10 U.S.C. § 2462
Repealed. Pub. L. 113–291, div. A, title X, § 1060(a)(2)(A), Dec. 19, 2014, 128 Stat. 3502]
[repealed]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 13
cases, 1991–2005 · leading case: Labat-Anderson, Inc. v. United States, 65 Fed. Cl. 570 (Fed. Cl. 2005).
Labat-Anderson, Inc. v. United States, 65 Fed. Cl. 570 (Fed. Cl. 2005). “See 10 U.S.C. § 2462 . Government counsel argued to this court that the circumstances of this case were not covered by Circular A-76 and similar Department of Defense regulations, yet the Government’s use of the deviation letter from OMB suggested that they were.”
Info. Handling Servs., Inc. v. Def. Automated Printing Servs., 338 F.3d 1024 (D.C. Cir. 2003). “First, IHS asserted that DAPS had developed and was continuing to maintain ASSIST OnLine without first determining through a bona fide cost comparison that it could do so at lower cost than the private sector, as required by 10 U.S.C. § 2462 and the relevant DoD procurement…”
Am. Fed'n of Gov't Employees v. United States, 46 Fed. Cl. 586 (Fed. Cl. 2000). “IV 1998)) (“FAIR”) and the Defense Authorization Act, 10 U.S.C. § 2462 (b) (1994). 3 The government argues that plaintiffs do not have standing under the cited statutes to challenge the cost comparison, and therefore, this action should be dismissed.”
Am. Fed'n of Gov't Employees, Local 2119 v. William S. Cohen, 171 F.3d 460 (7th Cir. 1999). “While we agree with the district court that the plaintiffs do not have standing to challenge violations of the procurement and contracting statutes ( 10 U.S.C. § 2462 and 10 U.S.C. § 2304 ), we believe they have met the standing requirements with respect to the Arsenal Act, and…”
John M. Courtney, Larry E. Troutman, & Malcolm A. Webster v. David R. Smith, Major Gen., Vice Commander of the Hqafrc/cv, 297 F.3d 455 (6th Cir. 2002). “§ 2461 , (3) require the DOD to obtain supplies and services from private sector sources if “realistic and fair” cost comparisons reveal that reliance on private contractors would be more economical than the use of federal civilian employees, 10 U.S.C. § 2462 , (4) oblige the…”
Labat-Anderson, Inc. v. United States, 346 F. Supp. 2d 145 (D.D.C. 2004). “LABAT-Anderson argues that the DDC’s conversion to in-house personnel without first issuing a solicitation for bids or conducting a cost comparison study violates the Administrative Procedure Act (“APA”) because it is agency action that conflicts with several sources of…”
Diebold v. United States, 947 F.2d 787 (6th Cir. 1991). “See 10 U.S.C. § 2462 . Office of Management and Budget (“OMB”) Circular A-76 and its accompanying Supplement set out an elaborate, mandatory process for comparing the costs of in-house and private production.”
Americable Int'l, Inc. v. Dep't of Navy, 129 F.3d 1271 (D.C. Cir. 1997). “10 U.S.C. § 2462 (a). To implement this mandate the Department of Defense has promulgated a regulation requiring: When performance by a commercial source is permissible, a comparison of the cost of contracting and the cost of in-house performance shall be performed to determine…”
Am. Fed'n of Gov't Employees v. United States, 258 F.3d 1294 (Fed. Cir. 2001). “§ 501 (Historical and Statutory Notes), or 10 U.S.C. § 2462 (1994). Because we determine that Appellants lack standing under 28 U.”
JWK Int'l Corp. v. United States, 52 Fed. Cl. 650 (Fed. Cl. 2002). “Plaintiff also asserts that, in conducting the A-76 comparison here, defendant also violated 10 U.S.C. § 2462 by not conducting a cost comparison despite the rejection of JWK’s proposal.”
Am. Fed'n of Gov't Employees v. Babbitt, 143 F. Supp. 2d 927 (S.D. Ohio 2001). “1999) (citing Cheney for the proposition that civilian employees who challenge a federal agency out-sourcing decision are not within the “zone of interests” protected or regulated by 10 U.S.C. § 2462 and § 2463, both of which are cited by the Plaintiffs herein); American…”
Space Mark, Inc. v. United States, 45 Fed. Cl. 267 (Fed. Cl. 1999). “See 10 U.S.C. § 2462 (b) (1994); Office of Management and Budget ("OMB”) Circular A-76 and its Supplement.”
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.