48 C.F.R. § 1.601
1.601 General.
(a) Unless specifically prohibited by another provision of law, authority and responsibility to contract for authorized supplies and services are vested in the agency head. The agency head may establish contracting activities and delegate broad authority to manage the agency's contracting functions to heads of such contracting activities. Contracts may be entered into and signed on behalf of the Government only by contracting officers. In some agencies, a relatively small number of high level officials are designated contracting officers solely by virtue of their positions. Contracting officers below the level of a head of a contracting activity shall be selected and appointed under 1.603.
(b) Agency heads may mutually agree to—
(1) Assign contracting functions and responsibilities from one agency to another; and
(2) Create joint or combined offices to exercise acquisition functions and responsibilities.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 24
cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1989–2025 · leading case: Winter v. Cath-dr/Balti Jt. Venture, 497 F.3d 1339 (Fed. Cir. 2007).
Winter v. Cath-dr/Balti Jt. Venture, 497 F.3d 1339 (Fed. Cir. 2007). “See 48 C.F.R. § 1.601 (a) (vesting agency heads with authority to contract for supplies and services and mandating that "[c]ontracts may be entered into and signed on behalf of the Government only by contracting officers"); 48 C.”
William O. Schism & Robert Reinlie v. United States, 316 F.3d 1259 (Fed. Cir. 2002). “2001) (wherein Congress granted the Secretary of the Interior the express authority to contract with the State of California regarding certain water projects); 48 C.F.R. § 1.601 (vesting the “agency head” with express “authority and responsibility to contract for authorized…”
Flexfab, L.L.C. v. United States, 424 F.3d 1254 (Fed. Cir. 2005). “See 48 C.F.R. § 1.601 (2004) (“Contracts may be entered into and signed on behalf of the Government only by contracting officers.”
Trauma Serv. Grp. v. United States, 104 F.3d 1321 (Fed. Cir. 1997). “An MTF commander would have independent authority if he were also a duly appointed contracting officer, such as within the meaning of 48 C.F.R. § 1.601 and 41 U.S.C. § 601 . 4 .”
Aboo v. United States, 86 Fed. Cl. 618 (Fed. Cl. 2009). “United States, 48 Fed.Cl. 495, 503 (2000) (finding that DEA agents lacked the authority to bind the agency given that the “DEA’s internal procedures expressly preclude DEA agents from exercising contractual authority”); see also Def.”
Doe v. United States, 58 Fed. Cl. 479 (Fed. Cl. 2003). “A delegation of procurement authority (DPA) executed by her or her predecessor is required for a DEA employee to enter into contractual obligations on behalf of the DEA, and thus the United States, Federal Acquisition Regulations, 48 C.F.R. §§ 1.601 , 1.602-1; Def.’s Supp.”
Tracy v. United States, 55 Fed. Cl. 679 (Fed. Cl. 2003). “48 C.F.R. §§ 1.601 ,1.602.1. According to the declaration of Christinia Sisk, Deputy Assistant Administrator for the Office of Acquisition Management, DEA, who supervises all contract and small purchase activities within the DEA, none of the DEA agents referenced by plaintiff…”
Washington State Dep't of Servs. for the Blind v. United States, 58 Fed. Cl. 781 (Fed. Cl. 2003). “Defendant argues that “[ultimately, the decision regarding whether [RSA] applies to a particular procurement is made by the contracting officer for the procuring agency.”
Demodulation, Inc. v. United States, 103 Fed. Cl. 794 (Fed. Cl. 2012). “See 48 C.F.R. § 1.601 (a) (2011) ("[Procurement cjontracts may be entered into and signed on behalf of the Government only by contracting officers.”
Gary v. United States, 67 Fed. Cl. 202 (Fed. Cl. 2005). “” 48 C.F.R. § 1.601 (a). “Agency heads or their designees may select and appoint contracting officers and terminate their appointments.”
Doe v. United States, 48 Fed. Cl. 495 (Fed. Cl. 2000). “Christinia Sisk, the Deputy Assistant Administrator for the Office of Acquisition Management of DEA, who supervises all contract and small purchase activities at DEA, neither she nor her predecessor executed a delegation of procurement authority, pursuant to Title 48 C.F.R. §§…”
Wagner v. Fed. Election Comm'n, 854 F. Supp. 2d 83 (D.D.C. 2012). “(citing 48 C.F.R. § 1.601 (a)). *94 This wall between elected federal officials and agency heads is hardly as impassable as Plaintiffs make out.”
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.