, this section is a decision rule: if the conditions for sealed bidding are met, the contracting officer must use it; if not, competitive proposals may be used, and for overseas work competitive proposals will usually be the default unless sealed bidding is clearly appropriate and discussions are unnecessary.
Key Rules
Two acceptable methods
Sealed bidding and competitive proposals are both acceptable competitive procedures under FAR Parts 6, 14, and 15. The contracting officer must choose the method that fits the acquisition and then follow the detailed procedures in the applicable part.
Use sealed bidding when conditions are met
The contracting officer shall solicit sealed bids when all four conditions are present: time permits solicitation, submission, and evaluation of sealed bids; award will be based on price and other price-related factors; discussions with offerors are not necessary; and there is a reasonable expectation of receiving more than one sealed bid.
Award basis must fit sealed bidding
Sealed bidding is appropriate only when award can be made on price and price-related factors. If the acquisition requires evaluation of technical tradeoffs, negotiations, or other non-price considerations that call for discussions, sealed bidding is not the right method.
No discussions under sealed bidding
A key feature of sealed bidding is that discussions with responding offerors about their bids are not needed. If discussions are necessary, the contracting officer should not use sealed bidding and should consider competitive proposals instead.
Competitive proposals when sealed bidding is not appropriate
The contracting officer may request competitive proposals whenever the sealed-bidding conditions are not satisfied. This gives the government flexibility to use a negotiated procurement approach when the requirement is more complex or when discussions are needed.
Overseas contracts usually need proposals
For contracts to be made and performed outside the United States and its outlying areas, competitive proposals will generally be used because differences in law, regulations, and business practices usually make discussions necessary. Sealed bidding may still be used only if discussions are not required and sealed bidding is otherwise appropriate.
Responsibilities
Contracting Officer
Determine whether the acquisition meets all sealed-bidding conditions in paragraph (a). If it does, solicit sealed bids; if not, use competitive proposals as appropriate. For overseas acquisitions, generally use competitive proposals unless sealed bidding is clearly appropriate and discussions are unnecessary.
Agency
Support the contracting officer in selecting the proper competition method and ensure the acquisition strategy aligns with the requirements of FAR Parts 6, 14, and 15, including special considerations for overseas performance.
Offerors/Bidders
Respond using the method the government has chosen—sealed bids when the solicitation is issued under Part 14, or competitive proposals when the solicitation is issued under Part 15—and understand that discussions are generally not part of sealed bidding.
Practical Implications
This section is a threshold decision point: choosing the wrong method can create procurement errors, delays, or protest risk.
Sealed bidding is not just a preference for low price; it is only proper when award can be made without discussions and the government expects more than one bid.
If the requirement is complex, uncertain, or likely to need clarifications or negotiations, competitive proposals is usually the safer and more appropriate path.
For overseas acquisitions, contracting officers should assume discussions will likely be needed and document why competitive proposals are being used unless sealed bidding clearly fits.
A common pitfall is treating sealed bidding as available whenever price is important; the real test is whether all four conditions in paragraph (a) are satisfied.
Official Regulatory Text
Sealed bidding and competitive proposals, as described in parts 14 and 15 , are both acceptable procedures for use under subparts 6.1 , 6.2 ; and, when appropriate, under subpart 6.3 . (a) Sealed bids . (See part 14 for procedures.) Contracting officers shall solicit sealed bids if- (1) Time permits the solicitation, submission, and evaluation of sealed bids; (2) The award will be made on the basis of price and other price-related factors; (3) It is not necessary to conduct discussions with the responding offerors about their bids; and (4) There is a reasonable expectation of receiving more than one sealed bid. (b) Competitive proposals. (See part 15 for procedures.) (1) Contracting officers may request competitive proposals if sealed bids are not appropriate under paragraph (a) of this section. (2) Because of differences in areas such as law, regulations, and business practices, it is generally necessary to conduct discussions with offerors relative to proposed contracts to be made and performed outside the United States and its outlying areas. Competitive proposals will therefore be used for these contracts unless discussions are not required and the use of sealed bids is otherwise appropriate.