Stan Hinton

Home
Contact Me
2018 Blog
2017 Blog
2016 Blog
2015 Blog
2014 Blog
2013 Blog
2012 Blog
2011 Blog
2010 Blog
2009 Blog
2008 Blog
2007 Blog
2017 Procurement Review
2016 Procurement Review
2015 Procurement Review
2014 Procurement Review
2013 Procurement Review
2012 Procurement Review
2011 Procurement Review
2010 Procurement Review
2009 Procurement Review
2008 Procurement Review
2007 Procurement Review
Statutes
Regulations
Directives
Courts
GAO
Boards
SBA
Agency Sites
More Agencies
Periodicals
Research
 

Recent ASBCA Decisions (2013-Present)



 

 

Click on any case name below to link directly to the decision

 

 Jurisdiction, CDA, Claim Definition and Sufficiency, Timeliness, Statute of Limitations, etc.

Afghan Washington Construction Co., ASBCA No. 60856 (Mar. 20, 2018) (dismisses appeal filed from a fake email address by individual who apparently was impersonating contractor's President)

PROTEC GmbH, ASBCA Nos. 61161, 61162, 61185 (Mar. 20, 2018) (Board has jurisdiction over appeals from Contracting Officer's decisions that were not based on suspicion of fraud even though contractor is under investigation for possible fraud)

John Shaw LLC d/b/a Shaw Building Maintenance, ASBCA No. 61379 (Mar. 8, 2018) (dismisses claims for punitive damages (because Board lacks authority to award them) and for "missed opportunities" (because these are consequential damages that are too remote and speculative)), contractor's motion for reconsideration denied

John C. Grimberg Co., ASBCA No. 60371 (Feb. 15, 2018) (Board has jurisdiction over amended complaint adding superior knowledge count because it is based on same operative facts as original claim; any prejudice that might otherwise be attributed to submission of amended Complaint on eve of hearing is mitigated by fact that hearing has been postponed and Government, therefore, has time to respond, e.g., by deposing additional witnesses)

Khenj Logistics Group, ASBCA No. 61178 (Feb. 15, 2018) (dismisses appeal because contractor neglected to submit claim for more than six years after Contracting Officer failed to honor commitment to pay for materials)

Horton Construction Co., ASBCA No. 61085 (Feb. 14, 2018) (contractor that was decertified by State of Louisiana, but then reinstated retroactive to the date of decertification, has legal capacity to maintain appeal at Board; even if individual that signed CDA claim certification is ultimately proved to have lacked authority to do so, that does not deprive the Board of jurisdiction because it is a curable defect in the certification) 

Green Valley Co., ASBCA No. 61275 (Feb. 13, 2018) (contractor's failure to submit claim within six year limitations period is not excused by pendency of Government suit against contractor in District Court or by contractor's fear that Government would respond to claim by submitting fraud-based defense)

Hill Contracting Co., ASBCA No. 61360 (Feb. 6, 2018) (dismisses appeal for contractor's failure to respond to Board order to show that it was represented by a person meeting the requirements of Board Rule 15(a))

Tawhid Afzali Construction Co., ASBCA No. 61198 (Jan. 9, 2018) (evidence demonstrates appellant was not the contractor and the purported claim did not state a sum certain)

Austin Logistic Services Co., ASBCA Nos. 60916, 61052 (Jan. 8, 2018) (denies claim for alleged lease expenses of housing contractor's employees who were performing maintenance duties at Bagram Airfield in Afghanistan because, inter alia, the purported lease document did not state the beginning and ending dates of the lease (and a subsequent document that allegedly  included the dates was not submitted in English or translated) and the contract provided that the contractor's workers could be billeted at the base)

UTi, United States, LLC, ASBCA No. 60188 (Dec. 12, 2017) (no CDA jurisdiction over bill of lading acquisitions governed by ICA/Transportation Act)

North Arizona Construction Co., ASBCA No. 60128 (Dec. 11, 2017) (dismisses, as untimely, appeal filed almost four years after receipt of Contracting Officer's decision denying claim)

Ikhana, LLC, ASBCA Nos. 60462, et al. (Oct. 18, 2017) (denies surety's and Government's motions to dismiss contractor's affirmative claims and its appeal of default termination because contractor's right to CDA appeal cannot be waived by assignment of claims to surety)

L-3 Communications Integrated Systems, L.P., ASBCA Nos. 60713, 60716 (Sep. 27, 2017) (Contracting Officer's written decisions demanded sum certain and provided contractor with sufficient notice of basis and amount of Government's claims and, thus, contractor's motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction is denied)

NileCo General Contracting LLC, ASBCA No. 60912 (Sep. 22, 2017) (dismisses appeal for lack of jurisdiction because contractor included only typewritten signature block on the original claim, but no actual signature)

Elham Ahmadi Construction Co., ASBCA No.  61031 (Sep. 21, 2017) (no jurisdiction over untimely appeal submitted more than six years after default termination on which it was based)

Lulus Ostrich Ranch, ASBCA Nos. 61225, 61226 (Sep. 7, 2017) (no jurisdiction over bid-protest type claim that Government allegedly violated procurement rules by awarding contracts to other contractors; however, jurisdiction over claim that Government extended appellant's contract only as a pretext to permit subcontractor time to become eligible to perform contract in appellant's stead)

E.C. London & Assocs. , ASBCA No. 60273 (Sep. 1, 2017) (denies contractor's claim for cleaning windows added by changes because (i) evidence presented by Government establishes added windows were offset by others taken offline such that contractor was paid for square footage indicated in task orders and (ii) record contains no explanation of methodology used to come up with contrary square footage measurements once made by one government employee (and no way to replicate those figures); no jurisdiction over contractor's request for Prompt Payment Act interest on other portions of its claim that were allowed because contractor had not submitted Prompt Payment Act claim to Contracting Officer)

Elizabeth Construction Co., ASBCA No. 60723 (Aug. 21, 2017) (dismisses appeal for lack of jurisdiction because appellant did not allege any contract between it and United States)

Hellenic Air Force, ASBCA No. 60802 (Aug. 2, 2017) (dismisses appeal for lack of jurisdiction because Board lacks jurisdiction to provide requested relief in the nature of an injunction, i.e., ordering Government to re-open or reinstate FMS agreement)

Safeco Insurance Co. of America, ASBCA No. 60952 (July 25, 2017) (dismisses appeal for lack of jurisdiction because (i) Board lacks CDA jurisdiction over equitable subrogation claims and appellant failed to present non-frivolous allegations of required elements of implied-in-fact contract) 

Hanboo Construction Co., Ltd., ASBCA No. 60591 (July 14, 2017) (dismisses appeal after company advised the Board that it knew nothing about the original appeal letter and that individual who signed it no longer worked for the company)

K2 Solutions, Inc., ASBCA No. 60907 (July 13, 2017) (dismisses contractor's claims that option exercise improperly reduced contract's scope of work, finding that attempted option exercise was ineffective because it differed from the terms of the contract; refuses to dismiss contractor's claim that Government breached duty of good faith and fair dealing)

Anaconda Construction Co., ASBCA No. 60905 (June 26, 2017) (dismisses appeal for failure to file within 90 days of receipt of Contracting Officer's decision)

ABS Development Corp., ASBCA Nos. 61042, et al. (Jun. 14, 2017) (denies Government's motion to dismiss appeals as having been filed prematurely; Contracting Officer failed to issue decision within reasonable time)

Melwood Horticultural Training Center, Inc., ASBCA No. 60666 (June 7, 2017) (claim as a whole did not state sum certain, although portions of it stated definite sums)

[Redacted], ASBCA Nos. 60814, 60864 (June 1, 2017) (dismisses appeal for lack of jurisdiction because contractor failed to submit signed certification to Contracting Officer prior to filing appeal)

Andrews Contracting Services, LLC, ASBCA No. 60808 (May 22, 2017) (dismisses appeal because contractor's Request for Equitable Adjustment  did not request a Contracting Officer's decision and, therefore, was not a CDA claim)

American Green Land Construction Co., ASBCA No. 60986 (May 10, 2017) (dismisses appeal for lack of jurisdiction because no evidence contractor submitted claim to Contracting Officer prior to filing appeal)

Parsons Government Services, Inc., ASBCA No. 60663 (May 3, 2017) (appeal based on contention that Government allegedly violated statutory requirements for source of contract funding (thereby allegedly rendering the contract void ab initio, entitling contractor to recover in quantum meruit) is dismissed for failure to state claim upon which relief can be granted because statutes at issue provide no private cause of action)

Islands Mechanical Contractor, Inc., ASBCA No. 59655 (Apr. 13, 2017) (dismisses appeal because portion of "claim" was actually a proposal for additional work, and, therefore, did not demand a sum certain as a matter of right)

TKC International LLC, ASBCA No. 59784 (Apr. 6, 2017) (dismisses appeal because individual filing appeal failed to present any evidence that he was "officer" of company entitled to represent it in accordance with Board Rule 15)

[Redacted], ASBCA No. 60841 (Apr. 3, 2017) (dismisses appeal because underlying claim in excess of $100,000 included only a typed signature block but no actual signature)

USAC Aerospace Group dba USAC Aerospace Group Ordnance Division, ASBCA No. 59186 (Mar. 16, 2017) (dismisses appeal because the alleged corporate appellant failed to provide evidence of its legal capacity to bring its appeal or the authority of its alleged representative under Board Rule 15)

DCX-CHOL Enterprises, Inc., ASBCA No. 60782 (Mar. 15, 2017) (dismisses appeal as moot after Contracting Officer rescinded the underlying demand for payment that was being appealed)

Public Warehousing Co., K.S.C., ASBCA No. 58088 (Mar. 7, 2017) (Board lacks jurisdiction to certify prior decisions (staying Board case during pendency of district court fraud case and allowing Government to amend answer to assert affirmative defenses) for interlocutory review by CAFC)

Shippers Stevedoring Co., ASBCA No. 60309 (Mar. 7, 2017) (dismisses appeal because neither the appellant nor its representative responded to numerous board communications inquiring whether the representative met the requirements of Board rule 15(a))

Kandahar Gravel Supplies and Logistics, ASBCA 60531 (Mar. 6, 2017) (no jurisdiction over uncertified claim  in excess of $100,000), contractor's motion for recosideration denied

[Redacted], ASBCA No. 60597 (Mar. 3, 2017) (despite government actions that might have converted settlement proposal into disputed claim, no jurisdiction because proposal exceeded $100,000, but was uncertified)

Rover Construction Co., ASBCA No. 60703 (Mar. 1, 2017) (denies Government's motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction because, viewed as a whole, numerous emails between contractor and Government sufficed to convert routine invoice into claim)

Military Aircraft Parts, ASBCA No. 60308 (Mar. 1, 2017) (rejects contractor's argument that CAFC's holding in Sikorsky Aircraft (that six-year limit for submitting claims is not a statute of limitations) should be extended to apply to CDA's 90-day limit for appealing Contracting Officer's decision; absent evidence of when contractor received government email transmitting another Contracting Officer's decision, Board refuses to dismiss appeal from that decision as untimely)

Carter Safety Consultants, Inc., ASBCA No. 60779 (Feb. 22, 2017) (no jurisdiction over appeal filed more than 90 days after receipt of Contracting Officer's decision; attempt to file appeal within 90 days with wrong forum (in this case, the GAO) is unavailing)

Military Aircraft Parts, ASBCA No. 60139 (Feb. 21, 2017) (contractor's failure to appeal default termination decision within 90 days not excused by fact that contract did not include a "Default" clause)

Thorington Electrical and Construction Co., ASBCA No. 60476 (Feb. 16, 2017) (claim submitted more than six years after it accrued is time-barred, and there is no provision in CDA to cure this problem by allowing claim to "relate back" to earlier claim on which Contracting Officer already issued decision and which had already been disposed of on appeal)

[Redacted], ASBCA No. 60652 (Feb. 7, 2017) (dismisses appeal for lack of jurisdiction absent evidence contractor had submitted claim to Contracting Officer)

Sparton DeLeon Springs, LLC, ASBCA No. 60416 (Dec. 28, 2016) (Contracting Officer's decision demanding reimbursement of direct costs is government claim and time-barred because it was issued more than six years after Government knew or should have known of claim), Government's motion for reconsideration denied

URS Federal Support Services, Inc., ASBCA No. 60364 (Dec. 5, 2016) (dismisses as moot appeal from Contracting Officer's decision that was subsequently withdrawn)

BAE Systems Tactical Vehicle Systems LP, ASBCA Nos. 59491, 60433 (Dec. 5, 2016) (dismisses (as moot) appeal based on decision alleging government claim for defective pricing, which Contracting Officer rescinded)

B3 Solutions LLC, ASBCA No. 60654 ( Dec. 1, 2016) (dismisses direct appeal by second-tier subcontractor for lack of jurisdiction because there was no privity of contract with the Government and no claim sponsored by the prime)

The Adamant Group for Contracting and General Trading, ASBCA No. 60316 (Nov. 29, 2016) (dismisses appeal as time-barred because contractor failed to follow-up with any inquiries on an unpaid invoice until more than nine years  had passed)

KBAJ Enterprises, LLC t/d/b/a Home Again, ASBCA No. 60014 (Nov. 22, 2016) (dismisses appeal because contractor's alleged claim letter was not sent to Contracting Officer and did not request a decision by the Contracting Officer)

Sauer Inc., ASBCA No. 60366 (Nov. 17, 2016) (strikes claim raised for first time in Complaint filed with Board)

ABS Development Corp., ASBCA Nos. 60022, et al.(Nov. 17, 2016) (dismisses appeal because typing name of alleged claim certifier in cursive font does not result in signature that can be authenticated)

RECO Rishad Engineering Construction ORG, ASBCA No. 60444 (Nov. 10, 2016) (dismisses appeal because claim certification included only typed name of official and was not signed), contractor's motion for reconsideration denied

Washington Star Construction Co., ASBCA No. 60644 (Nov. 8, 2016) (dismisses appeal for failure to submit claim to Contracting Officer)

Genuine Construction Co., ASBCA No. 60626 (Nov. 7, 2016) (dismisses appeal for failure to submit claim to Contracting Officer)

Excel Link Construction Co., ASBCA No. 60419 (Nov. 7, 2016) (dismisses appeal appealing designation as "Not Eligible for Installation Access" in vendor vetting program because there was no contract between the firm and the Government and no prior claim to the Contracting Officer)

