{"id":74145,"date":"2026-09-02T16:30:18","date_gmt":"2026-09-02T19:30:18","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/a3aengenharia.com\/?post_type=articles&#038;p=74145"},"modified":"2026-09-02T16:30:18","modified_gmt":"2026-09-02T19:30:18","slug":"deserted-failed-procurement-law-14133-engineering-works","status":"publish","type":"articles","link":"https:\/\/a3aengenharia.com\/en-us\/content\/technical-articles\/deserted-failed-procurement-law-14133-engineering-works\/","title":{"rendered":"Deserted vs. Failed Procurement under Law 14,133: Differences, Causes and What to Do in Engineering Works"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">A deserted procurement and a failed procurement are different situations. A procurement is <strong>deserted<\/strong> when no interested parties come forward to participate; it is <strong>failed<\/strong> when there are participants, but no proposal can be validly accepted, for example because all proposals are disqualified, remain above the acceptable budget or fail to demonstrate feasibility. Under Law 14,133\/2021, this distinction matters because Art. 75, III allows, under specific conditions, direct contracting after a deserted or failed procurement.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">In public works and engineering services, however, failure should not be treated as a simple authorization to contract directly. Before deciding the next course, the Administration must identify <strong>why the market did not participate or why all proposals failed<\/strong>. An immature Basic Design, outdated budget, excessive qualification requirements, unrealistic execution period, unbalanced risk allocation matrix, incompatible commercial requirements and tender-document errors can produce exactly the same symptom: no viable contract at the end of the competition.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The correct decision therefore depends on diagnosis. If the tender documents were valid, the conditions remain appropriate and the failure actually resulted from the market, the hypothesis under Art. 75, III may be analyzed. If the procurement documents themselves drove competitors away or made it impossible to formulate a valid proposal, the solution is to correct the process and conduct a new procurement, not to turn a planning error into grounds for eliminating competition.<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">What is a deserted procurement<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">A procurement is considered deserted when, despite regular publication of the procedure, <strong>no interested party submits a proposal to participate<\/strong>. There was no competition because the market did not enter the procedure.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The absence of proposals should be treated as market information. In engineering, it is rarely enough to conclude that \u201cnobody was interested.\u201d It is necessary to investigate whether the contracting design made the scope unattractive or unviable for capable contractors.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Recurring causes include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\"><li>estimated budget below prevailing costs;<\/li><li>execution period incompatible with mobilization and productivity;<\/li><li>disproportionate technical-capacity requirements;<\/li><li>guarantees and insurance incompatible with the actual risk;<\/li><li>unfavorable payment conditions;<\/li><li>scope with material uncertainties;<\/li><li>risks transferred to the contractor without a reasonable basis for pricing;<\/li><li>excessively restrictive site-visit or logistics requirements;<\/li><li>insufficient outreach to the market actually capable of execution;<\/li><li>bundling of specialties that unduly reduces the competitive universe.<\/li><\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">In a R$ 20 million public work, for example, the absence of proposals may have less to do with a \u201clack of companies\u201d than with a combination of an outdated budget, compressed schedule and obligation to assume uninvestigated interferences. The Administration must distinguish spontaneous lack of interest from lack of interest <strong>created by the tender documents<\/strong>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">What is a failed procurement<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">In a failed procurement there are interested parties and proposals may exist, but <strong>none validly reaches contracting<\/strong>. The TCU summarizes the situation as the absence of valid proposals, including cases in which all are disqualified or prices remain manifestly above market levels or incompatible with official parameters.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Art. 59 of Law 14,133 addresses disqualification situations, including proposals with incurable defects, noncompliance with technical specifications, unfeasible prices, prices above the estimated budget or failure to demonstrate feasibility when required.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">This creates several possible types of failure in engineering:<\/p>\n\n\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-table\"><table><tbody><tr><td>Situation<\/td><td>Engineering example<\/td><td>Required diagnosis<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>All above budget<\/td><td>all proposals remain 20% above the reference<\/td><td>outdated budget or expensive market?<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>All unfeasible<\/td><td>bids below technically demonstrable cost<\/td><td>poorly calibrated competition or aggressive behavior?<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>All technically noncompliant<\/td><td>none meets a critical requirement<\/td><td>is the requirement necessary and was it clearly specified?<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Incurable documentary failure<\/td><td>all bidders fail the same requirement<\/td><td>was the requirement appropriate and understandable?