Georgia Tech Procurement Assistance Center

  • Home
  • About Us
  • Training
    • Class Registration
    • On-demand Training
  • Useful Links
  • Team Directory
    • Albany Counselor
    • Atlanta Counselors
    • Augusta Counselor
    • Carrollton Counselor
    • Columbus Counselor
    • Gainesville Counselor
    • Savannah Counselor
    • Warner Robins Counselor
  • Directions
    • Atlanta – Training Facility
    • Atlanta – Office
    • Albany
    • Augusta
    • Carrollton
    • Columbus
    • Gainesville
    • Savannah
    • Warner Robins
  • New Client Application
  • Contact Us

Construction claims in the COVID era: lessons learned and best practices

February 22, 2021 By Nancy Cleveland

As we move into the second year of a global pandemic, construction contractors are not only taking stock of project delays and disruption experienced to date, but also preparing for more of the same.  What better time than now for contractors to take affirmative steps to protect themselves from default actions and to preserve their right to a time extension and/or contract adjustment.

Delay and Disruption in a Pandemic

As construction contractors well know, delay to agreed-upon construction schedules can result from a host of circumstances. The COVID-19 pandemic presents numerous challenges that may result in such delays, including, for example, project site closures or restrictions; labor impacts due to employee illness, exposure, and/or quarantine; new health and safety protocols such as on-site screenings; supply chain issues; subcontractor impacts; and delays to Government activities such as permitting and issuing approvals.  Of course, the type of delay and the extent to which a contractor may be entitled to additional time or compensation depend on the circumstances.

A threshold question is whether a delay to the project schedule is excusable in the first instance—i.e., whether the contractor will or should be excused from being found in default by virtue of the delay.  The Excusable Delay clause at FAR 52.249-14 provides some guidance.  This clause excuses contractors from default for failure to perform—including failure to make progress in a manner that endangers performance—if the failure “arises from causes beyond the control and without the fault or negligence of the contractor.”  Of potential relevance to COVID-related delays, the clause identifies specific causes deemed beyond contractors’ control.  These include epidemics, acts of God or the public enemy, and quarantine restrictions, among others.

A second question is whether a contractor delayed by such causes is due any relief.  To establish entitlement to an extension of time, the contractor must show that the cause of the delay was unforeseeable, beyond the contractor’s control and without the fault or negligence of the contractor, and that any Government caused delays were not concurrent with delays caused by the contractor.  To establish entitlement not only to time, but also to additional compensation, the contractor must show that the Government was the “sole proximate cause” of the delay such that “the contractor would not have been delayed for any other reason during that period.”

Continue reading at:  Wiley

Filed Under: Contracting Tips Tagged With: construction, delays

This project is behind schedule – what is a contractor to do?

August 8, 2019 By Nancy Cleveland

Construction projects rarely, if ever, go precisely as planned.  One of the most common issues government contractors face is falling behind schedule.  A schedule is developed, and then the contractor is confronted with differing site conditions, changes, or a litany of other causes of delay.  The contract completion date that seemed easily achievable when performance began may now appear to be impossible to meet.  What should a government contractor do to ensure they are compensated and to avoid liquidated damages?

The first step in most situations is to notify the contracting officer in writing.  There are several FAR provisions that require a contractor to provide notice (e.g., FAR 52.242-17 Government Delay of Work; FAR 52.243-1 Changes – Fixed-Price; and FAR 52.236-2 Differing Site Conditions), and providing notice helps to preserve one’s rights moving forward.

The next step is determining the type of delay that has occurred.  There are three types of delay: inexcusable, excusable, and compensable.  Determining the type of delay requires an analysis of responsibility, impact, and the existence of other delays during the same time period.

Continue reading at:  JDSupra

Filed Under: Contracting Tips Tagged With: certified claim, claim, delays, equitable adjustment

Federal contractors may be able to recover costs caused by the government shutdown

January 25, 2019 By Nancy Cleveland

The current government shutdown is now the longest in U.S. history, and many federal contractors are incurring costs as a result of shutdown-related work stoppages and delays. Luckily, many federal contracts contain clauses that provide a potential avenue for recovery of such costs. Further, there are practical steps that contractors can take to increase their chances of recovering shutdown-related costs from the government.

