April 25, 2023; the Court of Appeals agreed with the Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals (ASBCA) that a contractor cannot take a unilaterally established Undefinitized Contract Action (UCA) to the Board without first submitting a certified claim request for a final decision by the contracting officer.
Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Company, 67 CCF ¶82,468, (Apr. 25, 2023)
This case involved two UCAs for upgrades to F-16 aircraft under the Foreign Military Sales program. The Government awarded the UCAs and started down the path laid out in FAR 52.216-25. FAR 52.216-25(c) states in part: “If agreement on a definitive contract to supersede this letter contract is not reached by the target date in paragraph (b) of this section, or within any extension of it granted by the Contracting Officer, the Contracting Officer may, with the approval of the head of the contracting activity, determine a reasonable price or fee in accordance with subpart 15.4 and part 31 of the FAR, subject to Contractor appeal as provided in the Disputes clause.” (Emphasis added) Lockheed assumed that the contracting officer’s unilateral definitization was in effect a claim by the Government that could be directly appealed to the Board under the Disputes clause FAR 52.233-1. Both the Board and Appeals Court found that the contracting officer’s definitization as outlined in FAR 52.216-25 was not a Government claim as it did not demand or assert entitlement to anything from the contractor.
Our Takeaway
If the Government unilaterally establishes the price of a UCA, the contractor must first submit a certified claim with an amount (i.e., sum certain) to which the contracting office will be required to respond with a contracting officer’s final decision. Then an appeal to the Board under the Disputes clause can be raised.
Redstone GCI assists contractors with understanding the Government’s compliance expectations with the federal regulation, contract terms and helps prepare you for government audit.