<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>No valid proposal after negotiation<\/td><td>prices remain unacceptable<\/td><td>is there real market room for a new competition?<\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table><\/figure>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The fact that several companies fail at the same point is an especially important signal. When the entire market gets the same requirement wrong, the Administration should verify whether the problem lies only with bidders or whether there is ambiguity, excess or inconsistency in the tender documents.<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Deserted vs. failed procurement: practical difference<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The central difference can be summarized as follows:<\/p>\n\n\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-table\"><table><tbody><tr><td>Question<\/td><td>Deserted<\/td><td>Failed<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Were there participants?<\/td><td>No<\/td><td>Yes<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Were there proposals?<\/td><td>No<\/td><td>Yes, but none valid or acceptable<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Main signal<\/td><td>absence of interest<\/td><td>inability to convert proposals into a contract<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Dominant diagnosis<\/td><td>attractiveness and market access<\/td><td>technical compliance, price, feasibility and evaluation rules<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Can Art. 75, III apply?<\/td><td>Yes, if the requirements are met<\/td><td>Yes, if the requirements are met<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Is direct contracting automatic?<\/td><td>No<\/td><td>No<\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table><\/figure>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The legal classification is relevant, but for contracting engineering the more important point is different: <strong>what cause produced the result?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Does Art. 75, III allow direct contracting afterward?<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-a3a-destaque\">\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Direct contracting under Art. 75, III should not be used to bypass defective tender documents. If the conditions need to be materially changed, the market must receive a new opportunity to compete.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><a href=\"https:\/\/a3aengenharia.com.br\/servicos\/planejamento\/revisao-tecnica-edital-anexos-licitacoes-engenharia\/\">Review the tender documents and annexes<\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Yes. Law 14,133 allows waiver of competitive procurement when the contracting maintains all conditions defined in the tender documents of a procurement conducted less than one year earlier and, in that procedure, no interested parties came forward, no valid proposals were submitted, or the proposals had prices manifestly above market levels or incompatible with official parameters.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">This does not mean that any deserted or failed procurement automatically authorizes a waiver.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">In summary, the hypothesis requires:<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ol class=\"wp-block-list\"><li>a valid prior procurement;<\/li><li>actual occurrence of one of the situations in Art. 75, III;<\/li><li>contracting less than one year after the unsuccessful procedure;<\/li><li>maintenance of the conditions defined in the previous tender documents;<\/li><li>price justification and demonstration of advantageousness;<\/li><li>absence of an administrative defect that caused the failure.<\/li><\/ol>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The TCU draws attention precisely to this final point. If the procurement failed because the Administration used unduly restrictive requirements, insufficient periods, an incorrect budget or another manifest defect, the appropriate course is to correct the process and promote a new competition.<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">\u201cMaintaining all tender conditions\u201d is an important limitation<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The possibility of direct contracting under Art. 75, III should not be interpreted as an opportunity to freely renegotiate the scope after a failed procurement.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">If, to make the contracting viable, the Administration needs to substantially change:<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\"><li>quantities;<\/li><li>specifications;<\/li><li>schedule;<\/li><li>execution regime;<\/li><li>payment method;<\/li><li>risk allocation matrix;<\/li><li>qualification requirements;<\/li><li>supply conditions;<\/li><li>essential obligations;<\/li><li>economic criterion of the contracting;<\/li><\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">then the premise of maintaining the conditions of the previous tender documents is no longer satisfied.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">There is a competition-related reason for this. Companies that did not participate in the original procedure may have made that decision precisely because of the published conditions. Materially changing those conditions and directly contracting another supplier would deprive the market of the opportunity to compete under the new scenario.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">In engineering, this is common. Imagine that no company participated because the execution period was four months. If, after the deserted procurement, the Administration concludes that the correct period is eight months, the correction may make the scope attractive to several suppliers. The change points to a <strong>new procurement with the corrected schedule<\/strong>, not direct contracting based on the previous tender documents.