§ 501.602-3 - Ratification of unauthorized commitments.

(a) Authority. Under FAR 1.602-3, contracting officers may ratify unauthorized contractual commitments if the HCA approves the ratification action. The HCA may not redelegate this authority.

(b) Procedures. (1) Generally, the Government is not bound by commitments made by persons who do not have contracting authority. Such unauthorized acts may violate laws or regulations. Therefore, unauthorized commitments should be considered as serious employee misconduct and consideration given to initiating disciplinary action. If suspected irregularities may involve fraud against the Government, or any type of misconduct that might be punishable as a criminal offense, either the employee's supervisor or the contracting officer must immediately report the matter to the Office of the Inspector General with a request for a complete investigation.

(2) The individual who made the unauthorized commitment shall furnish the appropriate contracting director all records and documents concerning the commitment and a complete written statement of facts, including, but not limited to, a statement as to why normal acquisition procedures were not followed, why the contractor was selected and a list of other sources considered, description of work or products, estimated or agreed-upon contract price, citation of appropriation available, and a statement regarding the status of the performance. Under exceptional circumstances, such as when the person who made the unauthorized commitment is no longer available to attest to the circumstances of the unauthorized commitment, the contracting director may waive the requirement that the responsible employee initiate and document the request for ratification, provided that a written determination is made stating that a commitment was in fact made by an employee, who must be identified in the determination.

(3) The contracting director will assign the request to a contracting officer for processing. The contracting officer shall prepare a summary statement of facts addressing the limitations in FAR 1.602-3(c) recommending whether or not the transaction should be ratified. Advice against express ratification should include a recommendation for other appropriate disposition. When ratification is not permissible due to legal improprieties in the procurement, the contracting officer may recommend that payment be made for services rendered on a quantum meruit basis (the reasonable value of work or labor) or for goods furnished on a quantum valebant basis (the reasonable value of goods sold and delivered) provided there is a showing that the Government has received a benefit. (See FAR 1.602-3(d).)

(4) The request for ratification, the information required by paragraph (b)(3) of this section and a recommendation for corrective action to preclude recurrence, must be forwarded, through appropriate channels to the HCA for consideration.

(5) The HCA shall approve the ratification in writing, or direct other disposition as appropriate. Acquisitions approved for ratification are returned to the contracting officer for issuance of the necessary contractual documents. If the request for ratification is not justified, the HCA will return the request without approval and provide a written explanation for the decision not to approve ratification.

(6) HCAs shall maintain a separate file containing a copy of each request for approval to ratify an unauthorized contractual commitment and a copy of the response. This file must be made available for review by the Office of Acquisition Policy and the Inspector General.