accept payment directly from Weststar for work performed under the subcontract “when and if paid” by the Navy does not constitute a “clear and explicit” waiver of its Miller Act rights. Although the district court was correct in stating that “there is nothing about the Miller Act that forecloses the parties from restructuring the subcontract governing their relationship when, in adversity, they seek to cut their respective losses,” the Miller Act does not permit such “restructuring” to preclude a subcontractor from exercising its rights in accordance with the express terms of the Act in the absence of a “clear and explicit” waiver of those rights. A subcontractor that has performed as agreed need not await the Government’s payment of the contractor before i d 999, 1001 (4th Cir.1951) (<HOLDING>); United States ex rel. Benkart Co. v. John A.
holding  under the predecessor statute to the miller act  that the cost of food clothing and lodging for laborers is recoverable under the terms of the miller act holding that the cost of capital equipment is not recoverable under the terms of the miller act holding that injuries suffered by laborers are not recoverable under the terms of the miller act holding that lost profits are not recoverable under the terms of the miller act holding that freight and transportalion charges are not recoverable under the terms of the miller act