Dene Slater

The components were part of a design change for carrier construction. The 200 widgets were not yet provided and the government is cancelling the requirement. Before the cancellation, the design changed the number of widgets from 200 to 116. The orginial requirement in the base contract was for 200 widgets. The contractor proposed a credit of 116 widgets. The government never got credit for the 84 widgets (200-116) when the design changed so the real question may be why not?

The contractor has provided FAR 15.408 as their justification for crediting 116 widgets instead of 200 on the giveback. In my mind, the clause is there to give the contractor credit for efficiencies for which they created (i.e underrun on a CPIF contract).

Thank you.

It is difficult to understand the context of your question. In fact the description is confusing.

Are these unit priced widgets? Or are they components that must be installed in an aircraft carrier or something, in which the design has changed?

You said the contractor was paid for 200 widgets, so did the contractor produce or purchase these and then provide them? Now the government doesn't need them?

What does the number "116" represent? A credit for 116 widgets not to be required? The revised number of widgets required by "new construction carrier design"?

What is the relationship of the 200 or 116 widgets to the original design and to the change?

FAR 15.408 states "include the current estimate of what the cost would have been to complete the deleted work not yet performed (not the original proposed estimates), and the cost of deleted work already performed." The contractor was paid for 200 widgets at $100 each in the base contract. Subsequently, the requirement was deleted with a change order. In response, the contractor proposed 116 widgets at $100. When the government questioned the number of widgets, the contractor's position was based on the FAR clause saying this is the current estimate based on the new construction carrier design maturing into the current configuration requiring a quantity of 116 versus the original 200. The government's position is that the giveback would be for 200 widgets not 116 since that was the original requirement. Is the FAR interpretation based on quantity or cost per item if work is deleted?