<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Before the waiver: perform a technical diagnosis of the failure<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The more mature decision is to treat the unsuccessful procurement as a due-diligence stage for the contracting strategy itself.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The diagnosis can be organized into five axes.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Design and scope<\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Verify whether the Basic Design or Terms of Reference allowed a proposal to be prepared without assuming inappropriate gaps.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Typical questions:<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\"><li>were the quantities consistent with drawings and design narratives?<\/li><li>were multidisciplinary interfaces defined?<\/li><li>were existing conditions surveyed?<\/li><li>were there discrepancies among drawings, spreadsheets and specifications?<\/li><li>were acceptance criteria objective?<\/li><li>did the scope include obligations without a sufficient basis for pricing?<\/li><\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">A deserted procurement may be the first sign that experienced companies identified a scope risk the Administration itself had not yet recognized.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Reference budget<\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Compare the reference used with the market at the time of procurement.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">For public works and engineering services, Art. 23 establishes a specific methodology for forming the estimated value, using parameters such as Sicro, Sinapi and other admitted sources. The budget cannot function merely as a bureaucratic ceiling: it must represent the probable cost of the scope under the actual execution conditions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">If all valid proposals converge at values far above the reference, the hypothesis of an outdated budget should be tested before concluding that the entire market is \u201cexpensive.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Qualification requirements<\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Examine how many companies in the market would be able to meet the published requirements and whether each requirement is proportionate to the contract risk.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Technical qualification should protect execution, not preselect a specific corporate configuration without justification.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Commercial conditions and risks<\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Evaluate:<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\"><li>payment period;<\/li><li>price adjustment;<\/li><li>guarantees;<\/li><li>insurance;<\/li><li>mobilization;<\/li><li>responsibilities for interferences;<\/li><li>licenses;<\/li><li>expropriations;<\/li><li>site access;<\/li><li>owner-furnished supplies;<\/li><li>geotechnical, operational or integration risks.<\/li><\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">A poorly allocated risk matrix can increase price or drive suppliers away even when the design is technically correct.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Competition and outreach<\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Map how many potentially qualified companies became aware of the procurement, how many accessed the documents, how many submitted clarification requests, how many participated and at which stage they were eliminated.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">This makes it possible to distinguish:<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\"><li>nonexistent market;<\/li><li>small market;<\/li><li>market that was not reached;<\/li><li>market reached but uninterested;<\/li><li>market interested but unable to meet the conditions.<\/li><\/ul>\n\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Deserted procurement: what to do step by step<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">When there are no interested parties, a prudent sequence is:<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ol class=\"wp-block-list\"><li>formally record the result;<\/li><li>review publicity and market reach of the procedure;<\/li><li>consult the market on an equal basis regarding participation barriers;<\/li><li>review budget, schedule, risks and requirements;<\/li><li>verify whether the previous conditions can be fully maintained;<\/li><li>compare a new procurement with direct contracting under Art. 75, III;<\/li><li>justify the selected alternative;<\/li><li>perform new price research or confirm adherence of the values;<\/li><li>preserve the entire decision trail in the administrative file.<\/li><\/ol>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Market consultation should not be used to informally negotiate a contract before the administrative decision. Its function is to produce information to determine why competition did not occur.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Failed procurement: what to do step by step<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">In a failed procurement, the process must be even more analytical because evidence has been produced by the participants.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">First, classify the reasons for elimination:<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\"><li>technical;<\/li><li>documentary;<\/li><li>economic;<\/li><li>feasibility;<\/li><li>qualification;<\/li><li>negotiation;<\/li><li>combination of causes.<\/li><\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Then identify whether the problem was concentrated or systemic. If four proposals were disqualified for different reasons, the market may simply have submitted poor responses. If all four were eliminated by the same clause, that clause must be reexamined.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The analysis should answer:<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\"><li>were the tender documents clear?<\/li><li>were legally permitted clarifications and diligence procedures correctly used?