Payne Hackenbracht & Sullivan
Contra-Proferentum
Once the existence of a latent ambiguity is established, the board must determine whether to apply the rule of "contra proferentem" and adopt the contractor's interpretation of the ambiguous contract language. A means of choosing among conflicting, reasonable interpretations of ambiguous contract language, "contra proferentem" places the risk of ambiguity and lack of clarity on the drafting party. See Sturm v. United States, 421 F.2d 723, 727 (Ct.Cl. 1970). Thus, where a contractor reasonably interprets an ambiguous government specification, the rule requires that the contractor's interpretation be upheld. See Peter Kiewit Sons' Co. v. United States, 109 Ct.Cl. 390, 418 (1947); W.P.C. Enterprises, Inc. v. United States, 323 F.2d 874 (Ct.Cl. 1963).