Creative Times Dayschool, Inc. ASBCA Nos. 58507, 59779 (Oct. 20, 2016) (court lacks jurisdiction over appeal from Contracting Officer's response to submission that had begun as a claim but which the contractor had subsequently converted into an REA)

Military Aircraft Parts, ASBCA No. 60739 (Oct. 12, 2016) (notice of appeal rights in decision by Contracting Officer need not inform contractor that if it chooses appeal to Court of Federal Claims company cannot be represented by non-attorney appearing pro se)

Colonna's Shipyard, Inc., ASBCA Nos. 59987, et al. (Oct. 6, 2016) (Board lacks jurisdiction over contractor's (i) claim that its due process rights were violated by Government's failure to permit contractor to review and respond to negative comments in CPAR before it was published and (ii) contractor's request for injunctive relief or specific performance, but retains jurisdiction over other disputes involving CPARs)

Marine Amazon Construction Co., ASBCA No. 60658 (Oct. 4, 2016) (dismisses appeal involving claim not previously submitted to Contracting Officer for decision)

KBAJ Enterprises, LLC  t/d/b/a Home Again, ASBCA Nos. 59932, et al.  (Sep. 9, 2016) (dismisses appeals because contractor did not submit monetary claims for sum certain to Contracting Officer)

Fahim Noori Construction Co., ASBCA No. 60659 (Sep. 8, 2016) (dismisses appeal because contractor's only submission to Contracting Officer was routine request for payment as an invoice)

Amaratek, ASBCA No. 60503 (Sep. 7, 2016) (dismisses appeal because claim challenging Government's in-sourcing decision is akin to bid protest over which Board lacks jurisdiction)

Exelis, Inc., ASBCA No. 60131 (Aug. 29, 2016) (dismisses Government's CAS 404 claim because building lease is not a tangible asset), Government's motion for reconsideration denied

Suzan Co., ASBCA No. 59817 (Aug. 17, 2016) (dismisses appeal because no evidence certification was provided to Contracting Officer before decision on claim was issued)

Arab Shah Construction Co., ASBCA No. 60553 (Aug. 4, 2016) (dismisses appeal because no evidence claim in any form was filed with Contracting Officer)

Panjshir Kandahur Construction Co., ASBCA No. 60173 (July 14, 2016) (dismisses appeal because no claim (only a routine invoice) was filed previously with Contracting Officer)

GSC Construction, Inc., ASBCA Nos. 59402 , 59601 (July 12, 2016) (Board has jurisdiction to decide whether termination based on alleged violations of contract's labor provisions was justified)

ABB Enterprise Software , Inc., f/k/a Ventyx, ASBCA No. 60314 (June 29, 2016) (Board has jurisdiction over dispute involving license agreement connected with software that Government was acquiring under CDA contract)

Black Tiger Co., ASBCA No. 59819 (June 29, 2016) (after appellant alleged existence of contract and provided some evidence of it, Board refuses to dismiss appeal based on Government's contention that it could find no reference to such a contract in its records)

Government Services Corp., ASBCA No. 60367 (June 20, 2016) (Board had jurisdiction over contractor's claim for "$100,000" because it was stated as a sum certain even though, in response to Contracting Officer's query re how that amount was calculated, contractor stated it was "good faith estimate . . . derived by a simple mathematical formula of estimating the future expense, both administrative and legal, that is expected to be required to counter the apparent bad faith libelous actions of" the Government)

Kellogg Brown & Root Services, Inc., ASBCA Nos. 58518, 59005 (June 16, 2016) (denies contractor's motions for summary judgment alleging that government nonmonetary and monetary claims were filed more than six years after they accrued)

Access Personnel Services, Inc., ASBCA No. (June 15, 2016) (denies Government's motion to dismiss appeal as untimely because contractor showed detrimental reliance on the absence of notice of its appeal rights in the Contracting Officer's decision)

Military Aircraft Parts, ASBCA No. 60139 (June 3, 2016) (no jurisdiction over contractor breach claims that implicitly were challenges to default terminations the contractor had not timely appealed), contractor's motion for reconsideration denied

Mansoor International Development Services, ASBCA Nos. 59466, et al. (May 19, 2016) (dismisses (as untimely) appeals filed more than 12 months after receipt of Contracting Officer's decisions because record shows contractor  failed to show prejudice from defective notice of appeals rights in decisions and received notice of its appeal rights by other means and was aware of them)

Leviathan Corp., ASBCA No. 58659 (May 12, 2016) (contractor's appeal based on written settlement offer made and signed by  DCMA Contracting Officer in form of proposed contract modification, which contractor accepted by signing, was sufficient to establish CDA jurisdiction of Board despite the fact that the original contracting entity (Iraq's CPA) was not one over which the Board has jurisdiction)

Public Warehousing Co., K.S.C., ASBCA No. 59020 (May 2, 2016) (liability for Prompt Payment Act penalties accrues, for each invoice, when the Government pays the invoice without paying any required  Prompt Payment interest; Board denies Government motion for summary judgment based on six-year limitations period because Government did not allege when each invoice was paid)

Military Aircraft Parts, ASBCA No. 60336 (Apr. 25, 2016) (no jurisdiction over appeal alleging termination of contract was a breach because it was not filed within 90 days of termination), contractor's motion for reconsideration denied

Bushra Co., ASBCA No. 59918 (Apr. 22, 2016) (appeal filed more than 90 days of notice of termination is untimely even though notice referred contractor to applicable FAR provisions rather than directly stating its appeal rights because contractor did not allege any prejudice from defect in termination notice) motion for reconsideration denied.

Afghan Active Group (AAG), ASBCA No. 60387 (Apr. 14, 2016) (contractor's emails to Contracting Officer evidencing intent to "appeal" (even absent direct appeal to Board and specific indication that the Board was where the contractor wanted its appeal filed) were sufficient for jurisdiction at Board, especially where the Contracting Officer's decision had not advised the contractor of its option of filing suit at the Court of Federal Claims)

Global Engineering & Construction, LLC, ASBCA Nos. 60072, et al. (Apr., 1, 2016) (no CDA jurisdiction because contractor's letters to Government did not amount to claim, especially where the amount at issue exceeded $100,000, but there was no certification; Government's letter to contractor did not contain indicia of finality that would constitute government claim)

AeroVironment, Inc., ASBCA Nos. 58598, 99 (Mar. 30, 2016) (proposed amendments to Government's answers are actually new claims first raised by Government's trial attorney over which ASBCA lacks jurisdiction because they are beyond scope of Contracting Officer's decision)

HK&S Construction Holding Corp., ASBCA No. 60164 (Mar. 25, 2016) (absent any indication in any of multiple copies of Contracting Officer's decision sent to contractor as to which of of them is supposed to start the appeal clock running, contractor is entitled to use the copy that it received last)

Aetna Government Health Plans, ASBCA No. 60207 (Feb. 10, 2016) (refuses to dismiss proper appeal from deemed denial because Contracting Officer failed to issue decision within 60 days of submission of certified claim and failed to specify non-contingent date by which decision could be expected)

Shavers-Whittle Construction, LLC, ASBCA No. 60025 (Feb. 9, 2016) (no jurisdiction over direct appeal by subcontractor, especially where letter subcontractor claims was its claim was not for a sum certain and was not certified and where subcontractor requested action (to have the prime contract voided) beyond Board's jurisdiction)

Military Aircraft Parts, ASBCA No. 60290 (Feb. 4, 2016) (termination for convenience belatedly  issued  after contractor already had submitted breach claim based on prior, erroneously issued cancellation, did not deprive Board of jurisdiction over appeal involving alleged breach)

Kellogg Brown & Root Services, Inc., ASBCA No. 58583 (Jan. 19, 2016) (denies Government's motion to dismiss claim for lack of jurisdiction (as time-barred) after Sikorsky established that the CDA's six-year limitations period is not jurisdictional)

Shafi Nasimi  Construction and Logistics Co.,  ASBCA No. 59916 (Jan. 6, 2016) (absent allegation of prejudice or detrimental reliance, Contracting Officer's default termination, which notified contractor of right to appeal but not time limits, was valid and started 90-day appeal clock; dismisses untimely appeal for lack of jurisdiction because Government's communications with contractor during appeal period could not reasonably be considered as a reconsideration of Contracting Officer's decision) 

Strobe Data, Inc., ASBCA No. 60123 (Jan. 5, 2016) (dismisses appeal for lack of jurisdiction because claim for a "minimum" of, and "likely more" than, a stated amount was not for a sum certain)

Global Energy U.S.-DLA Acquisitions LLC, ASBCA No. 59996 (Nov. 10, 2015) (dismisses appeal after contractor fails to identify its representative for purposes of Board's proceedings)

Ahjar  Shat Alarab Albidhaa Co., ASBCA No. 59868 (Nov. 4, 2015) (denies Government's motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction because Government failed to present credible evidence that it had failed to receive emailed claim sent to address Government had previously provided to contractor)

Air Services, Inc., ASBCA No. 59843 (Oct. 22, 2015) (denies Government's motion to dismiss claim for lack of CDA jurisdiction: revised REA satisfied requirements for a claim in context of totality of parties' communications even though it did not include a request for a Contracting Officer's decision; DFARS  252.243-7002  certification included with REA was deficient but correctable CDA certification)

Matcon Diamond, Inc. ASBCA No. 59637 (Oct. 21, 2015) (denies Government's motion to dismiss for failure to state claim upon which relief can be granted because Government has not shown from pleadings alone that claim was not submitted until after final payment or that Government was not aware of basis of claim prior to that time)

Bahram Malikzada Construction Co., ASBCA Nos. 59613, -14 (Oct. 8, 2015) (dismisses appeal as untimely because email sent by  contractor to Contracting Officer within 90 day period stating it "would start its appeal" did not express an intent to appeal to Board)

DynPort Vaccine Co. LLC, ASBCA No.  60119 (Sep. 30, 2015) (Contracting Officer cannot divest Board of its CDA jurisdiction to entertain appeals from government claims by issuing a letter characterizing his six unilateral contract modifications directing performance of corrective work at no cost to the Government as something other than final decisions)

MicroTechnologies, LLC, ASBCA Nos. 59911, 12 (Sep. 29, 2015) (ASBCA strikes portion of Complaint asking that Government be ordered to revise CPAR because Board does not have jurisdiction to grant specific performance or injunctive relief), subsequently Board struck portion of amended Complaint requesting remand to Contracting Officer with requirement to provide revised, fair CPAR

Bell Helicopter Textron Inc. and The Boeing Co., ASBCA No. 59561 (Sep. 16, 2015) (individual from one company had requisite authority to sign claim certification on behalf of both; appeal filed jointly in names of two companies will be construed as having been brought by their joint venture that was the contracting party)

Environmental Chemical Corp., ASBCA No. 58871 (Sep. 14, 2015) (allows contractor to amend Complaint concerning delay claim by adding count for Eichleay  unabsorbed overhead damages and certain allegations concerning breaches of the implied warranty of good faith and fair dealing because new language arose from same operative facts as delay claim and could reasonably be inferred from it; refuses to recognize amendment adding other allegations of breach of implied duty of good faith and fair dealing because it could not have been a part of original claim)

Freedom Systems, LLC, ASBCA No. 59259 (Sep. 3, 2015) (under Severin doctrine, contractor is barred from pursuing pass-through subcontractor claim from which subcontractor already has released contractor from all liability)

Subsurface Technologies, ASBCA No. 59774 (Sep. 1, 2015) (no jurisdiction over appeal previously pursued at, and rejected on the merits by, Court of Federal Claims)

CDM Constructors, Inc., ASBCA No. 59524 (Aug. 27, 2015) (dismisses (for lack of jurisdiction) counts of Complaint requesting Board to order the Government to terminate contract for convenience or to issue a modification because these are essentially claims for injunctive relief)

Big Iraqi Co., ASBCA No. 59822 (Aug. 20, 2015) (Board lacks jurisdiction over appeal involving MOA pursuant to which firm was required to deliver and set up trailers and related equipment to be used as a temporary school for Iraqi children in the village of Al Awad, Iraq)

Soap Creek Marina, LLC, ASBCA No. (Aug. 18, 2015) (Board lacks jurisdiction over portion of claim for alleged future damages of $985,462 identified in complaint because such damages were reasonably known to the contractor at the time it submitted its initial claim to the Contracting Officer but were not certified)

Smart Construction & Engineering, Co., ASBCA No. 59354 (June 18, 2015) (dismisses (for lack of standing) appeal filed by individual who did not meet requirements of Board rule 15(a)

Equine Architectural Products, Inc., ASBCA No. 59743 (June 4, 2015) (no jurisdiction over claim that was not in a sum certain and was not certified)

White Hand Co., LLC, ASBCA No. 59184 (June 2, 2015) (no jurisdiction over I-CERP contract funded entirely by Iraqi government for benefit of Iraqi people)

Kellogg Brown & Root Services, Inc., ASBCA No. 58175 (May 13, 2015) (based on analysis of when claim accrued, government claim did not run afoul of six-year limit for asserting claim), motion for reconsideration dismissed as untimely

Al Rafideen Co., ASBCA No. 59156 (May 7, 2015) (no jurisdiction over claim lacking signed certification)

Joseph Sottolano, ASBCA No. 59777 (Apr., 22, 2015) (dismisses appeal because one attempted claim letter did not state sum certain and follow-up did not include certification)

Tessada & Assocs., ASBCA No. 59446 (Apr. 21, 2015) (notice of appeal addressed to Contracting Officer and deposited in mailbox within 90 days of receipt of Contracting Officer's decision was timely filed)

Suodor Al-Khair Co - SAKCO for General Trading, ASBCA Nos. 59036, 59037 (Apr. 14, 2015) (Government failed to prove existence of earlier Contracting Officer's decision provided to the contractor than the decision from which contractor timely appealed)

U.S. Coating Specialties & Supplies, LLC, ASBCA No. 58245 (Apr. 9, 2015) (denies Government's motion to dismiss because open questions remain as to whether Contracting Officer induced contractor into agreement that Bankruptcy Court would reject contract on assumption the Government would then terminate only for convenience)