<\/li><li>were curable defects treated as incurable?<\/li><li>was negotiation under Art. 61 effectively explored?<\/li><li>did the estimated budget reflect the market?<\/li><li>was the feasibility criterion applied consistently?<\/li><li>was the technical specification proportionate to the scope?<\/li><\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Only after this review is it possible to rationally decide between correcting and retendering or proceeding with direct contracting allowed by law.<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Price above budget should not be analyzed in isolation<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">One of the most sensitive causes of failed procurement occurs when proposals remain above the reference.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The Administration should not automatically assume that bidders attempted to charge an excessive price. Nor should it simply raise the budget until it reaches the proposals.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">It is necessary to compare:<\/p>\n\n\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-table\"><table><tbody><tr><td>Evidence<\/td><td>Possible interpretation<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>All proposals close to one another and far above the reference<\/td><td>the reference may be outdated<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>One very high proposal and the others close to the reference<\/td><td>problem concentrated in that bidder<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Specific items far above the reference and the remainder coherent<\/td><td>the cost composition or quantity may be inadequate<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Market costs changed after the budget was prepared<\/td><td>an update may be necessary<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>BDI, mobilization or risk explains the difference<\/td><td>the commercial scope needs review<\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table><\/figure>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The calculation memorandum should allow the difference to be decomposed. In engineering, the total price alone rarely explains why a proposal exceeded the reference.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Unfeasible proposal and failed procurement<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The opposite extreme also produces failure: excessively low proposals.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Art. 59 provides for disqualification of unfeasible prices and authorizes the Administration to require demonstration of feasibility. In public works, the analysis must consider the specific applicable rules and, above all, the actual cost structure of execution.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The Administration should avoid two simplifications:<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\"><li>accepting any discount because it creates apparent savings;<\/li><li>automatically rejecting a proposal merely because it is aggressive, without correctly applying the established criteria and diligence procedures.<\/li><\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">If the entire competition drove the market to prices that cannot support execution, the competitive design itself also needs to be audited. Dispute mode, bid intervals, budget, qualification and risk perception can influence participant behavior.<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Negotiation before declaring the procurement failed<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Art. 61 of Law 14,133 allows negotiation with the first-ranked bidder to obtain more advantageous conditions. If the proposal remains above the maximum or admissible estimated price, negotiation may proceed with the other bidders, observing the ranking order.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Therefore, \u201call proposals initially above the reference\u201d does not necessarily mean immediate failure. The procedure must properly exhaust the stages provided to seek an acceptable proposal.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Negotiation, however, does not authorize materially modifying the object or creating preferential treatment. It operates within the tender rules and the limits of the procurement.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">What if the winner refuses to sign the contract?<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">This situation must be distinguished from a procurement process that was originally deserted or failed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">If there was a valid winner but it does not sign the contract or accept the equivalent instrument, Art. 90 governs the calling of the remaining bidders.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The Administration may call the remaining ranked bidders, initially under the conditions proposed by the winner. If none accepts, the law allows negotiation with the remaining bidders, in ranking order, observing the estimated value and any applicable update.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">There is therefore a specific sequence before concluding that a new procurement is necessary. In engineering contracts, this distinction prevents improperly abandoning a competitive outcome that can still be used.<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">When it is better to retender even when a waiver is possible<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">A waiver is a legal possibility; it is not necessarily the best procurement strategy.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">A new procurement process tends to be more appropriate when:<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\"><li>the market shows that the tender documents need to be changed;<\/li><li>the budget requires a material revision;<\/li><li>excessive requirements reduced competition;<\/li><li>publicity was insufficient;<\/li><li>the Basic Design was corrected;<\/li><li>the risk matrix will be changed;<\/li><li>the Administration expects more competitors after the adjustments;<\/li><li>direct contracting does not demonstrate sufficient economic advantage;<\/li><li>there is operational time to reopen competition.