1. Home
  2. |Insights
  3. |Limitation of Funds Clause Puts Bite in Termination Recovery

Limitation of Funds Clause Puts Bite in Termination Recovery

Client Alert | less than 1 min read | 12.30.13

In The Boeing Co. (Dec. 3, 2013), the Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals served a reminder of the risks Limitation of Funds (LOF) clauses pose for contractors, who normally must assure that funding on their contracts will be adequate not only for work underway but also for recovery of prime and subcontract costs in the event of a termination for convenience. The Board refused to allow recovery of costs incurred in excess of the funded amounts, holding that, if the contractor incurred costs in excess of the allotted funding, "it was a volunteer and did so for its own account."


Contacts

Insights

Client Alert | 3 min read | 05.28.26

PFAS Regulatory Alert: EPA Rolls Back RCRA Proposed Rule on “Hazardous Waste” but Does Not Disturb Proposed RCRA Rule on PFAS

Earlier this month, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) withdrew a February 2024 Biden administration proposed rule, “Definition of Hazardous Waste Applicable to Corrective Action for Releases From Solid Waste Management Units,” under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA).[1] The withdrawn proposal would have revised RCRA corrective action regulations to expressly apply the broader statutory definition of “hazardous waste,” rather than only the narrower regulatory definition. Now, EPA is maintaining the status quo for corrective action under RCRA. However, EPA’s withdrawal of its proposed RCRA hazardous waste definition makes no mention of its corresponding proposal from 2024 to list nine per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) as RCRA hazardous constituents.[2] This disjointed withdrawal, while providing some certainty for regulated entities, does not resolve how EPA plans to address PFAS under the RCRA program....

View All Insights