Al Nawars Co. , ASBCA Nos. 59043, 44 (Apr. 8, 2015) (denies Government's motion to dismiss allegedly tardy claims for lack of jurisdiction because, after CAFC's decision in Sikorsky, failure to comply with CDA's six year period for filing claims is no longer proper subject for jurisdictional motion)

Tech Projects, LLC,  ASBCA No. 58789 (Mar. 26, 2015) (allegation that SBA's acceptance of requirement for 8(a) program created implied-in-fact contract was sufficient to establish Board's jurisdiction over appeal)

Laitifi Shagiwall Construction Co., ASBCA No. 58872 (Mar. 24, 2015) (no jurisdiction over dispute involving Commanders' Emergency Response Program (CERP) contract not covered by CDA) 

Combat Support Assocs., ASBCA No. 58945, 58946 (Mar. 16, 2015) (vacates prior decision dismissing government claim for lack of jurisdiction because of Fed. Cir.'s holding in Sikorsky Aircraft that CDA's six-year requirement for asserting claim is not a statute of limitations)

HEB International Logistics, ASBCA No. 59448 (Mar. 12, 2015) (dismisses claims for lack of jurisdiction because language in claim letter was not close enough to required language to be considered certification)

Anwar Alsabah Co., ASBCA No. 59737-957 (Mar. 3, 2015) (no jurisdiction over request to direct Contracting Officer to issue decision because no evidence of a certified claim)

Tokyo Co., ASBCA No. 59709-953 (Feb. 12, 2015) (Board directs Contracting Officer to issue decision, noting that Contracting Officer could not rely on a decision previously issued before the contractor had submitted the required certification for its claim) 

GSC Construction, Inc., ASBCA No. 59401 (Feb. 11, 2015) (dismisses appeal because required certifications were not submitted until after Contracting Officer's decision was issued and, in one case, until after appeal filed)

TTF, LLC, ASBCA Nos. 59511, -13, -15 (Feb. 5, 2015) (contractor receiving multiple copies of final decision on different days is entitled to compute 90-day period of appeal from date of last copy received)

GSC Construction, Inc. ASBCA No. 59046 (Feb. 4, 2015) (denies contractor's motion to amend its complaint to add two new claims because both of them did not arise from the same operative facts as the original claim under appeal and neither was a proper claim that had been the subject of a valid decision by Contracting Officer) 

Axxon International, ASBCA Nos. 59497, 8 (Jan. 21, 2015) (Board has jurisdiction over misdirected appeal sent to agency counsel within 90 day period; second appeal is timely because it was received on Monday following Sunday that was 90 days from date contractor received Contracting Officer's decision)

DynPort Vaccine Co. LLC, ASBCA No. 59298 (Jan. 15, 2015) (unilateral mod directing contractor to perform corrective work at no cost was a government claim from which contractor could appeal; Government required to file complaint)

Agility Logistics Services Company KSC, ASBCA Nos. 57415 et al. (Dec. 9, 2014) (no jurisdiction over appeals involving definitization of task orders under ID/IQ contract issued to appellant by Coalition Provisional Authority of Iraq)

USAC Aerospace Group, Inc. dba USAC Aerospace Group: Aerostructures, ASBCA Nos. 59114 et al. (Dec. 4, 2014) (judges timeliness of appeals based upon whether they were sent by email to Contracting Officer within 90-day period)

Atlas International Trading Corp., ASBCA No. 59091 (Dec. 2, 2014) (bribery of Government's program manager in connection with obtaining contract rendered it void ab initio)

Agility Defense & Government Services, Inc., ASBCA Nos. 58870, 59621 (Nov. 14, 2014) (denies Government's motion to dismiss; convenience termination issued after original termination claim did not moot all elements of claim)

Lael Al Sahab & Co., ASBCA Nos. 58344, 59009(Nov. 13, 2014) (grants motion to dismiss for failure to submit proper CDA claims to Contracting Officer)

Canon Solutions America, Inc., ASBCA No. 59540 (Nov. 5, 2014) (no jurisdiction over dispute under delivery order that involved issues related to underlying GSA schedule contract absent decision by GSA Contracting Officer)

Vertex Construction & Engineering, ASBCA No. 58988 (Nov. 7, 2014) (submission of fraudulent master electrician certification in order to obtain contract rendered it void ab initio)

Combat Support Assocs., ASBCA Nos. 58945, 58946 (Oct. 22, 2014) (denies contractor's motion to dismiss government claims as time barred by CDA statute of limitations, but reserves right to examine issue further once record is more fully developed)

New Iraq Ahd Co., ASBCA Nos. 58763, 59286 (Oct. 22, 2014) (no jurisdiction over (i) one uncertified claim or (ii) another claim submitted more than six years after all events that gave rise to Government's alleged liability occurred)

Favor Co., ASBCA No. 58843 (Oct. 16, 2014) (dismisses appeal because there is no evidence of a prior claim submitted to Contracting Officer), contractor's motion for reconsideration denied

Lulus Ostrich Ranch, ASBCA Nos. 59252, 59450 (Oct. 10, 2014) (Board lacks jurisdiction to grant request for injunctive relief to stay default terminations and collection actions by the Government)

Besal Al-Reeh Company, ASBCA No. 58612 (Sep. 23, 2014) (no jurisdiction over appeal absent prior claim submission to Contracting Officer)

Mansoor International Development Services, ASBCA No. 58423 (Sep. 4, 2014) (termination letter notifying contractor it had "right to appeal under the disputes clause," but not including required language about time limits and possible forums for appeal, did not start appeal clock running)

VLOX, LLC, ASBCA Nos. 59305, et al. (Sep. 3, 2014) (contractor's "initial" requests for payment were, nevertheless, claims because they were labeled as such, were for sums certain, and demanded payments as a right with supporting statements of fact and legal narratives, were certified, and included requests for decisions by the Contracting Officer)

ASFA International Construction Industry and Trade, Inc., ASBCA No. 57880 (Sep. 2, 2014) (government claim for liquidated damages time-barred under CDA; contractor not required to submit claim that Government waived right to assess liquidated damages before raising that allegation as a defense to Government's claim on appeal)

Binghamton Simulator Co., ASBCA No. 59117 (Aug. 21, 2014) (dismisses attempt at direct (unsponsored) appeal by subcontractor from prime contractor's decision)

Kellogg Brown & Root Services, Inc., ASBCA No. 58492 (Aug. 18, 2014) (dismisses claim due CDA's six-year statute of limitations that had originally been withdrawn voluntarily; no equitable tolling)

Macro-Z Technology, ASBCA No. 56711 (Aug. 18, 2014) (on its own motion, Board dismisses pre-award claim only quantified during proceedings at Board)

Bizhan Niazi Logistic Services Company, ASBCA No. (Aug. 13, 2014) (dismisses appeal for lack of jurisdiction because no prior CDA claim submitted to Contracting Officer)

CCIE & Co., ASBCA Nos. 58355, 59008 (Aug. 12, 2014) (contractor converted routine request for payment into CDA claim by repeated queries seeking payment after the Government's continued failure to pay its original invoice)

Commissioning Solutions Global, LLC, ASBCA No. 59254 (Aug. 7, 2014) (dismisses appeal of breach of contract claim for failure to state claim upon which relief can be granted because contract was IQ contract and Government fulfilled its obligations by ordering the minimum required quantity)

Abdul Ahad Khadim Construction Company, ASBCA No. 59206 (Aug. 7, 2014) (dismisses uncertified claim in excess of $100,000), motion for reconsideration dismissed as untimely

Pros Cleaners, ASBCA No. 59067 (Aug. 6, 2014) (dismisses appeal filed 490 days after receipt of Contracting Officer's decision)

Integrity Management Services, Inc., ASBCA Nos. 58214, et al. (Aug. 1, 2014) (dismisses appeals covered by release language in settlement agreement and holds it lacks jurisdiction over enforcement of federal tax liabilities) 

PHA-JMR, JV, ASBCA No. 59032 (Aug. 1, 2014) (dismisses appeals because underlying claim was not for a sum certain, but rather for "at least" a stated amount and because lack of evidence that person submitting and certifying the claim had requisite authority to represent JV)

Lee's Ford Dock, Inc., ASBCA No. 59041 (July 23, 2014) (dismisses appeal with regard to claim of superior knowledge not previously presented to Contracting Officer for decision), request for reconsideration denied

Environmental Safety Consultants, Inc., ASBCA No. 58343 (July 25, 2014) (CDA statute of limitations has run on portion of termination settlement proposal that covers price adjustment claim for alleged increased costs that accrued more than 14 years before claim submitted) Government's motion for reconsideration of two alleged mistakes in statement of facts denied; contractor's motion for reconsideration denied

Certified Construction Co. of Kentucky, ASBCA No. 58782 (July 8, 2014) (dismisses portion of claim that accrued more than six years before it was submitted to the Contracting Officer)

Creek Services, LLC, ASBCA No. 59127 (July 1, 2014) (dismisses, as untimely, appeal filed more than 90 days after contractor received Contracting Officer's decision)

New Iraq Ahd Co., ASBCA No. 58778 (June 12, 2014) (dismisses appeal for lack of jurisdiction because MOA contingent on availability of funds that never became available was not a contract)

Zomord Co., ASBCA No. 59065 (June 10, 2014) (denies government motion to dismiss appeal as untimely because contractor could reasonably have concluded Contracting Officer was reconsidering decision; denies government motion to dismiss claim as time-barred  because it was filed more than two months before six- year CDA statute of limitations would have expired) 

AL Wahej Al Lamea Co., ASBCA No. 59125 (June 9, 2014) (dismisses appeal absent evidence person who filed it is authorized representative meeting requirement of Board Rule 26)

Patriot Pride Jewelry LLC, ASBCA No. 58953 (June 9, 2014) (Board has non-CDA jurisdiction over AAFES contract with Disputes clause that confers on Board authority to decide all disputes arising under or related to agreement; agreement did not require Government to advertise contractor's products)

Superior Maritime Services, Inc., et al., ASBCA Nos. 58580, 58691 (June 9, 2014) (denies Navy's motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction; non-FAR based transportation contract still governed by CDA, and Transportation Officer who administered contract met CDA definition of Contracting Officer)

Leidos, Inc., f/k/a Science Applications International Corporation, ASBCA No. 59076 (June 6, 2014) (grants government motion to substitute contract for one incorrectly identified in government claim for alleged mis-allocation of costs in CAS-covered contracts)

Laguna Construction Co., ASBCA No. 58569 (May 29, 2014) (government claim is time-barred by CDA's six year statute of limitations)

POZ Engineering and Environmental Consulting, ASBCA Nos. 58853, 59004 (May 13, 2014) (no jurisdiction over appeal involving termination settlement proposal that was still being negotiated at time of appeal; however, jurisdiction over subsequent appeal of same matter because Contracting Officer had issued "settlement by determination" after former appeal had been filed)

Ensign-Bickford Aerospace & Defense Co., ASBCA No. 58671 (May 5, 2014) (although appeal was premature when originally filed, Board has jurisdiction when Contracting Officer still has not issued decision on underlying claim as of date of Board's decision on jurisdictional motion and more than a reasonable amount of time has passed)

Suh'dutsing Technologies, LLC, ASBCA No. 58760 (Apr. 28, 2014) (denies government motion to dismiss claim; Contracting Officer's letter near end of original 60-day deadline for issuing a decision stating it would be "at least" another 60 days before a decision was issued was not sufficiently definite to comply with 41 U.S.C. n 7103(f)(2)(B), and contractor was authorized to appeal at any time from that point forward)

S&L Enterprise, Inc., ASBCA No. 58792, 58793 (Apr. 24, 2014) (grants contractor's requests to dismiss appeals without prejudice because (i) the parties agreed no impasse had occurred in negotiations over convenience termination settlement proposal before Contracting Officer had issued decision; and (ii) contractor had not certified another claim in excess of $100,000) 

Zara Co., ASBCA No. (Apr. 23, 2014) (emails to Contracting Officer that contractor alleged constituted the claim did not specify a sum certain)

Tokyo Co., ASBCA No. 59059 (Apr. 23, 2014) (no jurisdiction over $920,602 claim with a certification without a physical signature and bearing only the company's stamp and the typed written name of its general manager)

Maersk Line Limited, Inc., ASBCA No. 58779 (Apr. 23, 2014) (Board has CDA jurisdiction over dispute involving GSA claims for overcharges under FAR-based transportation services contract covered by CDA (rather than GSA under dispute resolution procedures of Transportation Act of 1940); contractor's submission to Contracting Officer, based on assertion that the GSA overcharge notices are not consistent or compatible with the provisions of the CDA, FAR or the contract, was a claim within meaning of CDA)

Puget Sound Environmental Corp., ASBCA Nos. 58827, 58828 (Apr. 17, 2014) (no jurisdiction over claim for contract adjustment based on alleged misclassification of DOL wage rates prior to ruling on such classification by DOL; jurisdiction over claim for adjustment based on allegation in original claim amounting to claim of bad faith termination of delivery order)

Esood Al Blad Co., ASBCA No. 58425 (Apr. 4, 2014) (dismisses appeal involving uncertified claim for $500,000)

Singleton Enterprises, ASBCA No. 58325 (Mar. 24, 2014) (dismisses appeal filed more than 90 days after contractor sent email acknowledging receipt of Contracting Officer's decision)

FRASSON LODOVICO, S.r.l., ASBCA No. 58645 (Feb. 10, 2014) (appeal filed within 90 days of receipt of mailed copy of Contracting Officer's decision was timely, even though that was more than 90 days after the date by which the Board had ordered the Contracting Officer to issue his decision)

The R.R. Gregory Corp., ASBCA No. 58517 (Feb. 6, 2014) (claim for remission of liquidated damages filed more than six years after they were withheld is barred by CDA's statute of limitations)

Commissioning Solutions Global, LLC, ASBCA No. 59007-945 (Feb. 5, 2014) (dismisses request for board order directing Contracting Officer to issue a decision because the underlying claim did not include a sum certain) 

Taj Al Rajaa Co., ASBCA No. 58801 (Feb. 5, 2014) (dismisses claim appeal of claim filed more than six years after it accrued), motion for reconsideration dismissed as untimely

Hanley Industries, Inc., ASBCA No. 58198 (Jan. 15, 2014) (for purposes of CDA's statute of limitations, dispute did not arise and claim did not accrue until Government advised contractor of Government's interpretation of disputed provision)

