When a project owner alters the scope of work, it is customary to ask the contractor for a change order cost proposal. This may occur prior to issuance of the change order, when the owner is merely considering the change. Or, it may occur after the owner has issued a unilateral contract modification. In either event, the preparation of change order cost proposals can be time-consuming and expensive.

Under most construction contracts, change order cost proposals are part of the contractor's administrative overhead. But on federal construction contracts, the expense of these efforts is sometimes recoverable as a direct cost. Recovery is predicated, however, on the proper documentation and allocation of the expenses. A federal contract appeals board recently grappled with this issue when awarding a contractor some -  but not all - of its change order cost proposal expenses.

Other cases this week involve payment for design services under a design/build contract and the application of an "anti-SLAPP" statute to a public procurement protest. Careless drafting of the design/build document left the contractor without a contractual right to payment after the owner decided not to build. And the anti-SLAPP statute was intended to protect free speech in public matters, not to shield violators of the competitive bidding laws.