U.S. Code
»
Title 41
» Subtitle Subtitle I— Federal Procurement Policy › Division Division A— General › Chapter CHAPTER 1— DEFINITIONS › Subchapter SUBCHAPTER III— DIVISION C DEFINITIONS
41 U.S.C. § 153
Simplified acquisition threshold for contract in support of humanitarian or peacekeeping operation
(1)In general.—In division C, the term “simplified acquisition threshold” has the meaning provided that term in section 134 of this title, except that, in the case of a contract to be awarded and performed, or purchase to be made, outside the United States in support of a humanitarian or peacekeeping operation, the term means an amount equal to two times the amount specified for that term in section 134 of this title.(2)Definition.—In paragraph (1), the term “humanitarian or peacekeeping operation” means a military operation in support of the provision of humanitarian or foreign disaster assistance or in support of a peacekeeping operation under chapter VI or VII of the Charter of the United Nations. The term does not include routine training, force rotation, or stationing.(Pub. L. 111–350, § 3, Jan. 4, 2011, 124 Stat. 3683.)Historical and Revision Notes |
|---|
153(1) | 41:259(d)(1). | June 30, 1949, ch. 288, title III, § 309(d)(1), as added Pub. L. 103–355, title I, § 1551, Oct. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 3299; Pub. L. 104–201, title VIII, § 807(b)(1), (2), Sept. 23, 1996, 110 Stat. 2606. |
153(2) | 41:259(d)(2). | June 30, 1949, ch. 288, title III, § 309(d)(2), as added Pub. L. 104–201, title VIII, § 807(b)(3), Sept. 23, 1996, 110 Stat. 2606. |
In paragraph (1), the words “a contingency operation or”, and the text of 41 U.S.C. 259(d)(2)(A), are omitted because the increased simplified acquisition threshold established under section 32A of the Office of Federal Procurement Policy Act (Public Law 93–400) in the case of a contract to be awarded and performed, or purchase to be made, outside the United States in support of a contingency operation supersedes the threshold established under this section. Section 32A is restated as section 1903 of the revised title.
Notes of Decisions
Le John Mfg. Co. v. Dwight Webb, Jr., 222 F.2d 48 (D.C. Cir. 1955).
“At the time the arrangement in this case was made, the Executive Order required Government procurement contracts to contain the following warranty: “The contractor warrants that he has not employed any person to solicit or secure this contract upon any agreement for a…”
Nat'l Elec. Labs., Inc. v. United States, 180 F. Supp. 337 (Ct. Cl. 1960).
“21 , 41 U.S. C. § 153(b) 1 says “The cost-plus-a-percentage-of-cost system of contracting shall not be used, and in the case of a cost-plus-a-fixed-fee contract the fee shall not exceed 10 per centum of the estimated cost of the contract, exclusive of the fee * * If, in the face…”
Vogt Bros. Mfg. Co. v. Stansbury, 304 S.W.2d 787 (Ky. Ct. App. 1957).
“The Act and the Order both provide that a person entering into a prime contract with an agency of the Department of Defense must warrant that “no person or selling agency has been employed or retained to solicit or secure such contract upon an agreement or understanding for a…”
— 41 U.S.C. § 153(b) — 1 case
Nat'l Elec. Labs., Inc. v. United States, 180 F. Supp. 337 (Ct. Cl. 1960).
“21 , 41 U.S. C. § 153(b) 1 says “The cost-plus-a-percentage-of-cost system of contracting shall not be used, and in the case of a cost-plus-a-fixed-fee contract the fee shall not exceed 10 per centum of the estimated cost of the contract, exclusive of the fee * * If, in the face…”
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.