(a) A proposal in the possession or control of the Government, submitted in response to a competitive solicitation, shall not be made available to any person under the Freedom of Information Act. This prohibition does not apply to a proposal, or any part of a proposal, that is set forth or incorporated by reference in a contract between the Government and the contractor that submitted the proposal. (See 10 U.S.C. 3309 and 41 U.S.C. 4702.)
(b) No agency shall disclose any information obtained pursuant to 15.403-3(b) that is exempt from disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act. (See 10 U.S.C. 3705(c)(3) and 41 U.S.C. 3505(b)(3).)
(c) A dispute resolution communication that is between a neutral person and a party to alternative dispute resolution proceedings, and that may not be disclosed under 5 U.S.C. 574, is exempt from disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552(b)(3)).
[62 FR 257, Jan. 2, 1997, as amended at 62 FR 51270, Sept. 30, 1997; 63 FR 58594, Oct. 30, 1998; 68 FR 56689, Oct. 1, 2003; 79 FR 24208, Apr. 29, 2014; 87 FR 73898, Dec. 1, 2022]
Notes of Decisions
Ctr. for Investigative Reporting v. U.S. Customs & Border Prot. (D.D.C. 2019).
“§ 4702 ; 48 C.F.R. § 24.202 (a)), but they do not claim that the submitters understood that questions and concerns expressed to a public-facing government email address about the RFPs would be covered by the provisions the defendants cite.”
Lenahan v. United States Dep't Health & Human Servs. (N.D. Cal. 2025).
“Johann informed 17 Plaintiff that HHS had withheld the proposal Chartwell had submitted to the agency pursuant to 18 Federal Acquisition Regulation, 48 C.F.R. § 24.202 (a), (b) and informed Plaintiff that Chartwell’s 19 proposal was not incorporated into the contract it was…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.