Differing site conditions occur when there are unforeseen conditions, either subsurface or physical, that alters the working conditions of a site within a construction site. The conditions may be due to buried debris or other conditions such as rocky surface in a soft soil surface. In the case of Rehab Inc., after realizing the differing site conditions, there are different site conditions. According to clause 52.236.2 of FAR on differing site conditions, the first step is to write to the contracting government officer to inform him of the differing site conditions (Cibinic, Nash, & Angle, 2006).
I will write to the officer asking for adjustment in the contract price and the time for implementation. I will also inform our contracting officer to record any new unforeseen cost incurred in transport the unexploded ordinance. Recording of the extra cost will be used in calculating the new cost of construction. It will also be used if there is a dispute to be taken to any court of law. The consequences of the new development will be an increase in the contract's cost between the government and Rehab Inc.
The rise in price will come from the cost of moving the unexploded ordinance from the site and dumping them where they will not be harmful. The second reason for the rise in the cost will be the change from rehabilitation to a complete overhaul because the building is crumbling. After receiving the letter from Rehab Inc., the government construction officer may visit the site to determine the differing site conditions that have been highlighted in the letter written to him by us. After doing his own assessment, he may decide to adjust the contract accordingly or as per his own views. The new adjustment in the contract will be tabled to Rehab Inc. for considerations. If Rehab Inc. agrees to the new terms of the contract, they will proceed with the construction work. If there is a disagreement Rehab Inc. will seek arbitration in a court of law.
The court of law, when trying to settle the dispute between the government and Rehab Inc., will consider whether the Rehab Inc. request is within the FAR clause on differing site conditions. In this case, the court will find that it is within the clause. The court will also determine whether the new cost of the contract will cover the expense incurred by Rehab Inc. in implementing the new development. Here the court will ask for documents to show any further costs incurred. If the court finds it worth it will solve the case in favor of Rehab Inc. The court may also want to determine if due diligence was done by Rehab Inc. before getting into a contract with the government. In this scenario, the contracting government officer may wish to produce the companies' names present during site seeing. Here the court will rule in favor of the government. The FAR clause on contracting states that due diligence should be done before getting into a contract. Therefore Rehab Inc. will lose the case.
The court of law, when trying to settle the dispute between the government and Rehab Inc., will consider whether the Rehab Inc. request is within the FAR clause on differing site conditions. In this case, the court will find that it is within the clause. The court will also determine whether the new cost of the contract will cover the expense incurred by Rehab Inc. in implementing the new development. Here the court will ask for documents to show any further costs incurred. If the court finds it worth it will solve the case in favor of Rehab Inc. The court may also want to determine if due diligence was done by Rehab Inc. before getting into a contract with the government. In this scenario, the contracting government officer may wish to produce the companies' names present during site seeing. Here the court will rule in favor of the government. The FAR clause on contracting states that due diligence should be done before getting into a contract. Therefore Rehab Inc. will lose the case.
