Jump to content

Loul

Members
  • Posts

    52
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Loul

  1. I always thought a cardinal change was one which was outside the scope of the contract as written and thus could not be redressed by a simple request for equitable adjustment to the contract price. A cardinal change is not covered by the Changes clause because it fundamentally alters the contractual requirements rather than change quantity, delivery point, etc. I would use the example of a contractor being hired to pave 4 lanes of the the beltway between points A and B. if the contracting officer suddenly issued a change order directing the contractor to add two additional lanes as the contractor paved, that would be a cardinal change since is is outside the scope of the contract, namely paving. Thus, an equitable adjustment is not appropriate as it is new work, and the contractor may not even be able to perform the work if he wanted, thus possibly setting up a default situtation due to no fault of the contrator. Does it void the contract or is the directed change simply illegal. I would think the change would be illegal and unenforcable, and the contract as originally written would be considered unchanged.
  2. PMR - I do not think that FAR prohibits the purchase of used equipment provided that it has been proposed thast way and agreed to by the Contracting Officer. I base this on FAR 52.211-5 ((d) which states "A proposal to provide used, reconditioned, or remanufactured supplies shall include a detailed description of such supplies and shall be submitted to the Contracting Officer for approval." I realize that you are talking about capital equipment but it is my understanding that this clause convers that as well. I would suggest you contact your Contractoing Officer and explain what you want to do and why and how it would benefit the Governmentand get his approval.
×
×
  • Create New...