C.F.R. » Title 48 » CHAPTER 1—FEDERAL ACQUISITION REGULATION › SUBCHAPTER A—GENERAL › PART 1—FEDERAL ACQUISITION REGULATIONS SYSTEM › Subpart 1.7—Determinations and Findings

48 C.F.R. § 1.704

1.704 Content.

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

Each D&F shall set forth enough facts and circumstances to clearly and convincingly justify the specific determination made. As a minimum, each D&F shall include, in the prescribed agency format, the following information:

(a) Identification of the agency and of the contracting activity and specific identifications of the document as a Determination and Findings.

(b) Nature and/or description of the action being approved.

(c) Citation of the appropriate statute and/or regulation upon which the D&F is based.

(d) Findings that detail the particular circumstances, facts, or reasoning essential to support the determination. Necessary supporting documentation shall be obtained from appropriate requirements and technical personnel.

(e) A determination, based on the findings, that the proposed action is justified under the applicable statute or regulation.

(f) Expiration date of the D&F, if required (see 1.706(b)).

(g) The signature of the official authorized to sign the D&F (see 1.706) and the date signed.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4 cases, 2003–2017 · leading case: Clinicomp Int'l, Inc. v. United States, 134 Fed. Cl. 736 (Fed. Cl. 2017).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Clinicomp Int'l, Inc. v. United States, 134 Fed. Cl. 736 (Fed. Cl. 2017). · cites it 4× “48 C.F.R. § 1.704 (2017), While the Court does not second guess the agency’s determination of what constitutes the public interest, the Court must confirm that the D & F clearly and convincingly justifies the agency head’s decision to invoke the public interest exception.”
Spherix, Inc. v. United States, 62 Fed. Cl. 497 (Fed. Cl. 2004). · cites it 2× “§ 3553 (d)(3)(C) and 48 C.F.R. §§ 1.704 and 33.104(c)(2) (2000).”
Spherix, Inc. v. United States, 58 Fed. Cl. 351 (Fed. Cl. 2003). · cites it 2× “” 48 C.F.R. § 1.704 . Plaintiff further argues that § 1.”
Spherix, Inc. v. United States, 58 Fed. Cl. 514 (Fed. Cl. 2003). “48 C.F.R. § 1.704 . In form, all of these requirements are met by the D & F attached to the Secretary’s written determination.”
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.