C.F.R. » Title 48 » CHAPTER 1—FEDERAL ACQUISITION REGULATION › SUBCHAPTER A—GENERAL › PART 1—FEDERAL ACQUISITION REGULATIONS SYSTEM › Subpart 1.6—Career Development, Contracting Authority, and Responsibilities

48 C.F.R. § 1.602-1

1.602-1 Authority.

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

(a) Contracting officers have authority to enter into, administer, or terminate contracts and make related determinations and findings. Contracting officers may bind the Government only to the extent of the authority delegated to them. Contracting officers shall receive from the appointing authority (see 1.603-1) clear instructions in writing regarding the limits of their authority. Information on the limits of the contracting officers' authority shall be readily available to the public and agency personnel.

(b) No contract shall be entered into unless the contracting officer ensures that all requirements of law, executive orders, regulations, and all other applicable procedures, including clearances and approvals, have been met.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 16 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1992–2025 · leading case: Winter v. Cath-dr/Balti Joint Venture
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Winter v. Cath-dr/Balti Joint Venture (2007) cafc · cites it 2× “See 48 C.F.R. §§ 1.602-1 , -2. When authorized, the contracting officer may delegate some of its authority to certain designated representatives, who act on behalf of the government during contract administration.”
Phillip Layton v. United States of America, Reba J. Richardson, Administratrix of the Estate of Ronnie Richardson, Decea (1993) ca8 “”); 48 C.F.R. § 1.602-1 (b) (1991) (“No contract shall be entered into unless the contracting officer ensures that .”
OSG Product Tankers LLC v. United States (2008) uscfc “See 48 C.F.R. § 1.602-1 (b) (“No contract should be entered into unless the contracting officer ensures that all requirements of law, .”
GULF GROUP GENERAL ENTERPRISES CO. W.L.L., Plaintiff, v. UNITED STATES, Defendant (2013) uscfc “” (citing 48 C.F.R. § 1.602-1 )). In sum, defendant has not adequately connected the dots between Mr.”
Council for Tribal Employment Rights v. United States (2013) uscfc “” 48 C.F.R. § 1.602-1 (a). In this instance, information about Ms.”
Industrial Property Management, Inc. v. United States (2004) uscfc “48 C.F.R. § 1.602-1 (2003). The weight that is to be accorded to each factor and subfactor is set out in the RFP itself.”
S & M Management Inc. v. United States (2008) uscfc “” 48 C.F.R. § 1.602-1 (1998). Encompassed within such authority is the power to “execute contract modifications on behalf of the Government.”
Pacord, Inc. v. United States of America a & E Industries, Inc. (1998) ca9 “The FAR specifically limits the authority of contracting officers when it provides that “Contracting officers .”
United States v. Frontier Airlines, Inc. (In Re Frontier Airlines, Inc.) (1992) cod “” 48 C.F.R. § 1.602-1 . By requiring that a claim be submitted in writing to the contracting officer, the regulations again ensure that a written notice of the claim will be directed to the person or persons with the authority and expertise to consider and process the claims.”
GASA, Inc. v. United States (2007) uscfc “” 48 C.F.R. § 1.602-1 ; see Winter v. Cath-dr/Balti Joint Venture, 497 F.”
Winterbottom v. Underriner (2019) hid · cites it 3× “2 (Count 3); (3) violation of 48 C.F.R § 1.602-1 (Count 4); and (4) violation of “at least spirit of” 42 C.”
Winterbottom v. Underriner (2019) hid · cites it 2× “2 (Count 3); (3) violation of 48 C.F.R § 1.602-1 (Count 4); and (4) violation of “at least spirit of” 42 C.”
Show all 16 citing cases →
— 48 C.F.R. § 1.602-1(a) — 1 case
Slsco, Ltd. v. United States (2025) uscfc
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.