18 C.F.R. § 1308.4

Coverage of certain excluded Contractors

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) A Contractor whose contract is excluded from this part under § 1308.3(b) may elect to proceed under this part and the Act with respect to any dispute pending before a Contracting Officer on March 1, 1979, or initiated thereafter. If the disputes clause in the contract is not an “all disputes” clause (see Patton Wrecking & Dem. Co. v. Tennessee Valley Authority, 465 F.2d 1073 (5th Cir. 1972)), a Contractor's election under this section shall cause the provisions of the first two sentences of section 6(a) of the Act to apply to the contract, and such an election shall be irrevocable.

(b) A Contractor makes an election under paragraph (a) of this section by giving written notice to the Contracting Officer stating that the Contractor elects to proceed with the dispute under the Act. For disputes pending on March 1, 1979, the notice shall be actually received by the Contracting Officer within 30 days after the Contractor receives the Contracting Officer's decision. For disputes initiated thereafter, the notice shall be included in the document first requesting a decision by the Contracting Officer.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 2 cases, 1982–1985 · leading case: Massman Constr. Co. v. Tennessee Valley Auth., 769 F.2d 1114 (6th Cir. 1985).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Massman Constr. Co. v. Tennessee Valley Auth., 769 F.2d 1114 (6th Cir. 1985). · cites it 5× “Does the Contract Disputes Act apply? The trial court reached the following negative conclusion with respect to this question: Plaintiff’s rights to proceed under the Contract Disputes Act are regulated by the provisions of 18 C.F.R. § 1308.4 (1983). This section requires that…”

Brown & Root Dev., Inc. v. Tennessee Valley Auth., 681 F.2d 1313 (11th Cir. 1982). “18 C.F.R. § 1308.4 (b). For claims initiated after the effective date, the contractor had to include the notice in the document first requesting a decision by the contracting officer.”

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.