<\/li><\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The decision should compare schedule, transaction cost, urgency, legal risk, potential competition and probability of success.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">When direct contracting may be technically justifiable<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Direct contracting under Art. 75, III may be rational when the previous procurement was valid, the object remains exactly appropriate, the conditions remain current and repeating the procurement has a low probability of producing a different result.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Example: specialized public works in a remote region are tendered with a market-based budget, proportionate requirements and an adequate schedule. The procurement is widely publicized and no interested party participates. The Administration confirms with the market that few contractors are available and identifies a supplier capable of fully meeting the same conditions at a compatible price. In this scenario, the analysis of the waiver has a much stronger basis.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Compare this with another case: no company participates because the budget is 25% below the market and the schedule is technically impossible. Changing the budget and schedule and then contracting directly would be incompatible with the logic of maintaining the conditions that supports Art. 75, III.<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Decision matrix after a deserted or failed procurement<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-table\"><table><tbody><tr><td>Question<\/td><td>If the answer is \u201cyes\u201d<\/td><td>Likely direction<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Do the tender documents contain a flaw that reduced competition?<\/td><td>correct the instrument<\/td><td>new procurement<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Is the budget outdated?<\/td><td>update the reference<\/td><td>new procurement<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Does the scope need to change?<\/td><td>revise Basic Design\/TR<\/td><td>new procurement<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Can the conditions be fully maintained?<\/td><td>Art. 75, III requirement potentially satisfied<\/td><td>evaluate waiver<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Did the procurement take place less than one year ago?<\/td><td>time requirement potentially satisfied<\/td><td>evaluate waiver<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Was the failure not caused by the Administration?<\/td><td>reduces the risk of improper use of the waiver<\/td><td>evaluate waiver<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Is there a demonstrable advantage in direct contracting?<\/td><td>strengthens the justification<\/td><td>possible waiver<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Would new competition likely attract more of the market?<\/td><td>competition may produce a better result<\/td><td>retender<\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table><\/figure>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">This matrix does not replace the legal opinion or the decision of the competent authority. It organizes the technical evidence that should support both.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">How to revise the tender documents to avoid repeating the failure<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">When the decision is to retender, the worst solution is to republish the same document package changing only the date.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The review should match each diagnosed cause with a corrective action.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-table\"><table><tbody><tr><td>Identified cause<\/td><td>Procurement engineering action<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Outdated budget<\/td><td>update compositions, inputs, BDI and base date<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Ambiguous scope<\/td><td>coordinate Basic Design, TR and spreadsheets<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Excessive technical requirement<\/td><td>apply proportionality and most-relevant portions<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Unfeasible schedule<\/td><td>review productivity, mobilization and critical path<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Transferred unpredictable risk<\/td><td>review risk matrix and responsibilities<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Unattractive payment conditions<\/td><td>review measurement milestones and cash flow<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Low participation<\/td><td>expand publicity and proposal period<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Many formal disqualifications<\/td><td>review clarity and documentary necessity<\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table><\/figure>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">This approach converts the previous failure into project information.<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Indicators that help prevent deserted and failed procurements<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The Administration can monitor indicators even before the public session.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Pre-tender indicators<\/h3>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\"><li>number of suppliers identified in market sounding;<\/li><li>number of companies capable of meeting experience requirements;<\/li><li>difference between the budget and market quotations;<\/li><li>regional concentration of suppliers;<\/li><li>average mobilization lead time;<\/li><li>number of unconfirmed assumptions.