Contract adjustment board

Last updated

In government contracting, a Contract Adjustment Board is a department board at the Secretariat level in the U.S. Government that deals with disputes and requests for extraordinary relief under Public Law 85-804 [1] of Aug. 28, 1958. [2]

Contents

In brief: [3]

Public Law No. 85-804, codified at 50 U.S.C. § 1431-35 (Supp. IV 1998), grants to the President the authority to authorize any agency which exercises functions in connection with the national defense to enter into contracts or into amendments or modifications of contracts, and to make advance payments, without regard to other applicable legal provisions whenever such action would facilitate the national defense. 50 U.S.C. § 1431. The legislative history of the statute indicates that it may also be used as the basis for making indemnity payments under certain government contracts, the so-called "residual powers. " ECR Current Materials at 1005, 1021. The legislative history explains that "[t]he need for indemnity clauses in most cases arises from the advent of nuclear power and the use of highly volatile fuels in the missile program. The magnitude of the risks involved under procurement contracts in these areas have rendered commercial insurance either unavailable or limited in coverage. [4]

History

During World War I, a "Board of Contract Adjustment" was created to determine "all claims, doubts and disputes which may arise under departmental contracts"; [5] it implemented the policies for Liquidation, Cancellation, and Adjustment of contracts. [6]

According to Evans Reamer Machine Company v. United States. 386 F.2d 873, "since the early days of World War II," the main defense agencies have been authorized to grant discretionary relief to contractors suffering losses on account of mistakes. [7] The underpinning for the granting of relief must be a finding that such action would facilitate the national defense or prosecution of the war. [8] Title II relief has been referred to variously as "far-reaching," "extraordinary," and "a snare and a delusion." [9]

According to U.S. v. Utah Constr. & Mining Co., pursuant to a delegation by the President under Public Law 85—804, [10] government departments and agencies exercising functions in connection with the national defense may, upon a finding that such action would 'facilitate the national defense,' enter into amendments and modifications of contracts without regard to other provisions of law respecting such amendments and modifications. As implemented by the Atomic Energy Commission's procurement regulations, [11] the authority conferred encompasses amendments without consideration, correction of mutual mistakes, and formalization of informal commitments. This authority, which in many respects is analogous to power to settle claims, is delegated to Contract Adjustment Boards established within the departments and agencies concerned separate from the Boards of Contract Appeals. Because the regulations preclude resort to the powers conferred by Public Law 85—804, "unless other legal authority in the Department concerned is deemed to be lacking or inadequate", [12] the Army Contract Adjustment Board has generally required contractors to exhaust remedies before the ASBCA under the disputes clause. [13] Thus it is quite evident from the administration of Public Law 85—804 and its predecessors that the limitations on the jurisdiction of the Boards of Contract Appeals are well understood by the military procurement departments and Congress.

Examples

Further reading

See also

Related Research Articles

Indemnity Expenses that are made to compensate for disadvantages suffered or restrictions

Indemnity is a contractual obligation of one party (indemnifier) to compensate the loss incurred to the other party due to the acts of the indemnitor or any other party. The duty to indemnify is usually, but not always, coextensive with the contractual duty to "hold harmless" or "save harmless". In contrast, a "guarantee" is an obligation of one party assuring the other party that guarantor will perform the promise of the third party if it defaults.

United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces Federal tribunal for appeal of lower military courts

The United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces is an Article I court that exercises worldwide appellate jurisdiction over members of the United States Armed Forces on active duty and other persons subject to the Uniform Code of Military Justice. The court is composed of five civilian judges appointed for 15-year terms by the President of the United States with the advice and consent of the United States Senate. The court reviews decisions from the intermediate appellate courts of the services: the Army Court of Criminal Appeals, the Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals, the Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals, and the Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals.

Bayh–Dole Act Intellectual property bill on government funded research

The Bayh–Dole Act or Patent and Trademark Law Amendments Act is United States legislation dealing with inventions arising from federal government-funded research. Sponsored by two senators, Birch Bayh of Indiana and Bob Dole of Kansas, the Act was adopted in 1980, is codified at 94 Stat. 3015, and in 35 U.S.C. § 200–212, and is implemented by 37 C.F.R. 401 for federal funding agreements with contractors and 37 C.F.R 404 for licensing of inventions owned by the federal government.

