I am reviewing some older subcontracts from a few years ago (before my time) and I found one subcontract where the entire contract value was for less than $20K. However, the Prime included in the FAR flowdowns that for all contracts under $100K, 52.242-3, Penalties for Unallowable Costs would apply.
FAR 42.709-6 says to use 52.242-3 in all solicitations and contracts over $700K. Even assuming the previous amounts of $650K, $500K, etc. were in effect, clearly a contract of less than $20K would not apply.
My question is, in a situation like this where 1) the subcontract's requirement description was incorrect by stating this clause applied to contracts under $100K and 2) where the clause would obviously be inapplicable, does 52.242-3 still apply since it was included in the contract and technically falls under the incorrect terms listed in the contract?
Is there a "reverse Christian Doctrine" that does not allow for incorrectly included FAR clauses where they should be inapplicable? or are the included clauses mandatory since they are a part of the contract?
Thanks,