<\/li><\/ul>\n\n\n\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Indicators after publication<\/h3>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\"><li>tender document downloads;<\/li><li>requests for clarification;<\/li><li>challenges;<\/li><li>participation in site visits;<\/li><li>companies registered to compete;<\/li><li>most recurring topics in questions.<\/li><\/ul>\n\n\n\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Indicators after the session<\/h3>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\"><li>number of proposals received;<\/li><li>number of valid proposals;<\/li><li>causes of disqualification;<\/li><li>price dispersion;<\/li><li>difference between the lowest proposal and the budget;<\/li><li>negotiation success;<\/li><li>number of qualified bidders.<\/li><\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">A process that monitors these signals can act before the only available indicator becomes \u201c0 contracts.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Technical checklist before using Art. 75, III<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Before preparing a direct contracting process arising from a deserted or failed procurement, verify:<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\"><li>the previous procurement was valid and regularly publicized;<\/li><li>the result was formally recorded;<\/li><li>the cause of the failure was diagnosed;<\/li><li>there are no manifest Administration failures explaining the outcome;<\/li><li>the procurement took place less than one year ago;<\/li><li>all relevant conditions of the previous tender documents will be maintained;<\/li><li>the object continues to meet the public need;<\/li><li>the budget remains current and technically defensible;<\/li><li>the direct contracting price is justified;<\/li><li>the contractor selection is reasoned;<\/li><li>a new procurement does not offer a clearly superior prospect;<\/li><li>the documentary record for direct contracting meets the applicable legal requirements.<\/li><\/ul>\n\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Case study: public works project with no proposals<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Consider a complex renovation of an occupied building, estimated at R$ 12 million. The tender requires completion in six months, night work, full continuity of operations, high guarantees and contractor responsibility for hidden interferences. No company submits a proposal.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The event could be classified as a deserted procurement. But that still does not answer what should be done.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The market analysis identifies four facts:<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ol class=\"wp-block-list\"><li>the practicable schedule is nine to ten months;<\/li><li>the cost of night work was underestimated;<\/li><li>the design did not survey existing interferences;<\/li><li>companies considered the risk allocation impossible to price.<\/li><\/ol>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">In this case, using Art. 75, III while maintaining all previous conditions would probably reproduce exactly the same problem. To make the procurement viable, schedule, budget and risk would need to change. The natural consequence is to revise the procurement engineering and conduct a new procurement.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The case shows why \u201cdeserted\u201d is a legal diagnosis of the result, not a technical diagnosis of the cause.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Case study: proposals above budget<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Now consider an infrastructure project with an estimated budget of R$ 30 million. Four proposals are submitted between R$ 35 million and R$ 37 million. After negotiation, none reaches the acceptable ceiling.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The Administration should investigate the approximately 17% to 23% difference.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">If updated inputs, productivity, logistics and risk demonstrate that the market has changed and R$ 35 million is compatible with reality, the original budget must be corrected. Materially changing this parameter tends to require new competition.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">If the analysis shows that the R$ 30 million budget is correct and suppliers in other regions are capable of executing it, strengthening publicity and retendering may be more efficient.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">If the budget remains adequate, all conditions can be maintained, the procurement was valid and the Administration identifies a compatible solution within the legal hypothesis, direct contracting may be evaluated with the proper record.<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">The role of consulting engineering in recovering the procurement process<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">In complex procurements, recovering a frustrated tender is a multidisciplinary problem. Legal, procurement and engineering teams need to work from the same factual basis.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Engineering should answer in particular:<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\"><li>is the object executable under the published conditions?<\/li><li>does the budget represent actual costs?<\/li><li>are the risks priceable?<\/li><li>are the qualification requirements proportionate?<\/li><li>is the schedule feasible?<\/li><li>are the technical criteria clear?<\/li><li>does the market have installed capacity?<\/li><li>which changes would be material to competition?<\/li><\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Without these answers, the decision between waiver and a new procurement tends to become merely procedural.