Balad Alshemal Earth Co., ASBCA No. 58590 (Jan. 7, 2014) (dismisses appeal for lack of jurisdiction because contractor disavowed any connection with purported appeal notice)

WorleyParsons International, Inc., ASBCA No. 57930 (Dec. 20, 2013) (Board lacks CDA jurisdiction over government claim against only one member of JV, when JV was the contracting entity)

New Iraq Ahd Co., ASBCA No. 58800 (Dec. 17, 2013) (Board lacks jurisdiction over uncertified claim in excess of $100,000), contractor's motion for reconsideration denied

Linc Government Services, LLC, ASBCA Nos.  58561, et al. (Dec. 5, 2013) (given all the surrounding circumstances, contractor's letters implicitly requested Contracting Officer's decisions concerning interpretation of contract terms and, therefore, were valid CDA claims; contractor complied with CDA requirements by sending letter to Contracting Officer identified in contract; the fact that a new Contracting Officer (with a different address) had been assigned without notice to the contractor did not invalidate the claim submission)

Fluor Corp., ASBCA No. 57852 (Dec. 5, 2013) (for purposes of CDA statute of limitations, Government's CAS noncompliance claim first accrued as of date CAS noncompliance audit was completed for all payments made to contractor prior to that date and, thereafter, was a continuing claim that accrued for each subsequent payment to the contractor as it was made)

Duncan Aviation, Inc., ASBCA No. 58733 (Dec. 3, 2013) (certification submitted subsequent to, but clearly referencing, prior REA converted REA into CDA claim; request for Contracting Officer's decision was implicit in correspondence read as a whole)

Alnawars Co., ASBCA No. 58678 (Nov. 19, 2013) (dismisses untimely appeal (filed 140 days after receipt of COs decision) for lack of jurisdiction)

Public Warehousing Co. K.S.C., ASBCA No. 58078 (Nov. 12, 2013) (Contracting Officer's repeated delays (totaling more than four years) in issuing decision on claim in order to wait for judicial outcomes in separate fraud cases is appealable deemed denial)

Development & Evolution Construction Co., ASBCA No. 58342 (Nov. 7, 2013) (no jurisdiction over appeal demanding convenience termination settlement amount in excess of $100,000 because prior termination settlement proposals submitted to C.O. were not certified)

Metag Insaat Ticaret A.S., ASBCA No. 58616 (Nov. 4, 2013) (under theory of deemed denial, Board has jurisdiction over appeal filed (i) before C.O. issued decision on claim and (ii) less than 60 days after original claim was filed because C.O. still has not issued decision and much more than 60 days have now passed)

CB of Bozeman, Inc., dba Maintenance Patrol, ASBCA No. 58533 (Nov. 1, 2013) (Government's failure to notify contractor of appeal rights in "memorandum" denying claim coupled with subsequent government actions that led contractor to believe Government was reconsidering decision excused contractor's failure to appeal within 90 days; yearly releases executed by contractor are defense to current claims for additional SCA wage increases)

Ft. McCoy Shipping & Services, ASBCA No. 58673 (Oct. 9, 2013) (Board had jurisdiction over appeal commenced by letter submitted directly to Contracting Officer within 90 days of the Contracting Officer's decision because the letter (i) referenced the contracting officer's final decision, (ii) included the contract number, (iii) expressed dissatisfaction with the decision, (iv) made clear the contractor was seeking resolution by higher authority, and (v) stated: "This letter serves as my notice of intent to appeal.")

Mawaraa AlBihar Co., ASBCA No. 58585 (Sep. 27, 2013) (no jurisdiction over uncertified claim in excess of $100,000)

EJB Facilities Services, ASBCA No. 58314 (Sep. 26, 2013) (denies motion to dismiss government claim for fire damages because it is just different theory of recovery for same claim previously decided by Contracting Officer; denies government motion to dismiss contractor's complaint as request for declaratory relief not previously decided by Contracting Officer because it is just an answer to the Government's claim that includes a suggestion as to why the Board should deny the claim)

Alalamiah Technology Group Co. (K.S.C.C.) , ASBCA No. 58582 (Sep. 18, 2013) (no jurisdiction over appeal by disappointed bidder)

Xerox Corp., ASBCA No. 58478 (Sep. 13, 2013) (Dismisses appeal involving Army National Guard delivery order because it requires interpretation of underlying FSS contract, which is a matter for the GSA's Contracting Officer and the CBCA)

Kellogg Brown & Root Services, Inc., ASBCA No. 58578 (Sep. 9, 2013) (denies government motion to dismiss appeal regarding proper interpretation of contract clause even though Government has not taken any action to enforce its interpretation by denying costs involved in dispute)

Protecting the Homeland Innovations, LLC, ASBCA No. 58366 (Aug. 26, 2013) (non-CDA appeal; no jurisdiction over claim of promissory estoppel because it involves claim of contract implied-in-law and WMATA has not waived sovereign immunity with respect to such claims)

International Oil Trading Co., ASBCA Nos. 57491 et al. (Aug. 19, 2013) (Board has jurisdiction over Government's affirmative defense that contracts were obtained by bribery and were void ab initio)

Baghdadi Swords Co., ASBCA No. 58539 (Aug. 19, 2013) (dismisses appeal for failure to certify claim in excess of $100,000)

Lael Al Sahab & Co., ASBCA No. 58346 (Aug. 2013) (dismisses most of claims for failure to certify claim in excess of $100,000)

Dongbuk R&U Engineering Co., ASBCA No. 58300 (Aug. 13, 2013) (dismisses appeal because agreement obtained through fraudulent misrepresentations was void ab initio)

Baghdad Fallujah Co., ASBCA No. 58489 (Aug. 14, 2013) (dismisses appeal for failure to certify claim in excess of $100,000), motion for reconsideration denied

Honeywell International, Inc., ASBCA No. 57779 (Aug. 7, 2013) (portions of delivery order were illegal or invalid terms that the Board lacks jurisdiction to enforce)

Amina Enterprise Group, LTD, ASBCA Nos. 58547, 58548 (July 24, 2013) (gratuitous statements in pro se appellant's notice of appeal from default termination regarding remedies Board does not have power to grant and future claim do not deprive Board of jurisdiction)

Corporate Systems Resources, Inc., ASBCA No. 58398 (July 11, 2013) (no jurisdiction over claim by subcontractor under Washington Metropolitan Transit Authority prime contract)

Hewlett-Packard Co., ASBCA Nos. 57940, 41 (July 9, 2013) (jurisdiction is appropriate because resolution of appeal only requires interpretation of Army delivery orders, not underlying GSA schedule contract or BPA)

Premier Group, ASBCA No. 58263 (June 21, 2013) (denies Government's motion to dismiss an appeal as untimely because of declaration from appellant's attorney that he placed the notice appeal in a U.S. Postal Service mail receptacle on the 90th day from the day the contractor received the Contracting Officer's decision denying its claim)

TTF, L.L.C., ASBCA No. 58494 (June 19. 2013) (grants contractor's motion to withdraw appeal without prejudice, rending Government's motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction moot)

Environmental Safety Consultants, Inc., ASBCA No. 58221 (June 6, 2013) (grants motion to dismiss appeal from refusal to grant progress payment request because underlying claim never submitted to Contracting Officer for decision and was not certified)

Henry Stranahan, ASBCA No. 58392 (May 8, 2013) (Board lacks jurisdiction over appeal from decision to debar contractor)

MAC International FZE, ASBCA No. 56355 (Apr. 23, 2013) (Board lacks jurisdiction over claims for PPA interest because contracts were not with Government (see prior decision) and no claim was first submitted to Contracting Officer)

Impact Associates, Inc., ASBCA No. 57617 (Apr. 19, 2013) (no jurisdiction over claim under FSS Task order because dispute involves interpretation of provisions in FSS contract, itself, which must be decided by GSA schedule CO)

MOQA - AQYOL JV, LTD, ASBCA No. 57963 (Apr. 9, 2013) (denies government motion to disqualify individual from representing contractor before Board because it is based on alleged violation of criminal statute, which individual denies, and which Board lacks jurisdiction to determine)

Servicios y Obras Isetan S.L., ASBCA No. 57584 (Apr. 5, 2013) (dismisses appeal because contract obtained through fraud in the inducement is void ab initio

United Healthcare Partners, Inc., ASBCA No. 58123 (Apr. 2, 2013) (dismisses monetary portion of termination for cause appeal because contractor had not submitted that part of claim to Contracting Officer for decision)

Taj Al Safa Co., ASBCA No. 58394 (Apr. 1, 2013) (dismisses appeal for lack of CDA jurisdiction because it is questionable whether contractor's emails constituted a demand for a Contracting Officer's decision on a claim for a sum certain, but, in any event, there was no certification of amount sought in excess of $100,000)

Shubhada Industries, ASBCA No. 58173 (Mar. 21, 2013) (denies Government's motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction; party brining appeal is contracting party which has presented evidence it was licensed to do business at the time of contracting)

Lockheed Martin Services, Inc., ASBCA No. 58028 (Feb. 20, 2013) (denies (for lack of jurisdiction) government motion for partial summary judgment seeking return of license costs previously paid to contractor because there was no underlying Contracting Officer decision asserting the claim)

Tele-Consultants, Inc., ASBCA No. 58129 (Feb. 4, 2013) (Claimant need only allege contract existed in order to establish Board's jurisdiction; whether such a contract actually was formed goes to the merits of the appeal)

 

Contract Interpretation; Mistake; Changes; Breach; Contracting Officer's Authority; Defective Specs; Differing Site Condition; Miscellaneous Price Adjustment Clauses

Merrick Construction, LLC, ASBCA No. 60906 (Mar. 22, 2018) (general release signed by contractor as part of contract close-out to obtain final payment bars subsequent claim)

R.L. Persons Construction, Inc., ASBCA No. 60121 (Mar. 15, 2018) (denies Government's motion for summary judgment that the contract lacked positive indications of conditions at the site (which would be necessary for a finding of the Type I differing site condition alleged by the contractor) because the contract contained a latent ambiguity on this issue)

Kellogg Brown & Root Services, Inc., ASBCA No. 58175 (Mar. 15, 2018) (denies contractor's appeal of Contracting Officer's decision denying contractor's claim for subcontractor costs and asserting government claim for subcontractor costs basically because contractor had failed to implement an ACO's letter of technical direction (LOTD), which the Board determined was a type of document that the parties routinely treated as a directive that was to be followed by the contractor)

Shams Walizada Construction Co., ASBCA Nos. 61411, 61469 (Mar. 15, 2018) (denies claim for allegedly "late payment" because contractor failed to show it submitted request for original payment and claim barred by bilateral modification operating as accord and satisfaction)

Securityhunter, Inc. ASBCA No. 60896 (Feb. 15, 2018) (FAR 52.216-22(d) does not relieve contractor of obligation to complete fixed-price task order, whose original performance period was within the contract's term, simply because the contractor had not completed the work when the contract's term ended)

Great America Construction Co., ASBCA No. 60831 (Feb. 13, 2018) (contractor failed to prove that it performed one month of extra services or that an authorized government representative ordered the work (especially in light of a credible affidavit from the Government employee denying she had sent the email purportedly ascribed to her and noting she had not been employed by the Government as of the relevant dates)

[Redacted], ASBCA No. 60783 (Feb. 8, 2018) (dismisses appeal because issue had been released in settlement agreement)

American West Construction, LLC, ASBCA No. 61094 (Dec. 19, 2017) (Government, by its actions, waived its right to impose a deductive change on contractor for the contractor's failure to comply with a clear (albeit superfluous) contract requirement to construct  temporary bridges)

Burnham Assocs., ASBCA No. 60780 (Dec. 13, 2017) (holds that Government misrepresented levels of payable materials in solicitation because it based its estimate on an outdated survey when it had performed all but an hour's worth of the work that would have been required to make an estimate based upon the latest survey; denies claim for alleged delays caused by shipping traffic at the worksite because the contractor did not produce evidence that the traffic level was higher than the historical norm)

Aegis Defense Services, LLC, f/k/a Aegis Defence Services, Ltd., ASBCA Nos. 59082, et al. (Nov. 15, 2017) (Government breached contractual obligation to negotiate sale of vehicles to contractor at conclusion of contract if Government had no use for them)

[Redacted], ASBCA No. 61065 (Nov. 14, 2017) (contractor's execution of final release and acceptance of final payment to close out contract barred subsequent claim for extra work that was not listed as an exception in the release)

Family Entertainment Services, Inc., ASBCA No. 61157 (Oct. 24, 2017) (under normal rules of contract interpretation, "day" meant "calendar day" rather than "work day" as advocated by contractor;  inspections conducted by Government were authorized by the contact, and deductions taken by Government for substandard work were reasonable)

Assessment and Training Solutions Consulting Corp. , ASBCA No. 61047 (Oct. 3, 2017) (finds Government responsible for damage to leased vessel, even absent evidence clearly showing that damages to vessel were the result of the Government's negligence, because common law of bailment provides that when the Government rents property from a contractor, a bailment for the mutual benefit of the parties is created, which imposes upon the bailee the duty to protect the property by exercising ordinary care and establishes that, when the Government receives the property in good condition and returns it in a damaged condition, there is a presumption that the cause of the damage to the property was the Government's failure to exercise ordinary care or its negligence), Government's motion for reconsideration denied

Central Texas Express Metalwork LLC d/b/a Express Contracting, ASBCA No. 61109 (Sep. 7, 2017) (contractor cannot avoid final release of claims that it signed by refusing to accept final payment)

Arab Shah Construction Co., ASBCA No. 60813 (Sep. 7, 2017) (denies claim because it (i) was precluded by a contract modification and (ii) was not submitted until after final payment and (iii) was "supported" by two pieces of "evidence" the Board determined were likely forgeries by the contractor)

Access Personnel Services, Inc., ASBCA No. 59900 (Sep. 7, 2017) (contract interpretation; FAR 52.232-7 (Payments Under  Time-and-Materials and Labor-Hour Contracts) requires contractor to be reimbursed for its costs of subcontracts rather than for the hourly rates billed to it by its subcontractor)

