48 C.F.R. § 33.204
33.204 Policy.
The Government's policy is to try to resolve all contractual issues in controversy by mutual agreement at the contracting officer's level. Reasonable efforts should be made to resolve controversies prior to the submission of a claim. Agencies are encouraged to use ADR procedures to the maximum extent practicable. Certain factors, however, may make the use of ADR inappropriate (see 5 U.S.C. 572(b)). Except for arbitration conducted pursuant to the Administrative Dispute Resolution Act (ADRA), (5 U.S.C. 571, et seq.), agencies have authority which is separate from that provided by the ADRA to use ADR procedures to resolve issues in controversy. Agencies may also elect to proceed under the authority and requirements of the ADRA.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4
cases, 1995–2010 · leading case: M. Maropakis Carpentry, Inc. v. United States
M. Maropakis Carpentry, Inc. v. United States (2010)
“See 48 C.F.R. § 33.204 ; Reflectone, 60 F.3d at 1580 .”
Donald H. Rumsfeld, Secretary of Defense v. Freedom Ny, Inc., Freedom Ny, Inc. v. Donald H. Rumsfeld, Secretary of Defen (2003)
“” 48 C.F.R. § 33.204 (2002). The prompt settlement of those disputes serves the interests of the contractor, the government, and the public at large.”
Bill Strong Enterprises, Inc. v. John Shannon, Acting Secretary of the Army (1995)
“See 48 C.F.R. § 33.204 (1987) (“It is the Government’s policy to try to resolve all contractual issues by mutual agreement at the contracting officer’s level, without litigation.”
Plano Builders Corp. v. United States (1998)
“See 48 C.F.R. § 33.204 (1987) (“It is the Government’s policy to try to resolve all contractual issues by mutual agreement at the contracting officer’s level, without litigation.”
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.