How should the Contracting Officer proceed when a contractor claims a constructive change based on oral directions from a Group Commander?

The correct approach in this scenario is to consult with JAG (Judge Advocate General) and ensure proper protocols are followed. When a contractor claims a constructive change based on oral directions, it raises significant legal implications. Oral directions can lead to disputes regarding the enforceability and validity of the claim, as they lack the formal documentation that typically accompanies contract changes. Engaging JAG ensures that the contracting officer has the necessary guidance on legal matters, including how to properly acknowledge and address the claim while adhering to regulations and contractual obligations.

Moreover, consulting JAG helps in determining whether any modifications to the contract were properly authorized and whether the contractor's assertion has merit under the law. This step is critical in protecting the government's interests and ensuring that any actions taken are legally sound, thus mitigating the risk of potential disputes or claims against the government in the future. By following this protocol, the contracting officer can effectively manage the situation and maintain compliance with established guidelines.