E.C. London & Assocs. , ASBCA No. 60273 (Sep. 1, 2017) (denies contractor's claim for cleaning windows added by changes because (i) evidence presented by Government establishes added windows were offset by others taken offline such that contractor was paid for square footage indicated in task orders and (ii) record contains no explanation of methodology used to come up with contrary square footage measurements once made by one government employee (and no way to replicate those figures))

Engineering Solutions & Products, ASBCA No. 58633 (Aug. 4, 2017) (denies claim for implied-in-fact agreement; contractor made business decision to lease warehouse facilities for extended period in hopes it could sublease to Government for seven years, but without any binding commitment from Contracting Officer to stay that long, and, therefore, could not recover when Government vacated premises after only five years)

Benjamin Medina, ASBCA No. 60289 (July 24, 2017) (Board lacks jurisdiction over quantum meruit claim because it had not been previously presented to Contracting Officer; lease's restoration clause clearly stated Government would not be responsible for costs of repainting if it occupied the premises for more than three years and was not in conflict with indemnification clause; other property conditions at lease termination were non-compensable normal wear and tear) 

BAE Systems Southeast Shipyards  Mayport LLC, ASBCA No. 59876 (July 13, 2017) (contract's formula for calculating small business utilization percentage was unambiguous; Government's answer to question published as amendment to solicitation was incorporated into final contract as matter of law; contractor's proposed method of calculating small business utilization is unreasonable and would result in a small business utilization figure of more than 200% in one case)

Innoventor, Inc., ASBCA No. 59903 (July 11, 2017) (no evidence that any authorized individual  required contractor to perform work not required by basic contract terms)

Sonoran Technology and Professional Services, LLC, ASBCA No. 61040, 61101 (July 3, 2017) (contract interpretation; under the principle of  expressio unius est exclusio alterius (where one or more objects in a class are specifically named, objects of that class that are not named are excluded), FAR 52.222-43 (the Service Contract Act Price Adjustment clause) does not entitle a contractor to an equitable adjustment for an increase in a state's gross receipts tax; Changes clause does not authorize such an adjustment in this situation either)

Hallmark-Phoenix 3, LLC, ASBCA No. 61049 (June 23, 2017) (contractor entitled to costs associated with increased wages and fringe benefits it was required to pay as a result of DOL wage determinations applicable during extension period of contract and Government's affirmative defenses to claim were untimely raised)

Presentation Products, Inc. dba Spinitar, ASBCA No. 61066 (June 12, 2017) (contract clause (FAR 52.212-4) stating contract price included all applicable federal, state, and local taxes precluded contractor's claim for reimbursement of Hawaii state excise tax even though the contractor's bid had stated it did not include that tax)

L.C. Gaskins Construction Co., ASBCA Nos. 58550, et al. (June 9, 2017) (denies Government's affirmative defense of fraud in the inducement based on language in the contractor's proposal; analysis of contractor's claim that discovery of hazardous material in spent blast debris of existing paint constituted Type I Differing Site Condition), Government's motion for consideration granted as to reduction of delay days on one issue to account for concurrent delay; otherwise denied

Kellogg Brown & Root Services, Inc., ASBCA Nos. 56358, et al. (June 8, 2017) (includes appeals on remand from CAFC;  Government's prior material breach of contract (failure to provide the contractually promised level of force protection) excused contractor's subsequent noncompliance with the contract's prohibition against use of private security companies (PSCs) and contractor is entitled to reasonable costs of PSCs)

Zafer Construction Co., ASBCA No. 56769 (June 2, 2017) (contractor that failed to take advantage of prebid opportunities to inspect the site, review design drawings or ask questions, could not establish elements for recovery of additional costs under any of its theories of of unilateral mistake, unconscionability, or  or differing site condition)

IAP Worldwide Services, Inc., ASBCA Nos. 59397-99 (May 17, 2017) (Government constructively accelerated task order performance requirements by failing to timely grant contractor's requests for time extensions due to Pakistan's closure of border on contractor's route, but border closing was not breach of warranty of availability because the  Government had not made or agreed to any such warranty)

Swinerton Builders Northwest, ASBCA No. 57329 (Apr. 24, 2017) (contractor's proposal did not clearly apprise Government that it included an alternative/ deviation from the solicitation's HVAC/mechanical requirements, and contractor failed to prove Government approved deviation or waived contract requirements at time of award; Government's later approval of alternative design was only done to avoid further delays to project caused by contractor's stubborn insistence on its use and was not a basis for a constructive change or delay claim by contractor; contractor released certain aspects of Differing Site Conditions claim in bilateral modification, but is entitled to 14 days of compensable delay damages; although Government breached contract by denying access to worksite to contractor's Project Manager, contractor failed to prove damages from breach)

MULE Engineering, Inc., ASBCA Nos. 60854, et al. (Apr. 20, 2017) (contractor's inability to perform certain contract work, itself, and its failure to employ subcontractor for that effort constituted concurrent delays that barred one of its claims under "Suspension of Work" clause;  Army's alleged delays were not the cause of the cost of the contractor's subcontract with its metal building and concrete subcontractor; contract required installation of building column and Board was not bound by Contracting Officer's decision granting contractor certain of its claimed costs for installing the column; contractor not entitled to costs  of replacing unit with duct on the wrong side because the contract drawings contained a patent ambiguity about which contractor failed to inquire prior to bidding; any government-caused delay in delivery of dehumidifier was not on critical path and, therefore, does not entitle contractor to extra compensation; Board not bound by part of contracting Officer's decision erroneously granting part of contractor's claim for allegedly excess curb pours, because contract contained patent ambiguity on this issue) 

Supply & Service Team GmbH, ASBCA No. 59630 (Mar. 1, 2017) (broad waiver language in valid bilateral modification, supported by consideration, precluded Government from subsequently challenging costs of Technical Order), Government's motion for reconsideration denied

Astro Systems, Inc., ASBCA NO. 60861 (Feb. 15, 2017) (contractor not entitled to recover profit on cost of repairing damages to vehicle leased to Government)

South Bay Boiler Repair, Inc., ASBCA No. 59281 (Jan. 19, 2017) (plain language of ship repair contract satisfied requirements of 10 U.S.C. 7311 to notify contractor of "the types and amounts of hazardous wastes that are required to be removed by the contractor from the vessel, or that are expected to be generated, during the performance of work under the contract" so that contractor was not entitled to extra compensation for removing what it claimed were unanticipated quantities of hazardous materials)

K-Con, ASBCA Nos. 60686, 60687 (Jan. 12, 2017) (in contracts for construction of public buildings, bonding requirements of FAR 52.228-15 are mandatory and represent a significant component of public procurement policy and, therefore, are deemed to be incorporated in contracts by operation of law under Christian doctrine, even when mistakenly omitted from contract documents), contractor's motion for reconsideration denied

Military Aircraft Parts, ASBCA No. 60692 (Jan. 5, 2017) (grants Government's motion for summary judgment because bilateral modification was clear and unambiguous and constituted release and accord and satisfaction of contractor's claims)

A.T.I TACOSE S.C.a.R.L., ASBCA Nos. 59157, 59200 (Jan. 4, 2017) (contractor's reliance on single drawing that did not depict speakers in sleeping rooms was unreasonable because the specifications clearly contained the requirement and took precedence over the drawings pursuant to the Order of Precedence clause; firm, fixed-price design-build contract required contractor to comply with European and Italian building code requirements and, therefore, contractor was not entitled to extra compensation for complying with elements of those requirements it discovered only after award)

Astro Systems, Inc., ASBCA Nos. 60769, -81(Dec. 20, 2016) (contract did not required Government to pay lessor profit on cost of repairs resulting from damage caused by government personnel)

Ricoh USA, Inc., ASBCA No. 59408 (Dec. 5, 2016) (denies contractor's claim based on Government's use of fewer leased copiers than contractor expected because contract was a requirements contract that clearly contemplated the forecast number of units might be reduced without any penalty, and Government did not include extraneous language submitted in unsolicited parts of contractor's proposal in executed contract)

Smart Way Transportation Services, ASBCA No. 60315 (Nov. 21, 2016) (Government satisfied all obligations by permitting the contractor to invoice for the minimum guaranteed order quantity during base period under ID/IQ contract), contractor's motion for reconsideration denied

Tetra Tech Facilities Construction, LLC, ASBCA Nos. 58568, 58845 (Nov. 15, 2016) (contractor established that unsuitable subsurface soil constituted Differing Site Condition)

ABC Data Entry Systems, Inc., ASBCA No. 59865 (Nov. 10, 2016) (no liability for negligent estimate of work on indefinite-quantity contract)

Creative Times Dayschool, Inc. ASBCA Nos. 58507, 59779 (Oct. 20, 2016) (contractor failed to prove: (i) Government required paving work beyond original contract requirements; (ii) roofing specification was defective; (iii) Government unreasonably delayed roofing work;  or (iv) Government changed requirements regarding fall prevention system or management team; contractor entitled to remission of liquidated damages for period of time it took parties to agree on solution to problem arising during construction)

Contrack International, Inc., ASBCA No. 59917 (Oct. 19, 2016) (contractor not entitled to summary judgment for delay damages for third party's (Afghan National Army's) delay in moving vehicles off worksite)

Ensign-Bickford Aerospace & Defense Co., ASBCA No. 57929 (Oct. 20, 2016) (Government failed to prove its rejection of production lots was proper; characteristics of First Article do not change or add to contract requirements for production lots)

HCS, Inc., ASBCA No. 60533 (Sep. 20, 2016) (Government failed to present evidence in support of its post-contract, unilateral 50% price reduction for allegedly deleted work as a result of an earlier unilateral change order)

Ft. McCoy Shipping & Services, ASBCA No. 58673 (Sep. 20, 2016) (denies claims for various categories of costs because the contract required the contractor to be responsible for them, the contract contained no basis for their recovery, they constituted ordinary business expenses, or the contractor incurred them as a volunteer after the contract had ended)

Great America Construction Co., ASBCA No. 60437, 60501 (Aug. 2, 2016) (dismisses appeal because contractor signed mod releasing all claims in return for settlement payment)

King Aerospace, Inc., ASBCA No. 57057 (July 26, 2016) (in aircraft maintenance contract, condition of government-furnished aircraft was inferior to that represented in contract and government-furnished property listed in the contract was not delivered in serviceable condition in a timely manner)

CACI International, Inc. & CACI Technologies, Inc., ASBCA No. 60171 (July 18, 2016) (contract interpretation; 35% hazardous pay rate applies to all hours worked by contractor's employees, and did not exclude overtime work)

BAE Systems San Francisco Ship Repair, ASBCA Nos. 58818, 59642 (June 13, 2016) (contractor's advances to subcontractor to perform extra work and its agreement to pursue additional costs on behalf of sub sufficient to avoid application of Severin doctrine; although contractor's initial claim submission was based on estimates, its accounting system was adequate to demonstrate actual costs incurred for extra work; Contracting Officer on notice that contractor would require overtime to perform changed work and did not object, therefore bound by that interpretation; rejects Contracting Officer's "benefit of the bargain" approach for determining amount of equitable adjustment, in favor of contractor's actual costs)  

Mach I AREP Carlyle Center, LLC, ASBCA No. 59821 (June 1, 2016) (Government was not liable for unexercised option years on lease that was terminated early because of lack of funding due to government shutdown over budget dispute, where contractor was paid for the remainder of the option year that was terminated early, which was all the lease required)

Military Aircraft Parts, ASBCA No. 60009 (May 31, 2016) (contractor entitled to contract price as damages for Government's improper rejection of First Article that would have been acceptable but for damage caused by Government's inspection)

Military Aircraft Parts, ASBCA No. 60336 (Apr. 25, 2016) (cancellation of purchase order is not a government claim; subsequent contractor claims challenging cancellations are denied because contractor did not deliver first article items on time)

ERKA Construction Co. Ltd., ASBCA Nos., 57618, 58515  (Mar. 9, 2016) (even absent proof that contractor's owners or upper management knew of fuel theft, contractor is responsible for actions of its employees who stole fuel, especially when it is likely that project managers were aware of situation)

Lee's Ford Dock, ASBCA No. 59041 (Mar. 17, 2016) (contractor did not not entitled elements required for reformation based on mistake or misrepresentation; contractor's argument that Government breached agreement relies on unreasonable interpretation of clear provision in agreement)

SupplyCore, Inc., ASBCA No. 58676 (Feb. 17, 2016) (Government did not breach duty of good faith and fair dealing by delaying its notice to the contractor that an option would not be exercised because the contract did not require any earlier notice from the Government)

Andy Phillips, ASBCA No. 59045 (Jan. 19, 2016) (denies various breach claims (i) for lack of proof; (ii) because contract made contractor responsible for costs of alleged issue; (iii) because isolated issue did not rise to level of breach; (iv) because allegation of damages phrased as "[e]stimate loss of sales at 30%" did not meet CDA requirement to state claim as a sum certain; and (v) because allegations that Government failed to appoint a COR and invalidly extended contract were not CDA claims since they did not include demand for money or any other relief)

The Life Eye Co., ASBCA No. 48422 (Jan. 19, 2016) (denies claim primarily because contractor submitted inadequate, inconsistent documentation, including some forgeries, to support it)

Vistas Construction of Illinois, Inc., ASBCA Nos. 58479, et al. (Jan. 12, 2016) (post-Katrina construction contract to enlarge levee; contractor not entitled to retroactive use of value-added base for calculating G&A when contractor's normal approach for all other situations was total cost input; contractor failed to present sufficient, relevant, non-contradictory evidence to support its calculation of profit it was owed for changed work; government not obligated to pay PPA interest on disputed amounts in excess of original contract price; other claims not adequately supported with evidence, e.g., claims for costs of responding to DCAA audit report)

Relyant, LLC, ASBCA No. 58172 (Jan. 12, 2016) (contract interpretation that contract allowed parties to agree on lower prices for individual delivery orders than those stated in the price schedules of the overarching contract is the only reasonable reading of the contract documents as a whole and is consistent with the parties' actions  before the dispute arose)

Edinburgh International, ASBCA No. 58864 (Jan. 11, 2016) (contract interpretation; fixed-price task order which did not cover billeting services did not impose obligation on Government to pay for unexpected costs of billeting security personnel)

Dick Pacific Construction Co., Ltd., ASBCA Nos. 57675, et al. (Dec. 15, 2015) (entitlement decision on various and sundry construction contract claims, including propriety of sums withheld by Contracting Officer)