The Office of Administrator of Export Control was established in the United States by Presidential Proclamation 2413, July 2, 1940, to administer export licensing provisions of the act of July 2, 1940. Brigadier General Russell Lamont Maxwell, United States Army, headed up this military entity. It was abolished by Presidential Executive Order 8900, September 15, 1941, and its functions were transferred to the Economic Defense Board, which had been established by Presidential Executive Order 8839, July 30, 1941, to develop policies and programs to strengthen U.S. international economic relations. The name was changed to Board of Economic Warfare by Presidential Executive Order 8982, December 17, 1941. In turn, it was abolished by Executive Order 9361, July 15, 1943, and the functions were transferred to the newly created Office of Economic Warfare, OEM, which also assumed control of U.S. Commercial Company, Rubber Development Corporation, Petroleum Reserves Corporation, and Export-Import Bank of Washington from the Reconstruction Finance Corporation. Consolidated into the Foreign Economic Administration, 1943.

The Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR) cover many of the contracts issued by the US Military and NASA.

Price–Anderson Nuclear Industries Indemnity Act

The Price-Anderson Nuclear Industries Indemnity Act is a United States federal law, first passed in 1957 and since renewed several times, which governs liability-related issues for all non-military nuclear facilities constructed in the United States before 2026. The main purpose of the Act is to partially compensate the nuclear industry against liability claims arising from nuclear incidents while still ensuring compensation coverage for the general public. The Act establishes a no fault insurance-type system in which the first approximately $12.6 billion is industry-funded as described in the Act. Any claims above the $12.6 billion would be covered by a Congressional mandate to retroactively increase nuclear utility liability or would be covered by the federal government. At the time of the Act's passing, it was considered necessary as an incentive for the private production of nuclear power — this was because electric utilities viewed the available liability coverage as inadequate.

Tucker Act

The Tucker Act is a federal statute of the United States by which the United States government has waived its sovereign immunity with respect to certain lawsuits.

The processes of government procurement in the United States enable federal, state and local government bodies in the United States to acquire goods, services, and interests in real property.

United States Coast Guard Legal Division

The Coast Guard Judge Advocate General oversees the delivery of legal services to the United States Coast Guard, through the Office of the Judge Advocate General in Washington, the Legal Service Command, offices in the Atlantic and Pacific Areas, nine Coast Guard Districts, the Coast Guard Academy, three training centers, and a number of other activities and commands. Legal services are delivered by Coast Guard judge advocates and civilian counsel in ten legal practice areas: criminal law/military justice, operations, international activities, civil advocacy, environmental law, procurement law, internal organizational law, regulations and administrative law, legislative support and legal assistance.

The Civilian Board of Contract Appeals (CBCA) is an Article I court that was established under the Contract Disputes Act of 1978 as an independent tribunal to hear and decide contract disputes between Government contractors and the General Services Administration (GSA) and other civilian Executive agencies of the United States.

Government procurement Purchases made by the government

Government procurement or public procurement is the procurement of goods, services and works on behalf of a public authority, such as a government agency. With 12 percent of global GDP in 2018, government procurement accounts for a substantial part of the global economy.

The Defense Base Act (DBA) is an extension of the federal workers' compensation program that covers longshoremen and harbor workers, the Longshore and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act 33 U.S.C. §§ 901–950. The DBA covers persons employed at United States defense bases overseas. The DBA is designed to provide medical treatment and compensation to employees of defense contractors injured in the scope and course of employment. The DBA is administered by the United States Department of Labor.

Multisourcing is the concept of working with multiple suppliers – who are also competitors – in a trusted and collaborative effort. Large-scale buyers, such as the U.S. federal government, may want to feel assured that there is more than one supplier for an item.

United States v. Utah Construction & Mining Company, 384 U.S. 394 (1966), is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that "(w)hen an administrative agency is acting in a judicial capacity and resolves disputed issues of fact properly before it which the parties have had an adequate opportunity to litigate, the courts have not hesitated to apply res judicata to enforce repose." Utah Construction established a two-part test to determine whether res judicata effect should be given to an administrative determination. First, the agency proceeding must be examined to determine whether the agency was "acting in a judicial capacity" and whether the parties had "an adequate opportunity to litigate" the issues before the agency. Second, the general rules of res judicata must be applied to the case. Not all administrative adjudications, and not all judicial determinations, are entitled to res judicata effect. For the principles of res judicata to apply, administrative determinations, like court judgments, must be valid, final and on the merits.

