(a) An auditor recommends disallowance of certain direct labor and direct materials costs, for which a billing has been submitted under a contract, on the basis that these particular costs were not required for performance and were not authorized by the contract. The contracting officer issues a written decision which supports the auditor's position that the questioned costs are unallowable. Following receipt of the contracting officer's decision, the contractor must clearly identify the disallowed direct labor and direct material costs in his accounting records and reports covering any subsequent submission which includes such costs. Also, if the contractor's base for allocation of any indirect cost pool relevant to the subject contract consists of direct labor, direct material, total prime cost, total cost input, etc., he must include the disallowed direct labor and material costs in his allocation base for such pool. Had the contracting officer's decision been against the auditor, the contractor would not, of course, have been required to account separately for the costs questioned by the auditor.

(b) A contractor incurs, and separately identifies, as a part of his manufacturing overhead, certain costs which are expressly unallowable under the existing and currently effective regulations. If manufacturing overhead is regularly a part of the contractor's base for allocation of general and administrative (G&A) or other indirect expenses, the contractor must allocate the G&A or other indirect expenses to contracts and other final cost objectives by means of a base which includes the identified unallowable manufacturing overhead costs.

(c) An auditor recommends disallowance of the total direct indirect costs attributable to an organizational planning activity. The contractor claims that the total of these activity costs are allowable under the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) as “Economic planning costs” (48 CFR 31.205-12); the auditor contends that they constitute “Organization costs” (48 CFR 31.205-27) and therefore are unallowable. The issue is referred to the contracting officer for resolution pursuant to the contract disputes clause. The contracting officer issues a written decision supporting the auditor's position that the total costs questioned are unallowable under the FAR. Following receipt of the contracting officer's decision, the contractor must identify the disallowed costs and specific other costs incurred for the same purpose in like circumstances in any subsequent estimating, cost accumulation or reporting for Government contracts, in which such costs are included. If the contracting officer's decision had supported the contractor's contention, the costs questioned by the auditor would have been allowable “Economic planning costs,” and the contractor would not have been required to provide special identification.

(d) A defense contractor was engaged in a program of expansion and diversification of corporate activities. This involved internal corporate reorganization, as well as mergers and acquisitions. All costs of this activity were charged by the contractor as corporate or segment general and administrative (G&A) expense. In the contractor's proposals for final Segment G&A rates (including corporate home office allocations) to be applied in determining allowable costs of its defense contracts subject to 48 CFR part 31, the contractor identified and excluded the expressly unallowable costs (as listed in 48 CFR 31.205-12) incurred for incorporation fees and for charges for special services of outside attorneys, accountants, promoters, and consultants. In addition, during the course of negotiation of interim bidding and billing G&A rates, the contractor agreed to classify as unallowable various in-house costs incurred for the expansion program, and various directly associated costs of the identifiable unallowable costs. On the basis of negotiations and agreements between the contractor and the contracting officers' authorized representatives, interim G&A rates were established, based on the net balance of allowable G&A costs. Application of the rates negotiated to proposals, and on an interim basis to billings, for covered contracts constitutes compliance with the Standard.

(e) An official of a company, whose salary, travel, and subsistence expenses are charged regularly as general and administrative (G&A) expenses, takes several business associates on what is clearly a business entertainment trip. The entertainment costs of such trips is expressly unallowable because it constitutes entertainment expense, and is separately identified by the contractor. The contractor does not regularly include his G&A expenses in any indirect-expense allocation base. In these circumstances, the official's travel and subsistence expenses would be directly associated costs for identification with the unallowable entertainment expense. However, unless this type of activity constituted a significant part of the official's regular duties and responsibilities on which his salary was based, no part of the official's salary would be required to be identified as a directly associated cost of the unallowable entertainment expense.

[57 FR 14153, Apr. 17, 1992; 57 FR 34167, Aug. 3, 1992; 57 FR 43776, Sept. 22, 1992]