Diversified Construction of Oklahoma, ASBCA No. 59527 (Dec. 9, 2015) (unsuccessful claim for reformation of contract price; contractor's reduction of its original bid priced during negotiations was not result of government misrepresentation concerning amount of mowing that would be required because government negotiator's position based on government's IGE; contractor not reasonable to rely on Government's representation over his own evaluation of the cost of the job, the advice of three experienced people, and a site visit, all showing a higher cost would be involved) 

Lockheed Martin Services, Inc., ASBCA Nos. 58028, 58794 (Dec. 8, 2015) (contract interpretation; contract for performance of retired/annuitant pay system during which contractor voluntarily developed and implemented new system to replace outdated government system; contract did not prohibit contractor's recovery for license fee and other costs of Government's continued use of new system after Government decided to bring work back in house), Government's motion for reconsideration denied

Chloeta Fire, LLC, ASBCA No. 59211 (Nov. 9, 2015) (sustains contractor's appeal that it was entitled to full contract price for completing required burn on federal property because Government failed to provide evidence or testimony from individual who could have rebutted contractor's contention that he had authority to, and did, accept contractor's work)

Lean Construction and Engineering Co., ASBCA No. 58995 (Nov. 6, 2015) (denies all but $105 of claims related to differing site condition because contractor failed to provide required notice of claim and failed to produce credible evidence of differing site condition)

Korte-Fusco Joint Venture, ASBCA No. 59767 (Nov. 5, 2015) (denies Government's motion for summary judgment because language of contract modification did not clearly release claim at issue)

Weatherford Group, Inc., ASBCA Nos. 59315, et al. (Oct. 21, 2015) (Government's interpretation of three contract clauses gives reasonable meaning to all clauses without creating any conflicts between them; contractor failed to present evidence required to establish prior course of dealing)

Honeywell International, Inc., ASBCA No. 57779 (Sep. 24, 2015) (contractor entitled to quantum valebant recovery for value of conforming solar arrays delivered to Government under invalidated provisions of delivery order)

Automotive Management Services FZE, ASBCA No. 58352 (Sep. 21, 2015) (contract interpretation; contractor entitled to reimbursement of costs of transporting vehicle parts in Afghanistan; title of contract section could not vary the plain meaning of its text)

Balfour S&P Two, A Joint Venture, ASBCA No. 58067 (Sep. 1, 2015) (contractor bears responsibility for costs of repairing defects in drilled concrete foundation piers because its construction methods failed to comply with contract specifications in several ways)

Afghanistan Trade Transportation Co., Ltd., ASBCA No. 59782 (Aug. 18, 2015) (contractor's fraud (bribery) on different contracts predating current contract did not breach its obligation of good faith and fair dealing toward Government under current contract)

Kellogg Brown & Root Services, Inc., ASBCA Nos. 59357, -8 (Aug. 13, 2015) (contract interpretation; under FAR 52.250-1 (Indemnification Under Public Law 85-804) contractor is entitled to indemnification from the Government for third-party claims and related litigation costs, even those attributable to the contractor's alleged misconduct)

Certified Construction Co. of Kentucky, LLC, ASBCA No. 58782 (Aug. 12, 2015) (contract interpretation; denies contractor's claim because Government's interpretation of subparagraph 5.1 of the General Construction specifications, which excluded all "measurement" and "payment" paragraphs of  certain incorporated specifications is only reasonable interpretation of contract)

The Public Warehousing Co., ASBCA No. 56022 (Aug. 5, 2015) (contract interpretation; bilateral mod established cap on transportation fees)

VLOX, LLC,  ASBCA Nos. 59305, et al. (July 23, 2015) (contract interpretation; contract unambiguously requires that if a contractor's truck waits more than three days to be loaded and unloaded, the contractor is owed a demurrage payment for any additional days, regardless of whether those first three days were spent waiting for loading, waiting for unloading, or a combination of the two)

Circle, LLC, ASBCA No. 58575 (July 1, 2015) (denies contractor's claims because Government's engineers lacked express or implied authority to issue directives to modify contract)

Tri-County Contractors, Inc., ASBCA No. 58167 (June 16, 2015) (bidder's disclosure of proposed debarment to Contracting Officer was sufficient to overcome Government's subsequent defense of fraud in the inducement; release did not bar claim where Government had reason to know of contractor's mistake in failing to exclude claim from release; denies contractor's claim because any ambiguity in contract was patent, and contractor failed to inquire prior to bidding)

Snowden, Inc., ASBCA No. 59705 (May 20, 2015) (under "Government Property" clause (FAR 52.245-1), contractor owes Government proceeds from its sale of "contractor inventory" to third party because Government had not abandoned property)

Adria Operating Corporation, d/b/a/ Ramada Inn) d/b/a/ Adria Hotel & Conference Center, ASBCA No. 59493 (May 15, 2015) (ADR decision: agreement on which contractor bases its claim was neither executed nor ratified by government employee with requisite contracting authority)

MARCON Engineering, Inc., ASBCA No. 57471 (May 1, 2015) (original specification requirement was defective and was effectively relaxed by incorporation of approach in contractor's technical proposal into contract, so Government's attempt to impose original requirement was constructive change)

Optimum Services, Inc., ASBCA No. 58755 (Mar. 25, 2015) (dredging subcontractor entitled to recover under theory of Type I differing site condition  after  encountering much harder than anticipated subsurface material)

AMEC Environment & Infrastructure, Inc., ASBCA No. 58948 (Mar. 16, 2015) (under "Permits and Responsibilities" clause, contractor not entitled to additional costs of obtaining permit)

Martin Edwards & Assocs., ASBCA No. 57718 (Mar. 10, 2015) (release of claims language in bilateral modification not induced by fraudulent or a material misrepresentation by the other party upon which the recipient is justified in relying)

Government Contracting Resources, Inc. ASBCA No. 59162 (Mar. 12, 2015) (under FAR 52.222-43, contractor entitled to increased costs for severance payments required by CBA upon contract expiration)

SUFI Network Services, ASBCA No. 55306 (Feb. 2, 2015) (after remand from decisions by the CoFC and CAFC, Board increases amount awarded contractor on $131 million claim from approximately $7.5 million to $111 million), Government's request for reconsideration denied except for points of clarification; contractor's unopposed motion to increase award pursuant to Count XVI granted

C.R. Pittman Construction Co., ASBCA Nos. 57387, -88, 57688 (Feb. 4, 2015) (denies Type I differing site condition claim because contractor abandoned work before it ever exposed ("encountered") the allegedly differing condition)

Tele-Consultants, Inc, ASBCA No. 58129 (Feb. 3, 2015) (subcontractor failed to establish implied-in-fact contract with Government  because Government never indicated intention to contract directly with sub)

Watts Constructors, LLC, ASBCA No. 59602 (Jan. 26, 2015) (construction contractor that had chosen to account for job site overhead expenses as indirect costs pursuant to FAR  31.105(d)(3) could not switch and treat them as direct costs for the duration of a government-caused delay)

TTF, L.L.C., ASBCA No. 58452 (Dec. 22, 2014) (no evidence that contract specifications were impossible to perform)

New Iraq Ahd Co., ASBCA No. 59304 (Dec. 22, 2014) ("Release of Claims" form signed by contractor following default termination operated as an accord and satisfaction, barring further claims)

Mountain Chief Management Services, Inc., ASBCA No. (Dec. 3,2014) (Government's statements did not compel contractor to expend effort in excess of total specified by contract)

James G. Davis Construction Corp., ASBCA Nos. 58000, 58002 (Nov. 19, 2014) (contract interpretation; denies contractor's claims for allegedly extra insulation because, in one instance, the contract unambiguously required such insulation and, in another, the contractor's current interpretation is at odds with the one it employed during contract performance, which was consistent with the Government's interpretation)

Amaratek, ASBCA Nos. 59149, 59395 (Nov. 10, 2014) (after Government exercised option for 12 monthly units of service and then terminated contract part way through first month, contractor is entitled to payment for first full month's service because that was one "unit" of service)

Optex Systems, Inc., ASBCA No. 58220 (Nov. 6, 2014) (by its own terms, bilateral modification was neither a release nor an accord and satisfaction of the contractor's claims involved in this appeal)

New Iraq Ahd Co., ASBCA No. 58768 (Oct. 17, 2014) (no jurisdiction over claim raised for first time on appeal; bilateral modification operated as accord and satisfaction and allegation that Contracting Officer threatened convenience termination to induce contractor to sign it does not rise to level of duress)

Tug Hill Construction, Inc., ASBCA No. 57825 (Oct. 16, 2014) (implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing did not require Government to help the contractor perform work it was expressly assigned to accomplish by the contract; contractor's claim of Government's superior knowledge fails because contractor had the opportunity to gain that knowledge on its own before bidding the job) 

Gerald R. Rouillard, d/b/a International Gear Technologies, ASBCA No. 58459 (Oct.8, 2014) (upholds default termination; alleged illness of contractor's President's father does not excuse default; contractor failed to establish four of five required showings for mistake in bid defense)

Laguna Construction Co., ASBCA No. 58324 (Sep. 23, 2014) (contractor's receipt of kickbacks from subcontractors constituted criminal fraud and material breach which extinguished Government's obligation to make further contract payments)

Al Bahar Co. , ASBCA No. 58416 (Aug. 4, 2014) (no credible evidence contractor performed, or Government accepted, work in dispute)

PBS&J Constructors, Inc., ASBCA Nos. 57814, 57964 (July 25, 2014) (denies Type I Differing Site Conditions claim in part because contractor did not provide evidence of its precontract reliance on the indications of the site condition in the solicitation or that the conditions at the site were different, at that time, from those indicated in the solicitation; denies changes claim because contract unambiguously required deep footings under balconies and exterior walkways and Government was within its rights to require strict compliance with these specifications, so denying contractor's requests to deviate was not a breach of duty to cooperate with contractor)

Classic Site Solutions, Inc., ASBCA Nos. 58375, 58572 (July 2014) (Government not bound by summary level, preaward project schedule in bidder's proposal when clear solicitation requirements established a different time for the event in dispute)

Iron Bow Technologies, LLC, ASBCA No. 59181 (July 9, 2014) (monetary amount of Contracting Officer's warrant was sufficient to give him authority to execute contract and options at issue in appeal)

Classic Site Solutions, Inc., ASBCA Nos. 58376, 58573 (June 26, 2014) (Government's was only reasonable interpretation of MIX DESIGN paragraph in construction contract specs)

Kellogg Brown & Root Services, Inc., ASBCA Nos. 56358, et al. (June 17, 2014) (dismisses one government claim as untimely under CDA's statute of limitations; finds for contractor on other government claims because contractor's costs of hiring private security companies to provide protection not adequately afforded by Government in Iraq were reasonable and allowable)

American General Trading & Contracting, WLL, ASBCA No. 56758 (Apr. 23, 2014) (no evidence government had agreed in implied-in-fact cost reimbursable contracts for the provision of laundry services)

Thefaf Al-Rafidain Contracting Co., ASBCA No. 59014 (Apr. 4, 2014) (denies claim because Government satisfied minimum order requirements of IDIQ contract)

CCI, Inc., ASBCA No. 57316 (Mar. 14, 2014) (denies Type I differing site condition claim because any absolute reliance on the limited and qualified indications concerning site conditions in the contract would have been unreasonable, the contractor did not prove it relied on those indications, and, even if it did so, its interpretation of those indications was not reasonable)

CI2, Inc., ASBCA No. 56257, 56337 (Mar. 5, 2014) (Government's failure to award required quantities and to provide award terms in accordance with contract requirements breached the contract), Government's motion for reconsideration denied, with clarifications

Safety Training Systems, Inc., ASBCA Nos. 57095, 57166 (Jan. 23, 2014) (contract placed risk of increased shipping costs on contractor; declines to apply Christian doctrine to insert FAR 52.245-2 (Government Property) in contract for commercial items; finds implied warranty that government-supplied equipment would be fit for its intended use; contractor's evidence of duration of delays caused by breach of that warranty was "spotty")

DayDanyon Corp., ASBCA Nos. 57611, 57681, 57717 (Jan. 22, 2014) (where FAR 52.216-18 "Ordering" clause defined the period for ordering supplies as the "DATE OF CONTRACT AWARD . . . THROUGH: TWO (2) YEARS," and FAR 52.216-22(d) "Indefinite Quantity" clause provided: "the Contractor shall not be required to make any deliveries under this contract after Two Years," the clauses, having different purposes, were not in conflict, and, if they were, it was a patent ambiguity about which the contractor should have inquired prior to bidding)

All Star Technical Services, Inc., ASBCA Nos. 58668, 58772 (Jan. 7, 2014) (contract clause covering responsibility for damage to specific item in dispute controls over clause covering responsibilities for damage in general)

PAW & Assocs., LLC, ASBCA No. 68634 (Nov. 22, 2013) (Government did not breach ID/IQ contract by failing to award specific task order to contractor under option period because it had already met its obligation to order minimum quantity; Board retains jurisdiction over contractor's claims that Government (i) breached an implied-in-fact contract duty to provide the contractor a fair opportunity to be considered for issuance of a task order, in violation of FAR § 16.505(b)(1), and (ii) breached the underlying ID/IQ contract by failing to protect the proprietary information in the contractor's task order proposal)

Tiger Enterprises, Inc., ASBCA Nos. 57974, 58313 (Oct. 8, 2013) (Government properly continued to make lease payments to bank/assignee under bridge contract rather than making payments directly to contractor)

BYA International, LLC, ASBCA Nos. 58031, 58341 (Sep. 23, 2013) (contractor did not follow contract requirements for obtaining approval to use different method than specified for constructing exterior walls)

Mylene Will Co., L.L.C., ASBCA No. 58154 (Sep. 18, 2013) (denies Type I Differing Site Condition claim because contractor did not prove it was damaged by differing conditions)

B.A.E. Systems Technology Services , ASBCA No. 57581 (Sep. 18, 2013) (uses principles of contract interpretation to conclude that, although the contract was not a "model of clarity," it established that repair of generator damaged during fire was covered by cost reimbursable depot maintenance/repair CLIN rather than fixed-price organizational and intermediate maintenance/repair CLIN)

