The posters above suggest that you may actually have a series of bilateral changes (series of changes with a fair adjustment). For me, in a world of reimbursement of expenses close to almost all change orders, negotiations are underway and therefore does not give me the freedom to place the order unilaterally. Unless I unilaterally establish the amendment order, pursuant to the amendment clause, to notify and then negotiate a fair accommodation separately and execute an endorsement. The operating theatre has found that the new work is at hand and offers me no reason to believe that this would not be subject to the amendment clause. (2) Cost of additional work caused by the modification contract (e.g., new subcontracting work. B, new prototypes or upgrade or backfit kits). I think the PO (1) is not clear about what „change“ is and (2) is concerned about the FAR`s application of the order of (unilateral) amendments and the complementary (bilateral) agreement. The change clause does not cover all possible changes to the „in-scope.“ It only covers the „in-scope“ changes in the first paragraph of the clause. Most guidelines, including the DAU, provide for the adoption of additional agreements for the types of amendments in the amendment clause that lists this clause, whether or not it was initially ordered unilaterally in accordance with the clause. Block 13 C is used for complementary agreements under the contract. The book discusses both changes to existing services and whether the language of the invitation has helped to anticipate additional services during the selection process (extended selection process and scope of the contract).

(c) full and final fair adjustments. In order to avoid the subsequent controversies that might arise from a complementary agreement involving a fair adjustment following an amendment order, the delegate – The OP had to – The po was clear that the new work was within the scope, meaning that the OP probably considered the extent of any changes in the nature of the work, the duration of the performance and the costs between the amendment and the original contract. , as well as whether the original invitation properly informed suppliers of the potential for change or whether the change was the nature that could reasonably have been expected and whether the amendment would significantly alter the scope of competition for the requirement.