Two submissions can carry the same dollar figure, the same cost narrative, and the same signature block, and still land in different legal universes. A request for equitable adjustment asks the contracting officer to fix a price. A claim under the Contract Disputes Act demands a final decision that starts an interest meter and an appeal clock. FAR Part 33 governs the second; DFARS 243.204-71 governs the certification on the first.
Background
An REA is a negotiation tool. When the Government changes the work, delays site access, or constructively directs effort outside scope, the contractor prices the impact and asks for an adjustment. That submission triggers no deadline for the Government and earns no interest.
A claim is an assertion of right. FAR 33.201 defines accrual as the date when all events "that fix the alleged liability of either the Government or the contractor and permit assertion of the claim, were known or should have been known." Once that clock starts, FAR 33.206 gives the contractor six years: claims "shall be submitted, in writing, to the contracting officer for a decision within 6 years after accrual of a claim, unless the contracting parties agreed to a shorter time period." The same six-year limit sits in statute at 41 U.S.C. 7103(a)(4)(A).
The two documents also carry separate certifications with separate thresholds — and most published guidance still prints the wrong number for one.
Key Details
The CDA certification: $100,000. Under FAR 33.207 and 41 U.S.C. 7103(b)(1), any claim exceeding $100,000 must be certified. The certificate makes four statements: the claim is made in good faith; the supporting data are accurate and complete to the best of the contractor's knowledge and belief; the amount requested accurately reflects the contract adjustment for which the contractor believes the Government is liable; and the certifier is duly authorized to certify the claim on behalf of the contractor.
The DoD REA certification: $350,000. DFARS 243.204-71(a) provides that an REA exceeding the simplified acquisition threshold "may not be paid unless the contractor certifies the request in accordance with the clause at 252.243-7002," a requirement grounded in 10 U.S.C. 3862(a). FAR 2.101 sets that threshold at $350,000 — not the $250,000 figure still printed in much circulating guidance. For contingency, cyber, nuclear, biological, chemical or radiological attack response, and disaster or emergency acquisitions, FAR 2.101 raises it to $1 million inside the United States and $2 million outside it.
Absolute value, not net. DFARS 243.204-71(b) sets the arithmetic: to test the threshold, "add together the absolute value of each cost increase and each cost decrease." Increases and decreases do not offset. A change order that adds $200,000 of work and deletes $180,000 of other work is a $380,000 REA for certification purposes, even though the net ask is $20,000. Contractors who net the figures file uncertified REAs that needed a certificate.
The two certificates are not interchangeable. DFARS 243.204-71(c) says so directly: the REA certification implements 10 U.S.C. 3862(a), while the CDA certification implements 41 U.S.C. 7103. A contractor who certified an REA and then "desires to convert the request to a claim under the Contract Disputes statute... shall certify the claim in accordance with FAR subpart 33.2." So a 252.243-7002 certificate does no CDA work: it starts no interest and obliges no final decision. Claim rights are not forfeited — but neither are they preserved by that signature. They arrive only with a second, different certificate.
Defects are curable; absence is not. 41 U.S.C. 7103(b)(3) provides that "a defect in the certification of a claim does not deprive a court or an agency board of jurisdiction over the claim," and the tribunal may require correction before entering final judgment. That safety net covers a flawed certificate — wrong wording, wrong signatory. It does not cover a missing one.
The decision clocks. For claims of $100,000 or less, FAR 33.211 and 41 U.S.C. 7103(f)(1) require the contracting officer to issue a decision within 60 days of a written request. For claims over $100,000, 7103(f)(2) requires the CO within 60 days either to issue the decision or to notify the contractor when a decision will issue.
Interest. This is the economic heart of the distinction. FAR 33.208 runs CDA interest "from the date that the contracting officer receives the claim (certified if required)" or the date payment would otherwise be due, whichever is later. An REA sitting on a CO's desk for a year earns nothing. The identical package, submitted as a certified claim, accrues interest from the day it arrives.
Appeal deadlines. Once a final decision issues, FAR 33.211 gives 90 days to appeal to the agency Board of Contract Appeals, or 12 months to file at the U.S. Court of Federal Claims. Both run from receipt of the decision.
What It Means for Contractors
Fix the $350,000 number in your templates first. If a contract administration checklist, REA cover letter, or internal policy still keys DoD REA certification to $250,000, it is producing uncertified submissions above the real trigger and certified ones below it. Both signal a package off a stale form.
Compute the threshold with absolute values every time, and show the arithmetic. If the REA bundles a dozen change impacts, list each increase and decrease and total the absolute values. That table decides whether the certificate is required and leaves the CO nothing to argue about.
Decide deliberately whether you are filing an REA or a claim, and put the decision in writing. An REA is the right instrument while negotiation is genuinely live. It stops being the right instrument the moment the Government disputes liability or amount, or simply goes quiet. The FAR 2.101 definition of "claim" supplies the mechanism: a submission that is not a claim when made "may be converted to a claim, by written notice to the contracting officer as provided in 33.206(a), if it is disputed either as to liability or amount or is not acted upon in a reasonable time."
Treat the reasonable-time judgment as a calendared decision. Every month an REA drifts is a month of cost of money a claim would have captured. Set an internal review date when the REA goes out, and at that date either document why negotiation still justifies waiting or convert.
Finally, guard the six-year accrual date harder than the negotiation. Accrual runs from when the events fixing liability were known or should have been known — not from when the Government finally says no. A long, friendly, unproductive negotiation can consume years of that window while the contractor believes the clock has not started. Record the accrual date when the impact occurs and work backward from the deadline.