An equitable adjustment, in government contracting, is a contract adjustment pursuant to a changes clause, to compensate the contractor expense incurred due to actions of the Government or to compensate the Government for contract reductions. An equitable adjustment includes an allowance for profit; clauses that provide for adjustments, excluding profit, are not considered "equitable adjustments."

A changes clause, in government contracting, is a required clause in United States government construction contracts.

<i>G. L. Christian and Associates v. United States</i>

G.L. Christian and Associates v. United States is a 1963 United States Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) court case which has become known as the Christian Doctrine. The case held that standard clauses established by regulations may be considered as being in every Federal contract. Because the FAR is the law, and government contractors are presumed to be familiar with the FAR, a mandatory clause that expresses a significant or deeply ingrained strand of public procurement policy will be incorporated into a Government contract by operation of law, even if the parties intentionally omitted it.

The Contract Disputes Act of 1978, which became effective on March 1, 1979, establishes the procedures for handling "claims" relating to United States Federal Government contracts. It is codified, as amended, at 41 U.S.C. §§ 7101–7109.

Jeri Somers Vice Chair of the Civilian Board of Contract Appeals

Jeri Kaylene Somers is Chair of the Civilian Board of Contract Appeals and is a former nominee for Judge of the United States Court of Federal Claims.

In the United States the Armed Services Procurement Act established the Armed Services Procurement Regulations (ASPR) which were in effect from 1948 to 1978. The first complete ASPR was published by the Department of Defense in 1959.

References

  1. ↑ (72 Stat. 972; 50 U.S.C. 1431)
  2. ↑ Glossary: Defense Acquisition Acronyms & Terms (PDF). C. B. Cochrane, E. P. Vollmer. Diane Publishing. 1995. p. 175. ISBN   978-0-7881-2139-5. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2009-08-25. Retrieved 2009-06-27.CS1 maint: others (link)
  3. ↑ "Archived copy" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 2009-09-21. Retrieved 2009-10-09.CS1 maint: archived copy as title (link) United States General Accounting Office, Decision
  4. ↑ dept.), United States Claims board (War; Adjustment, United States War Department Board of Contract (1920). Decisions of the War Department Board of Contract Adjustment. U.S. Government Printing Office.
  5. ↑ Crowell, J.F. (1920). Government War Contracts. Oxford University Press. p.  314 . Retrieved 2014-12-27.
  6. ↑ Crowell, J.F. (1920). Government War Contracts. Oxford University Press. Retrieved 2014-12-27.
  7. ↑ Title II, Section 201, First War Powers Act, 55 Stat. 838 (1941); Executive Order No. 9001, 6 F.R. 6787 (1941); Act of Jan. 12, 1951, 64 Stat. 1257; 50 U.S.C. App. Sec. 611 (1952 ed.); P.L. 85-804, 72 Stat. 972, 50 U.S.C. Secs. 1431–1435 (1958).
  8. ↑ See Kramer, Extraordinary Relief for War Contractors, 93 U. of Pa.L. Rev. 357, 360 (1945); Correction of Mistakes in Contracts Under Public Law 85-804, Government Contracts Monograph No. 1, p. 4 (The Geo. Wash. Univ.) (1961)
  9. ↑ See Fain and Watt, War Procurement — A New Pattern in Contracts, 44 Col. L. Rev. 127, 199 (1944) and McClelland, Title II — One Year Later: A Legislative Midsummer Night's Dream, 62 Dick. L. Rev. 327 (1958)
  10. ↑ Public Law 85—804, 72 Stat. 972, 50 U.S.C. § 1431 (1964 ed.)
  11. ↑ see ASPR, 32 CFR § 17.000 et seq.; AECPR, 41 CFR § 9—17.000 et seq.,
  12. ↑ ASPR, 32 CFR § 17.205—1(b)(2)
  13. ↑ Blaw-Knox Co., ACAB Dkt. No. 1019, Nov. 2, 1960
  14. ↑ Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement; Conforming Changes--Standards of Conduct and Extraordinary Contractual Actions (DFARS Case 2008-D004) Defense Department Documents and Publications August 12, 2008
  15. ↑ established pursuant to the Contract Disputes Act of 1978 (92 Stat.2383; 41 U.S.C. 601)
  16. ↑ Kane, R.M. (2003). Air Transportation. Kendall/Hunt Pub. p. 155. ISBN   9780787288815 . Retrieved 2014-12-27.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.