Tzarina of Compliance

Good approach.

Completion can not be affected during SWO since no work was performed. If the SWO was lifted, you would get an additional fee added to the suspension costs for equitable adjustment, why not in a termination reconciliation? Becuase of the para (c) in FAR 52.242-15?

So in the settlement you give up the additional fee you would otherwise collect for the SWO period if the SWO was lifted?

The termination clause is FAR 52.249-6. We are settling the SWO in the termination settlement since SWO was never lifted and the contract was terminated. The question remains whether or not the SWO costs could include an additional fee in the calculation of the final settlement for termination since FAR 52.242-15 (c) says that if SWO is not lifted and the contract is terminated - only "reasonable costs" would be allowed vs if SWO is lifted, an "equitable adjustment" will be made.

So would the stop work order work carry an additional fee? If your contract was CPFF completion and you completed 50% of the fee schedule, before stop work order, then you were in stop work order for 60 days before temrination, would you recover the fee on top of stop work order costs, perhaps calculated as a % based on the orginal % fee proposed for the original contract?

So what would be the answer in a CPFF scenario? If you had an SWO and then were terminated for convenience, can you recover SWO costs and profit in termination given FAR 52.242-15 (c) which is different than (b) - i.e. equitable adjustment if SWO is lifted vs "reasonable costs" if you are T4C-ed.

I am not asking about termination costs. I am clear on what can be recovered under termination. I am asking about a SWO under a GSA MAS T&M order. After some research, I found that GSA MAS includes FAR 52.212-15. The Government issued a SWO for this T&M order and after 60 days of SW, the order was terminated for convenience. My question is what can be recovered during the 60 day period of SWO before termination costs. FAR 52.242-15 (c) says that if the SWO is not canceled and the work is terminated for convenience, the CO must allow reasonable costs resulting from the SWO in the termination settlement. This is different than the language in (b) which addresses what can be recovered if SWO IS canceled and work resumes and allows for "equitable adjustment". I am asking if there is a difference between "equitable adjustment" and "reasonable SWO costs"? If not, then I am assuming reasonable SWO costs for a T&M contract would mean the loaded rates for labor which could not be minimized during the SWO.

I think the termination costs are clear, but since the SWO was for 60 days and now the Government is terminating, I am looking at FAR 52.242-15 to see what happens and if an "equitable adjustment" for the SWO time (60 days) is still valid. FAR 52.242-15 under (c) says that if the SWO is not cancelled and the work is terminated, "the CO must allow reasonable costs resulting from the SWO in the termination settlement.". This is different than "equitable adjustment" in the previous para which is recoverable if the SWO is lifted. I am reading that equitable adjustment means costs and profit during the SWO period and "reasonable costs" are only costs.

I have two questions regarding FAR 52.242-15 (Stop-Work Order) in the context of a Time-and-Materials (T&M) order under a GSA schedule: I saw a prior discussion where FAR 52.242-15 was not included in a T&M order under a GSA schedule, yet a Contracting Officer (CO) issued a Stop-Work Order (SWO) under that clause. Can the Government order a stop-work under a commercial services T&M contract if the clause is not included (or even if it is included but does not apply)? If a T&M contract is terminated 60 days after the issuance of an SWO, what would be the recovery under the contract? FAR 52.242-15(c) states that if the SWO is not canceled and the work is terminated for convenience, the CO must allow reasonable costs resulting from the SWO in the termination settlement. This is different from an equitable adjustment, which applies when the SWO is lifted, suggesting different cost treatments. Does this mean that only direct and indirect costs of idle labor during the SWO are recoverable, or would it allow for loaded daily rates (including fee) times the hours of justifiable idle time for example?

Thats good info. Thank you

This makes sense. I think it would make sense to do this in the current environment, except the agencies may not have enough staff to do primes and subs.... Thank you!!!

FAR 52.249-6 states at (c) After receipt of a Notice of Termination, and except as directed by the Contracting Officer, the Contractor shall immediately proceed with the following obligations, regardless of any delay in determining or adjusting any amounts due under this clause: (1) Stop work as specified in the notice. (2) Place no further subcontracts or orders (referred to as subcontracts in this clause), except as necessary to complete the continued portion of the contract. (3) Terminate all subcontracts to the extent they relate to the work terminated. (4) Assign to the Government, as directed by the Contracting Officer, all rights, title, and interest of the Contractor under the subcontracts terminated, in which case the Government shall have the right to settle or to pay any termination settlement proposal arising out of those terminations. Does anyone know when this is ever used and for what reason? Does this only relate to like subcontractor IP rights or patent situations? Appreciate any thoughts. Or any link to where I can read about this.

Agree 100%. Somehow I feel this will all work out ❤️

Yes, because politicians and lawyers solve everything 🙄. Does anyone have any insight into precedents and what the rules say? The rule book does take half the shelf space...

Does anyone have thoughts or recommendations on how to support the approximately 300 USAID contractors currently under SWOs without access to their Contracting Officers (COs)? As USAID winds down and we anticipate the departure of many CO staff, what do you think the process will be for filing claims? Presumably, if you receive confirmation that your SWO has been lifted or you’ve been terminated for convenience (T4C), you could submit a Request for Equitable Adjustment (REA), claim, or Termination Settlement Proposal (TSP) directly to that person. However, what happens if, by the time you submit your claim or TSP, their email is deactivated and there’s no agency structure left to identify an alternative point of contact? Would this mean bypassing the CO’s final decision altogether and proceeding directly to the courts? How about if the SWO drags on with no action from the Agency -and no payments for any work completed prior to SWO? No correspondence is being answered by the Agency at all. Total silence. Can contractors essentially default and then argue that it should be converted to T4C? What are the options when the Government breaches completely? I’d appreciate any insights or guidance on this. Be kind. Lots of smalls out there who are also US taxpayers and many have not done anything wrong. ❤️