FAR 9.505—General rules.
Plain-English Summary
FAR 9.505 states the core policy for organizational conflicts of interest (OCI) and explains how the government should handle them when deciding whether to contract, and on what terms. It covers the general rules in FAR 9.505-1 through 9.505-4, the role of the illustrative examples in FAR 9.508, and the fact that OCI issues can arise outside the specific situations listed in the regulation. It also explains that each situation must be evaluated on its own facts, using common sense, good judgment, and sound discretion to determine whether a significant potential conflict exists and how to resolve it. The section identifies the two underlying OCI principles: preventing conflicting roles that could bias a contractor’s judgment, and preventing unfair competitive advantage. Finally, it defines two specific forms of unfair competitive advantage: possession of proprietary information improperly obtained from a Government official, and possession of relevant source selection information not available to all competitors that would help the contractor win the award. In practice, this section is the foundation for OCI screening, mitigation, and award decisions across federal procurements.
Key Rules
General OCI limits apply
The rules in FAR 9.505-1 through 9.505-4 set limits on contracting as a way to avoid, neutralize, or mitigate organizational conflicts of interest. These limits are the baseline framework for deciding whether a contractor can compete, perform, or both.
Examples are illustrative only
The examples in FAR 9.508 help explain how the OCI rules work, but they do not exhaust every possible conflict situation. A procurement may still present an OCI even if it does not fit one of the listed examples.
Each case needs fact-specific review
Every contracting situation must be examined based on its particular facts and the nature of the proposed contract. The regulation requires practical judgment rather than a mechanical checklist approach.
Use judgment to assess risk
The contracting officer and agency must use common sense, good judgment, and sound discretion to decide whether a significant potential conflict exists. If one does, they must develop an appropriate means of resolving it.
Avoid biased judgment
One core principle is preventing conflicting roles that could bias a contractor’s judgment. This means a contractor should not be placed in a position where its other interests could influence how it advises, evaluates, or supports the Government.
Avoid unfair competitive advantage
The second core principle is preventing one offeror from gaining an unfair edge over others. This includes situations where a contractor has nonpublic information that could materially help it win the competition.
Improper proprietary information is disqualifying
A contractor has an unfair competitive advantage if it possesses proprietary information obtained from a Government official without proper authorization. The concern is not just possession of the information, but the improper way it was obtained.
Nonpublic source selection information matters
A contractor also has an unfair competitive advantage if it possesses source selection information relevant to the contract that is not available to all competitors and would help it obtain the award. This protects the integrity and fairness of the competition.
Responsibilities
Contracting Officer
Evaluate each procurement for possible OCI issues, determine whether a significant potential conflict exists, and decide whether the conflict can be avoided, neutralized, or mitigated. The contracting officer must also identify and address unfair competitive advantage concerns before award.
Agency
Support OCI identification and resolution through procurement planning, information controls, and appropriate mitigation measures. The agency must ensure the competition remains fair and that nonpublic information is protected.
Contractor
Avoid situations that create conflicting roles or unfair competitive advantage, and disclose or address potential OCI issues when identified. The contractor must not use improperly obtained proprietary information or nonpublic source selection information to compete.
Source Selection Officials and Government Personnel
Protect proprietary and source selection information and avoid unauthorized disclosure to any contractor. They must ensure that information shared with offerors is properly authorized and available on an equal basis.
Practical Implications
OCI analysis is not limited to the examples in FAR 9.508; unusual or novel arrangements can still create a conflict.
A contractor may be barred or restricted even when there is no actual bias, if the structure of the work creates a significant potential for biased judgment or unfair advantage.
Information handling is critical: unauthorized disclosure of proprietary or source selection information can create a competition problem and jeopardize the procurement.
Contracting officers should document the facts, the risk assessment, and the rationale for any mitigation or award decision, because OCI determinations are highly fact-specific.
Contractors should screen teaming, advisory, and support roles carefully, since prior access to Government information or involvement in acquisition planning can create downstream OCI issues.
Official Regulatory Text
The general rules in 9.505-1 through 9.505-4 prescribe limitations on contracting as the means of avoiding, neutralizing, or mitigating organizational conflicts of interest that might otherwise exist in the stated situations. Some illustrative examples are provided in 9.508 . Conflicts may arise in situations not expressly covered in this section 9.505 or in the examples in 9.508 . Each individual contracting situation should be examined on the basis of its particular facts and the nature of the proposed contract. The exercise of common sense, good judgment, and sound discretion is required in both the decision on whether a significant potential conflict exists and, if it does, the development of an appropriate means for resolving it. The two underlying principles are- (a) Preventing the existence of conflicting roles that might bias a contractor’s judgment; and (b) Preventing unfair competitive advantage. In addition to the other situations described in this subpart, an unfair competitive advantage exists where a contractor competing for award of any Federal contract possesses- (1) Proprietary information that was obtained from a Government official without proper authorization; or (2) Source selection information (as defined in 2.101 ) that is relevant to the contract but is not available to all competitors, and such information would assist that contractor in obtaining the contract.