B-184238, JUNE 7, 1977

B-184238: Jun 7, 1977

Additional Materials:

Contact:

Ralph O. White
(202) 512-8278
WhiteRO@gao.gov

Kenneth E. Patton
(202) 512-8205
PattonK@gao.gov

 

Office of Public Affairs
(202) 512-4800
youngc1@gao.gov

DISPUTE WHETHER CONTRACTOR IS REQUIRED TO PERFORM CONTRACT IN ACCORDANCE WITH ITS TERMS DUE TO TIME DELAY AND PRICE INCREASES MUST BE PURSUED WITH CONTRACTING AGENCY. SINCE IT IS NOT WITHIN AUTHORITY OF GAO TO INTERVENE IN DISPUTES ARISING UNDER CONTRACT. THE MATTER WAS THE SUBJECT OF OUR DECISION. IN THE CITED DECISION WE HELD THAT THERE WAS NO BASIS TO INCREASE THE CONTRACT PRICE AS A RESULT OF AN INCREASE IN THE COST OF PERFORMANCE IN THE ABSENCE OF A PRICE ESCALATION CLAUSE. THE ONLY ADDITIONAL FACTOR PRESENTED AS AN EXTENUATING CIRCUMSTANCE FOR THE REQUESTED RELIEF BY CESSNA IS THE EXTREME LAPSE OF TIME IN REQUESTING PERFORMANCE. WHETHER CESSNA IS REQUIRED TO PERFORM IS A MATTER PROPERLY RESOLVED UNDER THE TERMS OF THE CONTRACT.

B-184238, JUNE 7, 1977

DISPUTE WHETHER CONTRACTOR IS REQUIRED TO PERFORM CONTRACT IN ACCORDANCE WITH ITS TERMS DUE TO TIME DELAY AND PRICE INCREASES MUST BE PURSUED WITH CONTRACTING AGENCY, SINCE IT IS NOT WITHIN AUTHORITY OF GAO TO INTERVENE IN DISPUTES ARISING UNDER CONTRACT.

CESSNA AIRCRAFT COMPANY:

BY LETTER OF MAY 5, 1977, WITH ATTACHMENTS, THE CESSNA AIRCRAFT COMPANY (CESSNA) REQUESTED THAT OUR OFFICE CONSIDER ITS REQUEST FOR CANCELLATION OR MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT #14-16-0001-5444-L3, AWARDED JANUARY 24, 1975, BY THE DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, FOR AN AIRCRAFT ENGINE. THE MATTER WAS THE SUBJECT OF OUR DECISION, CAPITAL AVIATION, INC., B-184238, JULY 30, 1975, 75-2 CPD 68, CONCERNING CESSNA'S PREDECESSOR'S REQUEST FOR A PRICE INCREASE DUE TO A MISTAKE IN ITS BID AS WELL AS FOR INCREASES IN ITS COSTS FOR MATERIAL AND FREIGHT.

IN THE CITED DECISION WE HELD THAT THERE WAS NO BASIS TO INCREASE THE CONTRACT PRICE AS A RESULT OF AN INCREASE IN THE COST OF PERFORMANCE IN THE ABSENCE OF A PRICE ESCALATION CLAUSE. THE ONLY ADDITIONAL FACTOR PRESENTED AS AN EXTENUATING CIRCUMSTANCE FOR THE REQUESTED RELIEF BY CESSNA IS THE EXTREME LAPSE OF TIME IN REQUESTING PERFORMANCE. WHETHER CESSNA IS REQUIRED TO PERFORM IS A MATTER PROPERLY RESOLVED UNDER THE TERMS OF THE CONTRACT. THE AUTHORITY OF OUR OFFICE DOES NOT INCLUDE INTERVENTION BETWEEN A CONTRACTOR AND THE AGENCY FOR THE PURPOSES OF RESOLVING DISPUTES ARISING UNDER THE CONTRACT. HUGH BRASINGTON CONTRACTING COMPANY, B-187022, SEPTEMBER 14, 1976, 76-2 CPD 243.

THEREFORE, THE REMEDY CESSNA SEEKS SHOULD BE PURSUED WITH THE CONTRACTING AGENCY UNDER THE TERMS OF THE CONTRACT.

Aug 4, 2020

Jul 31, 2020

Jul 30, 2020

Jul 29, 2020

Looking for more? Browse all our products here