Optimum Services, Inc., ASBCA No. 57575 (Sep. 10, 2013) (contractor failed to prove elements for Type I Differing Site Condition and was the one primarily responsible for project delays involving submittal reviews)

Dragados USA, Inc., ASBCA No. (Aug. 29, 2013) (uses rules of contract interpretation to arrive at the plain meaning of a specification paragraph at issue between the parties)

EJB Facilities Services, ASBCA No. 57547 (Aug. 28, 2013) (pricing of deductive change should be based on  contractor's estimated costs to perform the deleted work (which relied on actual historical costs of performance) rather than contractor's original proposal) 

Bluebird Communications, Inc., ASBCA No. 58379 (July 16, 2013) (grants Government's motion for summary judgment and denies contractor claim for allegedly unamortized capital improvement costs based on a theory of mutual mistake) 

Atlantic Dry Dock Corp., ASBCA No. 54936 (June 20, 2013) (denies claim for alleged extra painting for unexpected vertical square footage area on a ship because there was no proof the Government had superior knowledge as to that actual square footage and no clear proof of a trade practice to include a contingency of 20% for such painting in a bid)

Jaynes Corporation, ASBCA No. 58385 (May 7, 2013) (Government's improper interpretation of ASTM A135 pipe specification led to improper rejection of Schedule 40 pipe submitted by contractor)

Strand Hunt Construction, Inc., ASBCA No. 55905 (Apr. 11, 2013) (contract completion date was date originally proposed by contractor and accepted by Government, despite the fact, in modifications, that both parties erroneously continued to refer to the completion date in the solicitation until the dispute arose; contractor is entitled to remission of liquidated damages to the extent (i) unreasonable portion of stop work order and (ii) Contracting Officer's failure (a) to act within reasonable period of time to resolve punchlist items and (b) to concede beneficial occupancy occurred at same time as substantial completion)

Glasgow Investigative Solutions, Inc., ASBCA No. 58111 (Apr. 9, 2013) (grants Government's motion for summary judgment that options were properly exercised; rejects contractor's contention that FAR 52.217-8 (Option to Extend Services) can only be used to extend the contract term after all other options have been fully exercised and is intended only for situations at the end of a contract where the Government needs extra time to transition to a new contractor)

Raytheon Missile Systems Co., ASBCA No. 57594 (Mar. 18, 2013) (imputes DESC jet fuel price increase to contracting party, NAVAIR; in failing to reimburse contractor for increases in price of jet fuel, NAVAIR breached implied duty not to hinder or interfere with performance by subjecting contractor to price increases for purposes outside the set of risks it assumed in its fixed-price contract), affirmed on recon

Jaynes Corp., ASBCA No. 58288 (Feb. 15, 2013) (rules of contract interpretation; contractor entitled to equitable adjustment because Government's interpretation of contract rendered portions of it "inoperative, meaningless, and useless")

Colorado River Materials, Inc., d/b/a NAC Construction, ASBCA No. 57751 (Feb. 2013) (settlement agreement that applied to "all claims and all potential claims" related to contract acted as accord and satisfaction; no evidence in record to support contention that Government led contractor to believe claim was excepted from agreement and still being considered by Government)

ThinkQ, Inc., ASBCA No. 57732 (Jan. 24, 2013) (Government's is only reasonable interpretation of "Placing Orders" clause)

 

Cost Principles; Defective Pricing; Cost Accounting Standards; Limitation of Costs

Northrop Grumman Corp., ASBCA No. 60190 (Jan. 9, 2018) (Government's request for reconsideration of prior quantum decision denied because Board rejects Government's "novel, extraordinary, unique, and unprecedented" theory that contractor incurred Post-Retirement Benefit costs "by operation of law" when, in fact, contractor had underfunded the benefit plan at issue and, thus, neither incurred the costs nor charged them to its contracts with the Government, resulting in the Government's inability to show any damages)

Luna Innovations, Inc., ASBCA No. 60086 (Nov. 29, 2017) (employee stock option costs included in publically-traded contractor's indirect cost proposal using Black-Scholes model were unallowable pursuant to FAR 31.205-6(i), but were not expressly unallowable and, therefore, were not subject to a penalty)

Raytheon Co., ASBCA Nos. 57743, et al. (Apr. 17, 2017) (burden on Government to prove costs were expressly unallowable is to show that it was unreasonable under all the circumstances for a person in the contractor's position to conclude that the costs were allowable; contractor has burden to prove Contracting Officer's decision not to waive penalty for expressly unallowable costs is an arbitrary and capricious abuse of discretion; neither aircraft fractional lease costs nor Challenger 604 aircraft lease costs are expressly unallowable costs under a FAR cost principle or executive agency FAR supplement  and, therefore, are not subject to a penalty on expressly unallowable costs; salary expenses of employees who engage in activities that generate unallowable lobbying costs are expressly unallowable costs, and contractor has not shown that Contracting Officer abused his discretion in declining to waive the penalty for such costs; costs of design and build of its M&A application, which was a proposed database intended to be used both for general planning and specific M&A purposes when ultimately configured, but which was terminated before it was completed and was never used in connection with any M&A target, were allowable economic and market planning costs, not expressly unallowable and not subject to penalty)

Exelis Inc., ASBCA No. 58966 (Mar. 29, 2017) (contractor's executive compensation costs were unallowable under FAR 31.205-6(i) because they were based on securities price changes and dividend payments rather than on the employee's individual performance;  Contracting Officer justified in imposing penalty because these were expressly unallowable costs)

A-T Solutions, Inc., ASBCA No. 59938 (Feb. 8, 2017) (interdivisional transfers were at  price and, thus, contractor was entitled to charge Government at price under FAR 31.205-26(e); rejects Government's attempt to establish rule that such transfers must have "economic substance")

Technology Systems, Inc., ASBCA No. 59577 (Jan. 12, 2017) (doctrine of retroactive disallowance of costs, under which Government is estopped from challenging the same type of costs it has allowed in the past, requires showing of affirmative misconduct by Government; DCAA's failure to object to costs in past audits, without more, is not sufficient to prevent Government from questioning costs in subsequent audits under either retroactive-disallowance or course- of-dealing theory; FAR 31.205-33 (covering professional and consultant service costs) does not establish a blanket requirement for the generation and provision of "work product" in order to recover such costs)

Lockheed Martin Integrated Systems, Inc., ASBCA Nos. 59508, 59509 (Dec. 20, 2016) (dismisses (i) government claim to disallow certain subcontract costs (because claim based on vague, conclusory assist audit reports on subcontractors that do not establish any logical claim against prime) and (ii) government claim that contractor breached some duty to the Government by failing to monitor subcontractors adequately to avoid billing Government for certain subcontractor costs questioned in various assist audits because Government failed to allege required elements of a breach)

Alaska Aerospace Corp., ASBCA No. 59794 (Sep. 13, 2016) (denies Government's claim for recoupment of pension contributions because Government presented no evidence that it reimbursed the contractor for any of those costs)

Exelis, Inc., ASBCA No. 60131 (Aug. 29, 2016) (dismisses Government's CAS 404 claim because building lease is not a tangible asset)

Raytheon Co., Space & Airborne Systems, ASBCA No. 58068 (Agu. 9, 2016) (Contracting Officer violated FAR § 30.602 and abused her discretion by making claim for increased costs without considering the materiality of cost impacts associated with the contractor's change in cost accounting practices pursuant to the criteria in 48 C.F.R. § 9903.305)

River Ridge Development Authority, ASBCA No.  58981 (Mar. 22, 2016) (offset of various insurance costs against fair market rental for ammunition plant leased by Government to contractor)

Symetrics Industries, LLC, ASBCA No. 59297 (Aug. 13, 2015) (denies Government's defective pricing claim because it had actual knowledge of data at issue when evaluating the contractor's price proposal)

Raytheon Co., Space & Airborne Systems, ASBCA Nos. 57801 et al. (May 7, 2015) ((i) prior to April 2005, in the absence of regulatory guidance, there was an established practice at DoD to permit offsets across contracts of the effects of simultaneous changes in accounting practices (a practice already recognized by the Board in its prior Boeing decision); (ii) the contractor could utilize this cross-contract offsetting procedure for contracts executed prior to the effective date (April 8, 2005) of the revised regulation (FAR 30.606) that prohibited the procedure; (iii) that revised regulation did not overstep the authority of the FAR Councils or infringe on the authority of the CAS Board; (iv) in the absence of any specific allegation by the contractor as to how it was damaged by the Contracting Officer's failure to consider any of the regulatory factors except increased costs to the Government in deciding whether the contested accounting changes were "desirable," the Contracting Officer's decision-making process was unobjectionable; and (v) the Government's attempt to recover both the increased costs resulting from the accounting changes on flexibly-priced contracts and the corresponding decreases in allocations to fixed-price contracts (allegedly to eliminate excess profits on the latter) amounted to double-counting that would result in a prohibited windfall to the Government)  

Accurate Automation Corp., ASBCA No. 59727 (Apr. 6, 2015) (denies contractor's appeal from Government claim for unallowable costs because costs were not deferred compensation)

Coherent Logix, Inc., ASBCA No. 59725 (Apr. 2, 2015) (analysis of (i) accrual date for government claim for unallowable patent-related legal costs and (ii) whether FAR  42.709-5 required Contracting Officer to waive penalty for unallowable costs), contractor's motion for reconsideration denied

Northrop Grumman Corp., ASBCA No. 57625 (Jan. 16, 2014) (upholds government disallowance of post-retirement benefit costs under FAR 31-205.6(o) because costs were not accrued using GAAP/FAS 106 and were not timely funded), motion for reconsideration denied

The Boeing Co., ASBCA No. 57409 (Dec. 3, 2013) (LOF clause limited amount contractor could recover for subcontract settlement costs under T for C of prime contract)

Parsons-UXB Joint Venture, ASBCA No. 56481 (Aug. 1, 2013) (allowability of various costs by individual members of joint venture related to dispute with Hawaii over amounts owed for Hawaii's general excise tax), Board accepts contractor's subsequent calculation of amount previously found due

GMS Hawaii Corp., ASBCA No. 58195 (July 30, 2013) (denies claim for termination costs because contract permitted termination without liability in situation at issue)

PHI Applied Physical Sciences, Inc., ASBCA Nos. 56581, 58038 (May 30, 2013) (denies claim for cost overrun because contractor failed to give required notice under FAR 52.232-20 (Limitation of Cost) and Contracting Officer did not authorize incurrence of costs)

CAE USA, Inc., ASBCA No. (May 23, 2013) (grants Government partial summary judgment on contractor's claims that it is entitled (under theory of unilateral mistake, failure to disclose superior knowledge, or breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing) to recover  fringe benefit costs it was required to pay under collective bargaining agreement as successor contractor pursuant to Service Contract Act)

PHI Applied Physical Sciences, Inc., ASBCA Nos. 56581, 58038 (Apr. 30, 2013) (FAR 52.232-20 (Limitation of Cost) bars contractor's claim for increased costs under CPFF contract because contractor failed to provide required notice of cost overruns and Contracting Officer never issued notice that estimated cost of contract had been increased)

Dynamics Research Corp., ASBCA No. 57830 (Mar. 26, 2013) (contractor that failed to notify Government at least 90 days before its incurred costs would equal 85% of the then-allotted funds, as required by "Limitation of Government Obligation" clause, could not recover for costs in excess of funding limit)

Green Dream Group, ASBCA Nos. 57413, et al. (Mar. 25, 2013) (various termination for convenience cost claims)

Space Gateway Support, LLC, ASBCA Nos. 55608, 55658 (Jan. 29, 2013) (former FAR 45.302.3(c) (now revised and relocated to 15.404-4(c)(3)) prohibits recovery of profit on cost of equipment purchased pursuant to directions from Government)

Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Co., ASBCA No. 56547 (Jan. 22, 2013) (Government failed to prove that nondisclosure of data resulted in any increase in negotiated price)

Delay; Suspension of Work; Eichleay; Unabsorbed Overhead

 

Sterling Design, Inc., ASBCA No. 61099 (Nov. 1, 2017) (any delays by Contracting Officer in responding to contractor's questions about CLIN requirements did not entitle contractor to delay damages because those questions were addressed by the PWS, which the contractor admittedly did not read)

Air Services, Inc., ASBCA No. 59843 (Mar. 17, 2016) (grants delay costs caused by government's "indecision and confusion" over project requirement)

KBJ, Inc.,  ASBCA No. 58512 (Mar. 3, 2016) (release in modification barred contractor's subsequent claims for compensation and time due to delays occasioned by encountering more than anticipated asbestos; contractor entitled to 109 days of Eichleay overhead because Govrnment's suspension of work resulted in delay to critical path, which resulted in contractor's standby costs in a situation where any contractor delays were not on critical path)

Terraseis Trading Limited, ASBCA Nos. 58731, 58732 (Nov. 19, 2015) (despite lack of delivery schedule in contract, contractor is entitled to six of claimed 28 days of delay compensation for the Government's delays in its obligation to deliver contractor's equipment to worksite; delays and other excuses not sufficient to overcome contractor's failure to meet contract schedule for its work so default termination upheld)

Alderman Building Co., ASBCA No. 58082 (Dec. 9, 2014) (partially grants contractor's motion for summary judgment, finds contractor has established one of three required  elements for recovery of Eichleay damages, i.e., contractor established there was a government-caused delay of uncertain duration)

Strand Hunt Construction, Inc., ASBCA No. 55905 (Apr. 11, 2013) (contract completion date was date originally proposed by contractor and accepted by Government, despite the fact, in modifications, that both parties erroneously continued to refer to the completion date in the solicitation until the dispute arose; contractor is entitled to remission of liquidated damages to the extent (i) unreasonable portion of stop work order and (ii) Contracting Officer's failure (a) to act within reasonable period of time to resolve punchlist items and (b) to concede beneficial occupancy occurred at same time as substantial completion)

Troy Eagle Group, ASBCA No. 56447 (Mar. 4, 2013) (delays in Iraq caused by gate and border closures, road blockages, and requirements that shipments be made in military convoys, whether ordered by United States or Iraqi government, are not compensable), affirmed on reconsideration

 

Default Terminations; Cancellation for Cause; Government Deductions and Rejection of Work; Government Claims; Liquidated Damages

 

