Contractors, why not submit a FAR 52.232-22 Limitation of Funds notice to the CO?

[Voyager]

Clause has said this since 1984:

Quote

 

(c) The Contractor shall notify the Contracting Officer in writing whenever it has reason to believe that the costs it expects to incur under this contract in the next 60 days, when added to all costs previously incurred, will exceed 75 percent of (1) the total amount so far allotted to the contract by the Government or, (2) if this is a cost-sharing contract, the amount then allotted to the contract by the Government plus the Contractor's corresponding share. The notice shall state the estimated amount of additional funds required to continue performance for the period specified in the Schedule.

(d) Sixty days before the end of the period specified in the Schedule, the Contractor shall notify the Contracting Officer in writing of the estimated amount of additional funds, if any, required to continue timely performance under the contract or for any further period specified in the Schedule or otherwise agreed upon, and when the funds will be required.

 

It has not been standard practice in the five offices I've worked as an 1102 to receive said notification.  I've had to demand it every time I've received it.  If we assume this noncompliance is governmentwide, is there a reason I don't understand that is preventing you from submitting the notification on time?  (Be honest, would you prefer ambiguity here?)

If I am wrong in my assumption about how widespread noncompliance is, please correct me.

[ji20874]

I hope you have mentioned these failures on the part of your contractors in their CPARS submissions.  

[here_2_help]

I work with contractors all the time. Most are simply unaware of their contractual obligations. (I ask them if they've read their contract, and they tell me they've read the SOW. Nobody ever reads the clauses incorporated by reference.)

The larger contractors are aware, but struggle to have solid processes that support proper notification. Some PMs are reluctant to acknowledge an incipient overrun. Others have trouble pulling actual costs from their accounting systems in a comprehensible manner.

The ones who are both larger and have adequate EV systems are the ones who can both project overruns and report IAW clause requirements. Unfortunately, the number of those contractors is rather small in comparison to all the rest.

So, yes. It can be done and IS being done by a few of the larger, knowledgeable, experienced primes with good systems. As for the rest, not so much. As contracting officers, you can help the rest of them learn by adhering to the clause requirements and refusing to fund cost growth that is not reported timely as required by the clause.

[Retreadfed]

1 hour ago, here_2_help said:

Most are simply unaware of their contractual obligations.

Agreed.  Moreover, I would not limit this observation to contractors.  Many contracting officers don't know what the FAR clauses they put in contracts require them or the contractor to do.  Further, they don't know what clauses are to be used in contracts.  For example, it is amazing how many times I see FAR 52.215-20 inserted in Section I of contracts.