<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Final considerations<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Deserted and failed procurements describe different outcomes, but both require more than a formal classification. In public works and engineering services, the result must be converted into a <strong>technical diagnosis of the procurement<\/strong>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Law 14,133 allows the Administration to evaluate direct contracting under Art. 75, III when the previous procurement, carried out less than one year earlier, attracted no interested parties, produced no valid proposals or received incompatible prices, provided the conditions of the tender documents can be maintained. This possibility does not correct planning failures.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">When the budget, scope, schedule, requirements or risks need to change to make the object contractable, the technically most consistent solution is to correct the documents and return to the market the opportunity to compete under the new conditions. The best response to a frustrated procurement is not to quickly seek another procedure: it is to identify <strong>which procurement assumption failed and prevent it from failing again<\/strong>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-a3a-destaque\">\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">When proposals exist, the analysis should separate technical nonconformity, price, feasibility and documentary failures. The cause of the failure must be demonstrated before the next decision.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><a href=\"https:\/\/a3aengenharia.com.br\/servicos\/servicos-transversais\/apoio-tecnico-licitacao-analise-propostas-engenharia\/\">Technical Support for Procurement and Proposal Analysis<\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n<details class=\"wp-block-details is-layout-flow wp-block-details-is-layout-flow\"><summary>Technical references<\/summary>\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">[1] BRAZIL. Law No. 14,133, of April 1, 2021 \u2014 Public Procurement and Administrative Contracts Law. Available at: <a href=\"https:\/\/www.planalto.gov.br\/ccivil_03\/_ato2019-2022\/2021\/lei\/l14133.htm\">https:\/\/www.planalto.gov.br\/ccivil_03\/_ato2019-2022\/2021\/lei\/l14133.htm<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">[2] FEDERAL COURT OF ACCOUNTS (TCU). Procurement and Contracts Manual \u2014 Deserted or failed procurement (Art. 75, III). Available at: <a href=\"https:\/\/licitacoesecontratos.tcu.gov.br\/5-10-2-2-licitacao-deserta-ou-fracassada-inciso-iii\/\">https:\/\/licitacoesecontratos.tcu.gov.br\/5-10-2-2-licitacao-deserta-ou-fracassada-inciso-iii\/<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">[3] FEDERAL COURT OF ACCOUNTS (TCU). Procurement and Contracts Manual \u2014 Waiver of competitive procurement. Available at: <a href=\"https:\/\/licitacoesecontratos.tcu.gov.br\/5-10-2-dispensa-de-licitacao\/\">https:\/\/licitacoesecontratos.tcu.gov.br\/5-10-2-dispensa-de-licitacao\/<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">[4] FEDERAL COURT OF ACCOUNTS (TCU). Procurement and Contracts Manual \u2014 Negotiation. Available at: <a href=\"https:\/\/licitacoesecontratos.tcu.gov.br\/5-4-3-negociacao\/\">https:\/\/licitacoesecontratos.tcu.gov.br\/5-4-3-negociacao\/<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">[5] FEDERAL COURT OF ACCOUNTS (TCU). Procurement and Contracts Manual \u2014 Call to contract. Available at: <a href=\"https:\/\/licitacoesecontratos.tcu.gov.br\/5-11-6-convocacao-para-contratar-2\/\">https:\/\/licitacoesecontratos.tcu.gov.br\/5-11-6-convocacao-para-contratar-2\/<\/a>.<\/p>\n<\/details>\n\n\n\n<details class=\"wp-block-details is-layout-flow wp-block-details-is-layout-flow\"><summary>Frequently asked questions<\/summary>\n<div class=\"schema-faq wp-block-yoast-faq-block\"><div class=\"schema-faq-section\" id=\"faq-question-qual-a-diferen-a-entre-licita-o-deserta-e-fracas-53a891a2\"><strong class=\"schema-faq-question\">What is the difference between a deserted and a failed procurement?<\/strong> <p class=\"schema-faq-answer\">A procurement is deserted when no interested parties appear or no proposals are submitted. It is failed when participants exist but no proposal can be validly accepted, for example because of disqualification, infeasibility or unacceptable prices.<\/p><\/div><div class=\"schema-faq-section\" id=\"faq-question-licita-o-deserta-permite-contrata-o-direta-aab4b4f5\"><strong class=\"schema-faq-question\">Does a deserted procurement allow direct contracting?<\/strong> <p class=\"schema-faq-answer\">It may, under Art. 75, III of Law 14,133, provided the previous procurement was valid, occurred less than one year ago, the tender conditions are maintained and the failure did not result from shortcomings of the Administration itself.<\/p><\/div><div class=\"schema-faq-section\" id=\"faq-question-licita-o-fracassada-permite-dispensa-4f7c45f9\"><strong class=\"schema-faq-question\">Does a failed procurement allow a waiver?<\/strong> <p class=\"schema-faq-answer\">Yes, in the situations covered by Art. 75, III, such as absence of valid proposals or prices manifestly above the market, provided the other legal requirements are met.<\/p><\/div><div class=\"schema-faq-section\" id=\"faq-question-obrigat-rio-contratar-diretamente-ap-s-uma-licit-29594c22\"><strong class=\"schema-faq-question\">Is direct contracting mandatory after a deserted procurement?<\/strong> <p class=\"schema-faq-answer\">No. The waiver is a possibility, not an obligation. The Administration should compare direct contracting with holding a new procurement and justify the most advantageous alternative.<\/p><\/div><div class=\"schema-faq-section\" id=\"faq-question-se-o-edital-estava-errado-pode-usar-o-art-75-iii-37e17c0a\"><strong class=\"schema-faq-question\">If the tender documents were flawed, can Art. 75, III be used?<\/strong> <p class=\"schema-faq-answer\">The TCU advises that direct contracting should not be used when the failure was caused by manifest errors of the Administration, such as restrictive requirements, insufficient schedule or inconsistencies in the tender documents. In such cases, the tendency is to correct the process and retender.