What contract clauses might apply?

Several Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) clauses, including the following ones, could provide contractors with an avenue to recover costs incurred as a result of shutdown-related delays or work stoppages:

  • FAR 52.242-14 (Suspension of Work)
  • FAR 52.242-15 (Stop Work Order)
  • FAR 52.242-17 (Government Delay of Work)
  • FAR 52.243-2 (Changes – Cost-Reimbursement)
  • FAR 52.243-3 (Changes – Time-and-Materials or Labor-Hours)

It is very important to note that these clauses generally impose very short timeframes in which a contractor must provide the government with notice and/or assert its right to an adjustment.

Keep reading this article at: https://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/federal-contractors-may-be-able-to-53396/

Filed Under: Contracting Tips Tagged With: actual cost, allowable costs, change order, changes, contract clauses, cost reimbursement, costs, delays, FAR, government shutdown, REA, shutdown, stop work order

Government’s delayed response breached contract, says ASBCA

July 20, 2018 By Nancy Cleveland

Note: Author of “The Small Business Guide to Government Contracts,” Steven J. Koprince blogged recently about a recent ruling by the Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals (ASBCA) that the government breached a contract when it waited more than three months to respond to a contractor’s request to amend the contract’s scope of work.  Here is his writing, along with a link to his post:

Here’s a situation my colleagues and I see with some frequency: a contractor, in the course of working on a government contract, submits a request of some sort to the agency.  Then waits for a response.  And waits some more.  Meanwhile, the government’s delay in responding prevents the contractor from moving forward with some aspect of the project, causing the contractor to incur costs.

For contractors faced with this type of government inaction, a recent decision by the Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals is welcome news.  In that case, the ASBCA held that the government breached its implied duty of good faith and fair dealing by waiting more than three months to respond to the contractor’s request to amend the Statement of Work – allowing the contractor to “twist in the wind” during that period.

The ASBCA’s decision in Relyant, LLC, ASBCA No. 59809 (2018) involved an Army contract for the acquisition of pre-fabricated relocatable buildings (abbreviated “RLBs” in the decision) for use at two different sites in Afghanistan.

The solicitation’s Statement of Work included certain specifications for the RLBs.  Among those specifications, the SOW required the installation of gypsum interior drywall to the interior of the shipping containers that would cover fiberglass insulation.  But in its proposal, Relyant, LLC proposed a different configuration: the use of a “sandwich panel,” including Styrofoam as the insulator instead of separate insulation and drywall.

Keep reading this article at: http://smallgovcon.com/claims-and-appeals/governments-delayed-response-breached-contract-says-asbca/

Filed Under: Contracting Tips Tagged With: appeal, Army, ASBCA, breach of contract, delays, fair dealing, good faith, SOW, statement of work

Industry fears new telecom contract on path to repeat past transition delays

June 13, 2018 By Nancy Cleveland

Agencies have just under two years to move to the new governmentwide telecommunications contract called Enterprise Infrastructure Solutions.

While this may seem like a lot of time, vendors and other industry experts are warning the General Services Administration that the current 11-year-old Networx contract may need to be extended.

Crystal Philcox, GSA’s deputy assistant commissioner for IT Category in the Federal Acquisition Service, said GSA is confident that agencies will have time to transition to EIS and modernize their IT infrastructures at the same time.

“What’s not on the table right now is just extending current contracts, extending legacy capabilities and not modernizing, and then asking for an extension. I think that’s something we are not interested in,” Philcox said in an exclusive interview with Federal News Radio. “We are continuing to really listen to agencies and we have a lot of venues to do that. We have been working with them, talking with them, listening closely and I think for those agencies that are really trying to rethink, trying to modernize and move off those legacy systems, we are interested in hearing how much time that will take and what we can do to help with that.”

Keep reading this article at: https://federalnewsradio.com/contractsawards/2018/06/industry-fears-new-telecom-contract-on-path-to-repeat-past-transition-delays/

Filed Under: Contracting News Tagged With: delays, FAS, GSA, IT, telecom, telecommunications, transition

Formal claim required to appeal negative performance evaluation

October 10, 2017 By Nancy Cleveland

For federal contractors, it is not an exaggeration to say that performance evaluations are the lifeblood of the business.

