Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Contract Defaults topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee proposal to limit default to payment rejected by counsel during contract review
Summary
A committee member proposed inserting the word 'payment' in section 13 to ensure a shortfall in purchased quantity would not trigger default; counsel declined the one-word change, citing operational and cost reasons.
A committee member (S3) raised concern that section 13 could be read to treat failure to purchase the contract quantity as a default. The member proposed inserting the single word "payment" to make the clause apply to payment defaults rather than performance defaults.
Counsel and staff rejected that proposed wording change. The committee member summarized counsel's position: altering a word in the contract would be impractical across thousands of existing contracts and would cost time and money to implement. "And it said simply, this is rejected," the member reported. The committee therefore did not secure the suggested one-word edit and accepted counsel's explanation as leaving the clause in its present form.
The decision to leave the clause as drafted was noted before the committee moved to approve the overall agreement; the transcript does not show a redline or amended text.
