Unauthorized Commitment and Ratification

FAR 1.602-1 puts contracting authority in the warrant, and 1.602-3 handles what happens when a program manager or COR orders work anyway. The vendor performs and invoices, and no contract exists. FAR 1.602-3(b) tells agencies to ratify rather than send the vendor to GAO, while insisting the procedure not encourage the practice.

Ratification authority sits with the head of the contracting activity unless the agency designates a higher official, and can be delegated no lower than the chief of the contracting office. Every condition in 1.602-3(c) must hold: the government accepted the work or received a benefit, the ratifying official could have entered the commitment when it was made, the contract would otherwise have been proper, the contracting officer finds the price fair and reasonable and recommends payment, legal counsel concurs unless agency procedures waive that step, funds were available at the time of the commitment, and agency procedures are followed.

The funds test is where packages die: availability is measured when the commitment was made, not when the file reaches the ratifying official. A case that fails any condition goes to 1.602-3(d): GAO claims procedures or extraordinary relief under FAR Subpart 50.1, and the FAR says to get legal advice first.