Versar, Inc. - Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals

9. Under SOW ~~ 9.1.1 and 9.1.2 the contractor was to conduct pre-final and final
inspections and publish the findings (R4, tab 2 at 85).
10. Under SOW Division 01, Project Administration, Management and General
Conditions, the contractor had to supply a full-time site superintendent (R4, tab 2 at 89).
11. TO'§ 0 1140, ~ 1.1, noted that the school would be open during construction
and the contract()r was to cause the least possible interference, with special attention to
phasing. There were eight phases. For phases 3-6, all work in each was to be complete
and accepted by the CO before the next started. (R4, tab 6 at 265, tab 575 at 7163-64, tab
578 at7181, tabs 579, 736 at 9831A, tab 742 at 9960-62; ex. G-118; tr. 3/67, 71-74,
.81-84, 129,4/21-27) Under the Use and Possession clause, government use or possession
is not acceptance (finding 1). There is no documentary evidence that the CO fonnally
accepted any phase prior to final project inspection and acceptance.
12. TO § 01330, ~ 1.1.1, noted that the Specifications and Drawings for
Construction clause, ~~ (d), ( e) and (f) (finding 1), applied to all submittals. Unger'
~ 1.1.2, "Construction Progress Schedule" and "Submittal register" were required
preconstruction submittals.· (R4, tab 7 at 270) Paragraph 1.4.3 provided:
a. Coordinate scheduling, sequencing, preparing and
processing ofsubmittals with performance ofwork so
that work will not be delayed by submittal processing.
Allow for potential requirements to resubmit.
b. Except as specified otherwise, allow review period,
beginning with receipt by approving authority, that
includes at least 15 working days for submittals for QC
Manager approval and 20 working days for submittals for
[CO] approval. ... [Resubmittal review period is same.]
d. No delay damages or tinle extensions will be allowed for
time lost iIi late submittals.
14