A less-than-satisfactory evaluation in the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) affects far more than just the agency’s assessment of performance on a particular project.  A negative evaluation follows a contractor around – impacting the ability to obtain future contracts due to the specter negative past performance ratings.

The good news for contractors is that the ability to challenge and – if successful – reverse negative CPARS evaluations is a quickly developing area of government contracting law.

The first step in any successful CPARS challenge involves meaningful participation in the evaluation process.  The Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Part 42.15 entitles contractors to submit comments and receive an agency review of a disputed performance evaluation.  Specifically, contractors are entitled to submit comments, rebuttal statements, and/or other information in response to the agency’s evaluation.  The agency must then review those comments at a level above the contracting officer and update the evaluation, if necessary.

Keep reading this article at: https://governmentcontracts.foxrothschild.com/2017/09/articles/contract-claims/cpars-challenge-primer-formal-claim-required-to-appeal-negative-performance-evaluation/

Filed Under: Contracting Tips Tagged With: Contract Disputes Act, contractor performance, Court of Appeals, Court of Federal Claims, cpars, delays, differing site conditions, evaluation, evaluation criteria, FAR, past performance, performance, proposal evaluation, site conditions

How force majeure contract clauses can plan for the unexpected

July 31, 2017 By Nancy Cleveland

Anyone in the construction business can attest to the fact that it’s an industry that defines the phrase “stuff happens.” And most of the time, there is someone to blame.

Inconsistencies between versions of the plans and specifications; late ordering of long-lead-time specialty items; failure on the part of a subcontractor to adequately allocate resources; mathematical mistakes in the original estimate — all of these can lead to delays in the schedule and higher costs. These are also the result of human error, so each step in the decision-making process that led to the mistake can be evaluated and corrected for the future.

But then there are those events no one could have anticipated, and these happenings fall under the category of force majeure — bringing a whole new set of contract-related questions that all parties must address.

Keep reading this article at: http://www.constructiondive.com/news/the-dotted-line-how-force-majeure-contract-clauses-can-plan-for-the-unexpe/446722/

Filed Under: Contracting Tips Tagged With: contract administration, contract clauses, delays, force majeure, risk, unanticipated, unexpected

Differing site conditions claims: Focus on actual costs incurred

March 15, 2016 By Nancy Cleveland

Today, we have a question for our federal construction readers:

If your project is operating within an anticipated budget, are you still entitled to the additional costs associated with a differing site condition? 

Recently, the Civilian Board of Contract Appeals (CBCA) answered our question with a resounding yes.

hardhatThis point is particularly important in the context of requests for equitable adjustments or claims asserted against the government.  You may think (or the government may try to convince you) that there is no entitlement when the project is below budget.  That is simply not the case.  The CBCA decision makes the point that damages are based upon the actual cost of performance — your bid should not be used against you.  In short, extra costs due to differing site conditions should always be tracked and documented — even if you are meeting or below a projected budget.

The case in question involved construction contractor Tucci and Sons Inc., which filed a claim seeking more than $80,000 on a DOT Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) contract for the reconstruction of a 9.7 mile stretch of highway in Mount Rainier National Park.  Tucci claimed that it experienced extra costs based on the unexpected need to work around a number of larger boulders impeding the work.

Keep reading this article at: http://www.mondaq.com/article.asp?articleid=470494

Filed Under: Contracting Tips Tagged With: actual cost, CBCA, Civilian Board of Contract Appeals, claim, construction, cost, damages, delays, FHWA, site conditions

Bidders await word from SOCOM after court ruling

March 4, 2016 By Nancy Cleveland

SOCOMTampa defense contractors are awaiting a response from U.S. Special Operations Command (SOCOM) to a federal court ruling last week that the command overreached by calling for a do-over on $900 million worth of awards on a problem-plagued contracting program.

At stake is millions of dollars in government contracts and a significant investment of time and money by contractors. But often, progress is tied up in a system where a protest can extend an existing contract or lead to a new one.

As government contracting dollars dry up, protests have increased, according to a study last year by the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service.

The latest example came last week from a Washington, D.C., court that few outside government contracting have heard about.

Court of Federal Claims Judge Nancy Firestone ruled that SOCOM took action “not reasonable under the circumstances” when it decided to redo an award that allowed four companies to bid on up to $900 million in services over a five-year period.

