Claim under the Contract Disputes Act

Filing a claim is the formal trigger for the government's dispute resolution machinery. Understanding what constitutes a valid CDA claim, and what distinguishes it from an informal request or a routine invoice, determines whether a contractor's right to appeal is preserved or lost.

What is a Claim under the Contract Disputes Act?

Under FAR 33.201 and the Contract Disputes Act (CDA), a claim is a written demand or written assertion by a contractor or the government seeking, as a matter of right, the payment of money in a sum certain, the adjustment or interpretation of contract terms, or other relief arising under or relating to the contract. This definition has several important elements that distinguish a claim from other communications.

The demand must be in writing and must seek relief as a matter of right, not merely as a request or proposal. The contractor must assert an entitlement, not merely ask the government to consider a payment. For monetary claims over $100,000, the contractor must include a signed certification as specified in the CDA. The claim must be submitted to the contracting officer, who then has authority to issue a final decision. Once a final decision is issued -- or the contracting officer fails to act within the statutory timeframe -- the contractor has 90 days to appeal to the appropriate Board of Contract Appeals or 12 months to file at the Court of Federal Claims.

Why CDA claims matter for government contractors

The distinction between a claim and an informal dispute matters enormously. Courts and boards have repeatedly ruled that a Requests for Equitable Adjustment (REA) submitted without express language asserting a right to relief does not constitute a CDA claim, meaning the 90-day appeal clock did not start running from the REA's submission. Contractors who wait too long to convert an REA into a formal claim can find themselves time-barred. The 6-year statute of limitations on CDA claims also means contractors cannot wait indefinitely to assert rights on older issues.

Example

A contractor submits a Request for Equitable Adjustment (REA) for $2.3 million in additional costs caused by government-furnished equipment delays. The contracting officer negotiates informally for six months but never issues a final decision. The contractor's counsel advises that the REA does not constitute a formal CDA claim because it lacks the required certification and explicit demand language. The contractor files a compliant CDA claim with certification, restarting the clock and preserving the right to appeal.

Frequently Asked Questions

Is a Request for Equitable Adjustment (REA) the same as a CDA claim?

Not necessarily. An REA is a common pre-claim document used to negotiate before formalizing a claim. It becomes a CDA claim only if it is in writing, makes a definite demand for a sum certain or specific relief, asserts entitlement as a matter of right, and (for amounts over $100,000) includes the required certification.

What must the certification say?

The certifying contractor representative must state: (1) the claim is made in good faith; (2) the supporting data are accurate and complete to the best of their knowledge and belief; (3) the amount requested accurately reflects the contract adjustment the contractor believes is due; and (4) the certifier is authorized to certify the claim on behalf of the contractor.

Can the government file a CDA claim against a contractor?

Yes. The government can file claims against contractors for things like cost disallowances, overpayments, defective pricing, and failure to perform. The same procedural framework applies.

What is the statute of limitations for CDA claims?

CDA claims must be submitted within six years of when the claim accrued. Missing this deadline generally bars the claim entirely.

Does filing a CDA claim damage the contractor-agency relationship?

Filing a formal claim signals a breakdown in informal resolution and can strain the relationship. Using ADR before filing a formal claim is encouraged by FAR and often produces faster, cheaper results while preserving the working relationship.