<\/p><\/div><div class=\"schema-faq-section\" id=\"faq-question-se-todas-as-propostas-ficaram-acima-do-or-amento-32940d62\"><strong class=\"schema-faq-question\">If all proposals were above budget, is the procurement failed?<\/strong> <p class=\"schema-faq-answer\">It may be considered failed when, after the applicable stages and negotiations, there is no acceptable proposal. Before that, Art. 61, negotiation and the alignment of the estimated budget with the market must be examined.<\/p><\/div><div class=\"schema-faq-section\" id=\"faq-question-a-recusa-do-vencedor-em-assinar-o-contrato-trans-e7954e6c\"><strong class=\"schema-faq-question\">Does the winner&#8217;s refusal to sign the contract turn the procurement into a failed one?<\/strong> <p class=\"schema-faq-answer\">Not necessarily. Art. 90 provides specific mechanisms for calling remaining bidders and negotiating before concluding that a new procurement is necessary.<\/p><\/div><div class=\"schema-faq-section\" id=\"faq-question-pode-alterar-o-prazo-e-o-escopo-e-contratar-dire-47851cb8\"><strong class=\"schema-faq-question\">Can the schedule and scope be changed and direct contracting used after a deserted procurement?<\/strong> <p class=\"schema-faq-answer\">Material changes are incompatible with the Art. 75, III requirement to maintain the conditions of the previous tender documents. If the object needs substantial correction, a new procurement tends to be the appropriate path.<\/p><\/div><\/div>\n<\/details>\n\n\n\n<details class=\"wp-block-details is-layout-flow wp-block-details-is-layout-flow\"><summary>Complementary technical materials<\/summary>\n<h4 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Main content on the topic<\/h4>\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\"><li><a href=\"https:\/\/a3aengenharia.com.br\/conteudo\/artigos-tecnicos\/revisao-tecnica-termo-referencia-erros-licitacao-aditivos\/\">Technical review of Terms of Reference: errors that lead to challenges, deserted procurements and contract amendments<\/a><\/li><li><a href=\"https:\/\/a3aengenharia.com.br\/conteudo\/artigos-tecnicos\/sobrepreco-superfaturamento-preco-inexequivel-diferencas\/\">Overpricing, overbilling and unfeasible price: differences and technical evidence<\/a><\/li><\/ul>\n\n<h4 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Related technical content<\/h4>\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\"><li><a href=\"https:\/\/a3aengenharia.com.br\/conteudo\/artigos-tecnicos\/modo-disputa-aberto-fechado-licitacoes-engenharia-lei-14133\/\">Open vs. closed bidding mode under Law 14,133<\/a><\/li><li><a href=\"https:\/\/a3aengenharia.com.br\/conteudo\/artigos-tecnicos\/pregao-pode-ser-usado-para-obra-lei-14133\/\">Can preg\u00e3o be used for public works? What Law 14,133 allows<\/a><\/li><li><a href=\"https:\/\/a3aengenharia.com.br\/conteudo\/guias-tecnicos\/guia-completo-sobre-licitacoes-e-contratos-de-engenharia\/\">Complete Guide to Procurement and Contracts for Public Works and Engineering Services<\/a><\/li><\/ul>\n\n<h4 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Related services<\/h4>\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\"><li><a href=\"https:\/\/a3aengenharia.com.br\/servicos\/planejamento\/revisao-tecnica-edital-anexos-licitacoes-engenharia\/\">Technical Review of Tender Documents and Appendices for Engineering Procurement<\/a><\/li><li><a href=\"https:\/\/a3aengenharia.com.br\/servicos\/planejamento\/revisao-tecnica-termo-referencia-obras-servicos-engenharia\/\">Technical Review of Terms of Reference for Public Works and Engineering Services<\/a><\/li><li><a href=\"https:\/\/a3aengenharia.com.br\/servicos\/servicos-transversais\/apoio-tecnico-licitacao-analise-propostas-engenharia\/\">Technical Support for Procurement and Proposal Analysis<\/a><\/li><\/ul>\n<\/details>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Understand the difference between deserted and failed procurement, when waiver under Art. 75, III of Law 14,133 may apply and how to diagnose failure in engineering works.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"parent":0,"template":"","meta":{"_a3a_global_related_solutions":[],"_a3a_global_related_services":[],"_a3a_global_related_materials":[],"_a3a_post_lang":"en-us","_a3a_translation_group_id":"8d595ec6-0005-4811-8d16-5bfe4e91b856","_a3a_i18n_canonical_slug":"deserted-failed-procurement-law-14133-engineering-works"},"categories":[],"segments":[],"mercados":[],"etapas":[],"class_list":["post-74145","articles","type-articles","status-publish","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/a3aengenharia.com\/en-us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/articles\/74145","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/a3aengenharia.com\/en-us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/articles"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/a3aengenharia.com\/en-us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/articles"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/a3aengenharia.com\/en-us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/a3aengenharia.com\/en-us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/articles\/74145\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":74147,"href":"https:\/\/a3aengenharia.com\/en-us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/articles\/74145\/revisions\/74147"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/a3aengenharia.com\/en-us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=74145"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/a3aengenharia.com\/en-us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=74145"},{"taxonomy":"segments","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/a3aengenharia.com\/en-us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/segments?post=74145"},{"taxonomy":"mercados","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/a3aengenharia.com\/en-us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/mercados?post=74145"},{"taxonomy":"etapas","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/a3aengenharia.com\/en-us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/etapas?post=74145"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}