Keep reading this article at: http://www.tbo.com/list/military-news/bidders-await-word-from-socom-after-court-ruling-20160227/

Filed Under: Contracting News Tagged With: bid protest, bid rejection, contract extension, Court of Federal Claims, delays, influence, SOCOM

House panel kicks off Pentagon acquisition reform drive

November 7, 2013 By ei2admin

The House Armed Services Committee last week kicked off a fresh drive to fix the way the Pentagon buys weapons and services, vowing to “look past Band-Aid fixes and parochial interests” and implement meaningful reforms.

The committee’s chairman, U.S. Representative Buck McKeon, said some successful efforts were already under way, but the U.S. military acquisition system still faced significant challenges including cost overruns and schedule delays, and those would get worse due to mounting pressure on U.S. budgets.

“The Congress, together with the Department of Defense and industry, must be willing to do the hard work to find root causes, look past Band-Aid fixes and parochial interests, and have the courage to implement meaningful, lasting reform,” McKeon said at the start of a hearing on the issue.

McKeon said he had asked Representative Mac Thornberry, a Texas Republican, to lead the long-term effort, aided by Representative Adam Smith, the top Democrat on the committee.

The latest Government Accountability Office report calculates that the Pentagon is slated to spend $1.5 trillion to acquire 85 separate weapons programs in coming years. Those programs are projected to experience $411 billion in cost growth and average scheduled delays of 27 months, the GAO estimates.

Paul Francis, managing director of acquisition and sourcing management for the GAO, told the committee that previous reform efforts had started to slow cost growth, but 39 percent of the weapons programs on the books in fiscal 2012 had experienced cost growth of 25 percent or more.

Keep reading this article at: http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/10/29/us-pentagon-weapons-congress-idUSBRE99S16E20131029

Filed Under: Contracting News Tagged With: accountability, acquisition workforce, cost overrun, delays, DoD, FAR, GAO

  • 1
  • 2
  • Next Page »

Recent Posts

  • Contractors must update EEO poster
  • SBA scorecard shows federal government continues to prioritize small business contracting
  • The risk of organizational conflicts of interest
  • The gap widens between COFC and GAO on late is late rule
  • OMB releases guidance related to small business goals

Popular Topics

8(a) abuse Army bid protest budget budget cuts certification construction contract awards contracting opportunities cybersecurity DoD DOJ False Claims Act FAR federal contracting federal contracts fraud GAO Georgia Tech government contracting government contract training government trends GSA GSA Schedule GTPAC HUBZone innovation IT Justice Dept. marketing NDAA OMB SBA SDVOSB set-aside small business small business goals spending subcontracting technology VA veteran owned business VOSB wosb

Contracting News

SBA scorecard shows federal government continues to prioritize small business contracting

OMB releases guidance related to small business goals

OMB issues guidance on impact of injunction on government contractor vaccine mandate

Changes coming to DOD’s Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification under CMMC 2.0

Judge issues nationwide injunction halting enforcement of COVID-19 vaccine mandate

Read More

Contracting Tips

Contractors must update EEO poster

The risk of organizational conflicts of interest

The gap widens between COFC and GAO on late is late rule

Are verbal agreements good enough for government contractors?

CMMC 2.0 simplifies requirements but raises risks for government contractors

Read More

GTPAC News

VA direct access program events in 2022

Sandia National Laboratories seeks small business suppliers

Navy OSBP hosting DCAA overview (part 2) event Jan. 12, 2022

Navy OSBP hosting cybersecurity “ask me anything” event Dec. 16th

State of Georgia hosting supplier systems training on January 26, 2022

Read More

Georgia Tech News

Undergraduate enrollment growth reflects inclusive excellence

Georgia Tech delivers $4 billion in economic impact to the State of Georgia

Georgia Tech awards first round of seed grants to support team-based research

Georgia Tech announces inaugural Associate Vice President of Corporate Engagement

DoD funds Georgia Tech to enhance U.S. hypersonics capabilities

Read More

  • SAM.gov registration is free, and help with SAM is free, too
APTAC RSS Twitter GTPAC - 30th Year of Service

Copyright © 2023 · Georgia Tech - Enterprise Innovation Institute