31 U.S.C. § 6301

Purposes

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 31 CasesGoogle Scholar

The purposes of this chapter are to—(1) promote a better understanding of United States Government expenditures and help eliminate unnecessary administrative requirements on recipients of Government awards by characterizing the relationship between executive agencies and contractors, States, local governments, and other recipients in acquiring property and services and in providing United States Government assistance;(2) prescribe criteria for executive agencies in selecting appropriate legal instruments to achieve—(A) uniformity in their use by executive agencies;(B) a clear definition of the relationships they reflect; and(C) a better understanding of the responsibilities of the parties to them; and(3) promote increased discipline in selecting and using procurement contracts, grant agreements, and cooperative agreements, maximize competition in making procurement contracts, and encourage competition in making grants and cooperative agreements.(Pub. L. 97–258, Sept. 13, 1982, 96 Stat. 1003.)

Historical and Revision Notes
Revised Section	Source (U.S. Code)	Source (Statutes at Large)
6301	41:501.	Feb. 3, 1978, Pub. L. 95–224, § 2, 92 Stat. 3.

In the chapter, the words “procurement contract” are substituted for “contract” for consistency.

The text of 41:501(a) and (b)(4) is omitted as executed.

Statutory Notes and Related SubsidiariesEnvironmental Protection Agency; Agreements and Grants Affecting Real Property in the District of Columbia

Pub. L. 106–522, § 153, Nov. 22, 2000, 114 Stat. 2474, provided that:“(a) Nothing in the Federal Grant and Cooperative Agreements Act of 1977 (31 U.S.C. 6301 et seq.) may be construed to prohibit the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency from negotiating and entering into cooperative agreements and grants authorized by law which affect real property of the Federal Government in the District of Columbia if the principal purpose of the cooperative agreement or grant is to provide comparable benefits for Federal and non-Federal properties in the District of Columbia.“(b) Subsection (a) shall apply with respect to fiscal year 2001 and each succeeding fiscal year.”

Similar provisions were contained in Pub. L. 106–553, § 1(a)(1) [§ 153], Dec. 21, 2000, 114 Stat. 2762, 2762A–37, which was repealed, and deemed for all purposes to have never been enacted, by Pub. L. 106–554, § 1(a)(4) [div. A, § 406(a)], Dec. 21, 2000, 114 Stat. 2763, 2763A–189, effective as if included in Pub. L. 106–553 on the date of its enactment. See section 1(a)(4) [div. A, § 406] of Pub. L. 106–554, set out as an Effective Date and Construction of 2000 Amendment note under section 1155 of Title 20, Education.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 37 cases (7 in the last 5 years), 1985–2026 · leading case: Hymas v. United States, 810 F.3d 1312 (Fed. Cir. 2016).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Hymas v. United States, 810 F.3d 1312 (Fed. Cir. 2016). · cites it 4× “” 31 U.S.C. § 6301 (2). Congress intends the FGCAA to “eliminate unnecessary administrative requirements on recipients of Government awards by characterizing the relationship between executive agencies and contractors, States, local governments, and other recipients in acquiring…”

St. Bernard Par. Gov't v. United States, 916 F.3d 987 (Fed. Cir. 2019). “Bernard under the authority of the Federal Grant and Cooperative Agreement Act ("FGCAA"), 31 U.S.C. §§ 6301 - 08. The agreement provided that, under the provisions of the Emergency Watershed Protection ("EWP") Program, the NRCS was "authorized to assist [St.”

Frankel v. United States, 842 F.3d 1246 (Fed. Cir. 2016). “See 31 U.S.C. § 6301 (1). In passing this chapter, Congress expressed a desire to “promote in *1251 creased discipline in selecting and using procurement contracts, grant agreements, and cooperative agreements.”

William Partridge James Zagorski William Stojack v. Robert B. Reich Helen Haase U.S. Dep't of Labor, 141 F.3d 920 (9th Cir. 1998). “We think it wise to consider the Grant Act because it was designed to “prescribe criteria for executive agencies in selecting appropriate legal instruments to achieve .”

United States v. President & Fellows of Harvard Coll., 323 F. Supp. 2d 151 (D. Mass. 2004). “The Cooperative Agreements are Contracts The two Cooperative Agreements in this case were entered into subject to the Fed *164 eral Grant and Cooperative Agreement Act of 1977, 31 U.S.C. §§ 6301 et seq. (“FGCAA”). The FGCAA distinguishes between three types of instruments:…”

Westmoreland Human Opportunities, Inc. v. James R. Walsh, Tr. of the Bankr. Est. of Life Serv. Sys., Inc. Life Serv. Sys., Inc, 246 F.3d 233 (3rd Cir. 2001). “31 U.S.C. § 6301 (2). For an overview of the relationship between the various federal assistance instruments, and an examination of the legal issues they raise, see generally Jeffrey C.”

name.space, Inc. v. Network Solutions, Inc. & Nat'l Sci. Found., 202 F.3d 573 (2d Cir. 2000). “, and the Federal Grant and Cooperative Agreement Act, 31 U.S.C. § 6301 et seq. Article 3 of the Cooperative Agreement states that NSI shall provide domain name registration services in accordance with RFC 1174.”

St. Bernard Par. Gov't v. United States, 134 Fed. Cl. 730 (Fed. Cl. 2017). “11; Federal Grant and Cooperative Agreement Act 31 U.S.C. §§ 6301 et seq.-, Anchorage v. United States, 119 Fed.”

CMS Contract Mgmt. Servs. v. Massachusetts Hous. Fin. Agency, 745 F.3d 1379 (Fed. Cir. 2014). “31 U.S.C. § 6301 . In pertinent part, “[a]n executive agency shall use a procurement contract as the legal instrument .”

Thermalon Indus., Ltd. v. United States, 34 Fed. Cl. 411 (Fed. Cl. 1995). “Next, as alternative support for its contention that this court’s Tucker Act jurisdiction covers only contracts involving the government’s proprietary procurement of goods and services, defendant relies upon the Federal Grant and Cooperative Agreement Act of 1977, 31 U.S.C. §…”

Trs. of the Univ. of the Dist. of Columbia v. Vossoughi, 963 A.2d 1162 (D.C. 2009). “31 U.S.C. § 6301 , et seq.; 45 CFR Part 74; NSF Grants Policy Manual.”

Wanda Henke & Robert Henke v. United States Dep't of Com. & Nat'l Sci. Found., 83 F.3d 1445 (D.C. Cir. 1996). “§§ 1891-93 (repealed), and its successor, the Federal Grant and Cooperative Agreement Act of 1977 (FGCAA), 31 U.S.C. §§ 6301 et seq., Congress drew a distinction between grants and procurement contracts.”

Show all 37 citing cases →

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.