In a fixed price construction contract procured via FAR Part 15 procedures, who owns the float in the schedule? The contractor's schedule submitted after award and accepted by the government showed an early completion date for the work. The contractor maintains that they own the float in the schedule, meaning that time between their planned completion date and the completion date of the contract.
A little internet research tells me that the commercial market place has three schools of thought: 1. The contractor owns the flow; 2. the owner owns the float; and 3. the project owns the float.
I did not readily find a discussion of float on federal contracts, but my guess is that the owner (government) owns the float and that the contract completion date or period of performance (POP) would not be extended until the critical path of the accepted schedule exceeds the contract completion data or POP, provided the delay is an excusable delay or the government-requested changes impact the critical path.
If anyone has experience with this or thoughts on the matter, please share.