FAR 9.406—Debarment.

General.

FAR 9.406-1 explains the general principles that govern debarment decisions. It covers the suspending and debarring official’s discretion to decide whether debarment is in the Government’s interest, the fact that a cause for debarment does not automatically require exclusion, and the factors the official should weigh in deciding whether a contractor is presently responsible. Those factors include internal controls and standards of conduct, self-disclosure, cooperation with investigations, payment of liability and restitution, disciplinary action, remedial measures, training, time to correct problems, management’s recognition of misconduct, prior history and pattern of wrongdoing, the extent and pervasiveness of the misconduct, tolerance by principals, prior exclusions or disqualifications, prior administrative agreements, and any other relevant circumstances. The section also explains that the contractor bears the burden of showing present responsibility once a debarment cause exists. In addition, it addresses the scope of debarment across divisions, organizational elements, and affiliates, and states that debarment generally applies throughout the executive branch unless an agency head or designee documents compelling reasons to continue doing business. Finally, it begins the rule for debarment authority that may cover both FAR procurements and Federal personal property transactions, signaling that debarment can have broad governmentwide consequences in practice.

Causes for debarment.

FAR 9.406-2 explains the specific causes that can justify debarment of a contractor or subcontractor from federal contracting. It covers three broad categories: convictions or civil judgments for serious misconduct; other serious contract, workplace, tax, disclosure, trade, and immigration-related violations proven by a preponderance of the evidence; and any other cause so serious or compelling that it affects the contractor’s present responsibility. The section also addresses special rules for delinquent federal taxes, including when a tax liability is considered final and delinquent, and gives examples showing when taxes are not yet delinquent because of pending appeals, installment agreements, or bankruptcy stays. In practice, this provision is a major integrity and responsibility screen: it allows the government to protect itself from contractors whose conduct shows fraud, dishonesty, repeated poor performance, noncompliance with drug-free workplace or immigration requirements, or failure to disclose serious wrongdoing. It is not automatic punishment for every violation; instead, it is a discretionary remedy used by the suspending and debarring official when the facts show the contractor is not presently responsible.

Procedures.

FAR 9.406-3 lays out the procedures agencies must use when considering debarment, from the initial reporting and referral of potential debarment matters through the notice, contractor response, fact-finding, and final decision. It covers agency procedures for prompt investigation and referral, the requirement that debarment decision-making be as informal as practicable while still fair, the contractor’s right to respond in person, in writing, or through a representative, and special procedures when disputed material facts require additional proceedings. It also specifies how the notice of proposed debarment must be delivered, what the notice must contain, what the contractor must disclose in opposition, and how the suspending and debarring official must decide the case based on the administrative record or on findings of fact when facts are disputed. In practice, this section is the procedural backbone of debarment actions: it is designed to protect due process, ensure the government acts on a complete and accurate record, and give contractors a meaningful chance to contest proposed exclusion before a final debarment is imposed. For contractors, it defines the response deadline, the disclosure burden, and the risk of further action for incomplete or false submissions. For agencies and suspending and debarring officials, it establishes the minimum process, recordkeeping, and decision standards that must be followed to make a defensible debarment decision.

Period of debarment.

FAR 9.406-4 explains how long a debarment lasts, when it may be extended, and when it may be shortened. It covers the general rule that debarment must be for a period commensurate with the seriousness of the cause, the usual 3-year maximum, and the special time limits for certain causes, including Drug-Free Workplace violations, immigration-related debarments under 9.406-2(b)(2), and debarments under 9.406-2(b)(1)(vii) when suspension comes first. It also explains that any prior suspension time counts toward the debarment period, that the suspending and debarring official may extend debarment only when needed to protect the Government’s interest and not merely by repeating the original facts, and that some immigration-related debarments may be extended in one-year increments if the proper official finds the violation continues. Finally, it gives the contractor a path to request a reduction in the debarment period or scope based on new evidence, reversal of the underlying judgment, a bona fide change in ownership or management, elimination of the cause, or other appropriate reasons. In practice, this section matters because it sets the outer limits of exclusion from federal contracting, defines when a contractor can seek relief, and requires agencies to justify both extensions and reductions with facts and documentation.

Scope of debarment.

FAR 9.406-5 explains how debarment-related misconduct can be attributed, or "imputed," beyond the person or entity that directly engaged in the wrongdoing. It covers three related situations: conduct by an individual associated with a contractor that may be imputed to the contractor; conduct by a contractor that may be imputed to associated individuals; and conduct by one participant in a joint venture or similar arrangement that may be imputed to the other participating contractors. The section focuses on fraudulent, criminal, or other seriously improper conduct and ties imputation to the relationship between the actor and the affected party, including whether the conduct occurred in the course of duties, with knowledge, approval, or acquiescence, or for the benefit of the contractor or joint venture. It also states that acceptance of benefits from the misconduct is evidence of knowledge, approval, or acquiescence. In practice, this provision matters because debarment can reach beyond the immediate wrongdoer and affect affiliated persons or entities, which makes internal controls, oversight, and prompt response to misconduct critical for contractors and contracting officials.