U.S. Code » Title 5 » Part PART I— THE AGENCIES GENERALLY › Chapter CHAPTER 3— POWERS › Subchapter SUBCHAPTER I— GENERAL PROVISIONS

5 U.S.C. § 302

Delegation of authority

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 5 CasesGoogle Scholar
(a) For the purpose of this section, “agency” has the meaning given it by section 5721 of this title.(b) In addition to the authority to delegate conferred by other law, the head of an agency may delegate to subordinate officials the authority vested in him—(1) by law to take final action on matters pertaining to the employment, direction, and general administration of personnel under his agency; and(2) by section 3702 of title 44 to authorize the publication of advertisements, notices, or proposals.(Pub. L. 89–554, Sept. 6, 1966, 80 Stat. 379; Pub. L. 94–183, § 2(1), Dec. 31, 1975, 89 Stat. 1057.)

Historical and Revision Notes

Derivation

U.S. Code

Revised Statutes and

Statutes at Large

 

5 U.S.C. 22a.

Aug. 2, 1946, ch. 744, § 12, 60 Stat. 809.

Clause (2) of former section 22a is omitted because of the repeal of R.S. § 3683 (31 U.S.C. 675) by the Act of Sept. 12, 1950, ch. 946, § 301(76), 64 Stat. 843.

The word “agency” is substituted for “department” and defined to conform to the definition of “department” in section 18 of the Act of Aug. 2, 1946, ch. 744, 60 Stat. 811.

In subsection (b), the words “In addition to the authority to delegate conferred by other law,” are added for clarity and in recognition of the various reorganization plans which generally have transferred all functions of the departments and agencies to the heads thereof and have authorized them to delegate the functions to subordinates.

Standard changes are made to conform with the definitions applicable and the style of this title as outlined in the preface to the report.

Editorial NotesAmendments

1975—Subsec. (b)(2). Pub. L. 94–183 substituted “3702” for “324”.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 22 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1978–2026 · leading case: Dist. of Columbia v. United States, 67 Fed. Cl. 292 (Fed. Cl. 2005).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Dist. of Columbia v. United States, 67 Fed. Cl. 292 (Fed. Cl. 2005). · cites it 2× “, 5 U.S.C. §§ 302 , 902, 5721. Divisions of an executive agency are also referred to as agencies, and have been for some time.”
Baca v. Dep't of Army, 983 F.3d 1131 (10th Cir. 2020). “5 U.S.C. § 302 (b)(14)(ii); see, e.g., Kahn v.”
Nasa v. Flra, 527 U.S. 229 (1999). “Along those lines, respondent AFGE contends that OIG's representative must have been acting for agency management by threatening P with discipline because only NASA's Administrator and his delegates, 5 U. S. C. § 302 (b)(1); 42 U. S. C. § 2472 (a), have the authority to…”
Local 2855, AFGE (AFL-CIO) v. United States, 602 F.2d 574 (3d Cir. 1979). “5 U.S.C. § 302 (1976). . 5 U.S.C. § 305 (1976).”
SGA Fin. Corp. v. United States Small Bus. Admin., 509 F. Supp. 392 (D.N.J. 1981). “” 5 U.S.C. § 302 (1976) gives the heads of department the power to delegate this authority.”
Dist. of Columbia v. White, 435 A.2d 1055 (D.C. 1981). “6055 (1978). . The assumption that statutory authority is necessary for valid delegation by an agency is incorrect.”
Nat'l Treasury Employees Union v. Reagan, 663 F.2d 239 (D.C. Cir. 1981). “II, § 2; 5 U.S.C. §§ 302 , 3101 (1976); Federal Personnel Manual, ch.”
Nat'l Aeronautics & Space Admin. v. Fed. Labor Relations Auth., 527 U.S. 229 (1999). “Along those lines, respondent AFGE contends that OIG’s representative must have been acting for agency management by threatening P with discipline because only NASA’s Administrator and his delegates, 5 U. S. C. § 302 (b)(1); 42 U. S. C. § 2472 (a), have the authority to…”
Illinois Com. Fishing Ass'n v. Salazar, 867 F. Supp. 2d 108 (D.D.C. 2012). “It is well established that the Secretary of the Interior is authorized to delegate agency functions to other personnel within the agency, see 5 U.S.C. § 302 , and he properly delegated implementation of the ESA to FWS over 30 years ago.”
Nat'l Aeronautics & Space Admin. v. Fed. Labor Relations Auth., 527 U.S. 229 (1999). “Along those lines, respondent AFGE contends that OIG’s representative must have been acting for agency management by threatening P with discipline because only NASA’s Administrator and his delegates, 5 U. S. C. § 302 (b)(1); 42 U. S. C. § 2472 (a), have the authority to…”
Skokomish Indian Tribe v. Gen. Servs. Admin., 587 F.2d 428 (9th Cir. 1978). “See 5 U.S.C. § 302 ; Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1950; 5 U.”
Reid v. United States, No. 17-205 (Fed. Cl. June 14, 2019). · cites it 2× “§ 301 and 5 U.S.C. § 302 . Id. at 100 (CMPI 1.1-1).”
Show all 22 citing cases →
5 U.S.C. § 302(b): 1 case
Jane Does I, II, III v. Scalia, No. 3:20-cv-01260 (M.D. Pa. Mar. 30, 2021).
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.