MOQA-AQYOL JV, LTD., ASBCA Nos. 57963, 60456 (Nov. 7, 2017) (upholds default termination for failure to make progress because contractor: (i) did not provide credible analysis of government delays; (ii) failed to overcome the release language in the bilateral modifications that resolved three major delays; and (iii) did not account for its own considerable delays, basically having assumed the risks of a complex project it was ill-equipped to undertake), contractor's motion for reconsideration denied

Rashed Elham Trading Co., ASBCA Nos. 58383, et al. (2017) (upholds termination for cause of contract to transport cargo and fuel in support of contingency operations in Afghanistan; contractor's letter to Government stating contractor was "cancelling" contract as of specific date amounted to anticipatory repudiation; contractor's lack of response to cure notice constituted failure to provide adequate assurances of performance; contractor failed to establish any factors excusing its failure to perform)

Avant Assessment, LLC, ASBCA Nos. 58903, et al. (Aug. 21, 2017) (overturns default termination of one contract because the Government had waived original delivery dates by adopting new schedule and failed to prove contractor failed to meet new schedule (see also the Board's earlier decision in ASBCA No. 58866); contractor failed to provide specific proof that Government had improperly rejected test items)

Thunderstruck Signs, ASBCA No. 61027 (Aug. 16, 2017) (upholds termination for cause because, after Government repeatedly extended delivery date, final due date established by Government (which contractor failed to meet through no fault of the Government) was reasonable in the circumstances)

SYMVIONICS, Inc., ASBCA Nos. 60335, 60612 (June 26, 2017) (upholds default termination because contractor anticipatorily repudiated contract by notifying Government it could not perform unless certain delivery order requirements were modified, especially because the contractor was aware of the Government's interpretation of those requirements prior to award and failed to object)

Campus Management Corp., ASBCA Nos. 59924, 59925 (Apr. 20, 2017) (denies many of contractor's claimed termination for convenience costs because they were not supported by evidence in the form of contractor's business records and documentation; contractor is entitled to CDA interest from the time it submitted its claim for invoices that Government unreasonably delayed in paying)

[Redacted], ASBCA Nos. 60300, 600302 (Mar. 29, 2017) (upholds default termination after contractor lost access to work areas due to vendor vetting process, which determined that it was Force Protection Threat to United States and Coalition forces at Kandahar Airfield)

Military Aircraft Parts, ASBCA No. 60904 (Mar. 27, 2017) (upholds cancellation of purchase order because contractor failed to tender conforming items in timely manner)

Pyrotechnic Specialties, Inc., ASBCA Nos. 57890, et al. (Mar. 13, 2017) (upholds default termination; discussions concerning extending contract schedule did not result in an agreement to do so; contractor failed to present sufficient evidence that production defects were caused by Government's allegedly defective specification rather than by contractor's own production problems; Government not required to approve contractor's requests for deviation; even if Government changed test acceptance requirements in one area, failures on another test would still have justified rejection of units; email suggesting termination but not addressed to Contracting Officer and not directing Contracting Officer to terminate is not evidence Contracting Officer failed to exercise independent judgment in terminating contract; no evidence of bad faith termination)

Industrial Consultants, Inc. dba W. Fortune & Co., ASBCA Nos. 59622, 60491 (Mar. 10, 2017) (upholds default termination because contractor's failure to perform was due to its disagreement with the Government's project design rather than any excusable causes)

Truckla Services, Inc., ASBCA Nos. 57564, 57752 (Jan. 26, 2017) (upholds default termination because (i) the contractor had completed only 13% of the work within the contractual performance period and the Contracting Officer's conclusion that the contractor's plan to complete the work was not reasonably certain nor finalized was reasonable and not an abuse of discretion and (ii) BP oil spill, while complicating contractor's efforts to find barges, did not excuse its failure to perform because it did find subcontractors capable of performing the work)

Avant Assessment, LLC, ASBCA No. 58866 (Sep. 28, 2016) (converts default termination to one for convenience because the Government (i) failed to present any evidence of a delivery schedule it claimed the contractor had failed to meet and (ii) failed to show the contractor had delivered fewer than the required number of items because the parties had agreed to reduce the number of required items to only the number the Government found acceptable)

Precision Standard, Inc., ASBCA Nos. 58135, 58205 (June 8, 2016) (default termination justified by contractor's refusal to perform or to properly respond to cure notices after Government applied what contractor believed was incorrect welding standard, especially when contractor did not allege Government's action was breach prior to termination), contractor's motion for reconsideration denied

Lean Construction and Engineering Co., ASBCA No. 59016 (May 18, 2016) (upholds partial default termination because contractor failed to complete the work despite two extensions to the contract schedule and several notices from the Government regarding the problems with the work)

Quality Trust, Inc., ASBCA No. 59983 (May 5, 2016) (upholds default termination based upon contractor's failure to obtain required performance and payment bonds), contractor's motion for reconsideration denied

Third Coast Fresh Distribution, L.L.C., ASBCA No. 59696 (Apr. 6, 2016) (upholds termination for cause of contract set-aside for small businesses after SBA determined contractor was not small because it was not compliant with nonmanufacturer rule)

Highland Al Hujaz Co., Ltd, ASBCA No. 58243 (Mar. 30, 2016) (upholds termination for default issued immediately after contractor anticipatorily repudiated material, non-severable requirement of contract by "positively, definitely, unconditionally, and unequivocally refus[ing] to continue providing temporary power without additional fuel payments by the government"; default not excused by Government's justifiable withholding of progress payments)

Joseph Sottolano, ASBCA Nos. 59081, 60043 (Mar. 24, 2016) (upholds termination for cause  of United States' Military Academy's head baseball coach for, inter alia, receiving oral sex from a  female staff assistant in his office during working hours)

Marshall's Electric, Inc., ASBCA No. 59749 (Mar. 7, 2016) (upholds defaut termination based on contractor's failure to obtain required bonding, rejecting all its excuses for its failure)

Lawn Legends LLC, ASBCA No. 59078 (Dec. 30, 2015) (upholds default termination because of contractor's failures to complete various tasks by the delivery deadlines without adequate excuses)

elson, Inc., ASBCA Nos. 57201, 58166 (Dec. 15, 2015) (default termination of work at two of contract sites was improper because no notice-to-proceed was ever issued; terminations of work related to other contract sites were improper because Government did not grant contractor time extensions to which it was entitled)

Palco Distributing, LLC, ASBCA No. 59892 (Oct. 22, 2015) (upholds cancellation of purchase order after seller tendered different items from those specified in order)

Capy Machine Shop, ASBCA No. 69133 (Oct. 8, 2015) (overturns default termination because contractor's request for a no-cost cancellation was not sufficient to establish anticipatory repudiation and its past practice of bidding low and then requesting no-cost terminations on other contracts was not evidence it bid this contract with no intention of performing); same reasoning and result re same contractor in ASBCA No. 59085.

Military Aircraft Parts, ASBCA No. 59978 (Sep. 1, 2015)  (overturns default termination because Government should have conditionally approved second submission of First Article)

DayDanyon Corp., ASBCA No. 57681 (Aug. 17, 2015) (upholds default termination; contractor's performance during one month and 12 days between first missed delivery date and date of termination was too insubstantial to establish detrimental reliance based on government forbearance)

Avant Assessment, LLC, ASBCA No. 58867 (Aug. 11, 2015) (sustains appeal from default termination because contract modification had deleted requirement that Government subsequently used to try to justify termination); Government's motion for reconsideration denied.

Precision Standard, Inc., ASBCA No. 59116 (July 13, 2015) (upholds termination for default based on failure to deliver First Article on time; provision authorizing termination at no cost "to the Government" did not mean such termination would also be at no cost to the contractor), contractor's motion for reconsideration denied

CP of Bozeman, Inc., ASBCA No. 58491 (July 8, 2015) (overturns termination for default because contract gave contractor the right to unilaterally end its services at specific location on one days' notice, so, doing so, was not a breach of contract; denies contractor's claim of misrepresentation because contractor failed to inquire about, or properly make use of, data provided by Government)

Gilbane Building Co., ASBCA No. 57206 (Aug. 13, 2014) (Government properly rejected contractor's submittal of proposed subcontractor's elevator system because subcontractor did not comply with requirement that it be regularly engaged in the manufacture of pre-engineered elevator systems), motion for reconsideration denied

Hanley Industries, Inc., ASBCA No. 56584 (Aug. 12, 2014) (upholds termination for default after response to cure notice, which mainly regurgitated excuses Government already had found inadequate)

AEON Group, LLC, ASBCA Nos. 56142, 56251 (Aug. 6, 2014) (denies appeals of default termination and assessment for unliquidated performance-based payments; contractor was in default, which was not excused by Government's superior knowledge or alleged lack of good faith and fair dealing)

DODS, Inc., ASBCA Nos. 57746, 58252 (July 22, 2014) (denies appeal of default termination for failure to make progress because contractor failed to provide adequate assurances in response to cure notice )

Dyno Group, Inc., ASBCA No. 59074 (Apr. 11, 2014) (rejects multiple contractor arguments against assessment of liquidated damages for late completion of contract work)Bulova Technologies Ordnance Systems LLC, ASBCA No. 57406 (Jan. 28, 2014) (supply contract for delivery of three, severable types of  guns was properly terminated for failure to deliver one type, properly terminated for failure to make progress and failure to provide adequate assurances of performance as to a second type, but improperly terminated the third because the contractor was not yet in default as of the date of that termination and had not anticipatorily repudiated its obligations), motion for reconsideration denied

Earthstar Construction and Logistics Co., ASBCA No. 58086 (Nov. 13, 2013) (upholds termination for cause due to failure to deliver "new" items required by contract)

Dace Enterprises, LLC, ASBCA No. 57984 (Nov. 1, 2013) (Government properly terminated contract for cause because contractor was not authorized by manufacturer to provide (resell) required manufacturer support for specified systems and, thus, could not fulfill terms of contract) 

TTF, L.L.C., ASBCA Nos. 58495, 58516 (Sep. 3, 2013) (PO lapsed because firm failed to timely deliver supplies that met specification requirements, and the items it did deliver were nonconforming because they did not fulfill requirement to be produced by a HUBZone business)

Platinum Logistics Services Co., ASBCA No. 57965 (Aug. 15, 2013) (upholds termination for default after contractor repeatedly failed to provide conforming items and, after cure notice, did not give Government assurances it would comply with contract in the future)

Donaldson Enterprises, Inc., ASBCA No. 57297 (July 16, 2013) (contractor is responsible for value of government property taken by subcontractor)

Commissioning Solutions Global, LLC, ASBCA Nos. 57429, 57494 (June 25, 2013) (termination of fixed price contract for cause justified by contractor's refusal to perform absent price increase; argument that drawing was illegible is no excuse because its condition was patent before award and contractor did not rely on it to perform)

Gargoyles, Inc., ASBCA No. 57515 (May 28, 2013) (upholds termination for cause of commercial items contract for light armored vehicles for failure to deliver within required delivery schedule without excuse; warning letter issued by Government after delivery date had passed was actually a Show Cause notice even through it referred to itself as cure notice and both parties referred to it as such)

ADT Construction Group, Inc., ASBCA No. 55358 (Apr. 30, 2013) (upholds default termination based on (i) contractor's failure to meet original completion date and interim construction date on revised schedule; (ii) contractor's lack of progress, indicating it was unlikely to meet any new completion date; and contractor's failure to provide adequate assurances that it would or could complete contract), request for reconsideration denied

Strand Hunt Construction, Inc., ASBCA No. 55905 (Apr. 11, 2013) (contract completion date was date originally proposed by contractor and accepted by Government, despite the fact, in modifications, that both parties erroneously continued to refer to the completion date in the solicitation until the dispute arose; contractor is entitled to remission of liquidated damages to the extent (i) unreasonable portion of stop work order and (ii) Contracting Officer's failure (a) to act within reasonable period of time to resolve punchlist items and (b) to concede beneficial occupancy occurred at same time as substantial completion)

Red Sea Engineers & Constructors, Inc., ASBCA Nos. 57448, et al. (Feb. 21, 2013) (default not excused by Government's withholding of progress payments and its refusal to process related documents because Government's expressed concerns that, due to lack of progress, earlier progress payments had overpaid contractor; four-month forbearance period after warning to contractor that Government was reserving its rights did not waive completion date)

American AquaSource, Inc., ASBCA Nos. 56627, 57275 (Jan. 8, 2013) (upholds termination for cause of contract to supply purified water because contractor's performance during 49 day period between missed delivery date and termination (conducting a site survey, being notified by its construction contractor that it might be liable for liquidated damages, and using minimal efforts to find alternate source of water) was not sufficiently substantial to constitute reliance in support of the contractor's claim of waiver of the delivery date), request for reconsideration denied.

 

Convenience Terminations

Abdul Khabir Construction Co., ASBCA No. 61155 (Apr. 6, 2018) (contractor failed to submit termination settlement proposal within one year of T for C)

American Boys Construction Co., ASBCA No. 61163 (Jan. 8, 2018) (contractor failed to submit termination settlement proposal within one year of T for C)

Black Bear Construction Co., ASBCA No. 61181 (Nov. 14, 2017) (denies appeal of contractor that did not file termination settlement proposal (or request an extension) within one year of termination for convenience, as required by FAR 52.249-2(e))

Atlas Sahil Construction Co., ASBCA No. 58951 (Nov. 9, 2017) (in convenience termination case, Board rejects contractor's arguments that: (i) Christian doctrine should be used to read basic version of FAR 52.249.2 into the contract (because contract included Alternate I to that clause and there was no regulation requiring the basic version to be used); (ii) CLIN pricing should be sued to determine recovery (because costs, not prices, are basis for T for C claims); and (iii) the jury verdict method should be utilized (because there was little or no evidence to support contractor's contention that records of certain costs were unavailable to it)

American Boys Construction Co., ASBCA No. 60515 (Sep. 13, 2017) (where stop work order was issued nine days after award (and was followed by termination for convenience), appellant's material purchases prior to both notice to proceed and material approval were unreasonable and, therefore, noncompensable; claim for standby labor costs is denied for lack of evidence)

Tristana R. Harvey Career Planning & Consulting Series LLC, ASBCA No. 60927 (Aug. 11, 2017) (convenience termination was not in bad faith and did not violate the implied duty of good faith and fair dealing)

2Connect W.L.L., ASBCA No. 59233 (June 2, 2017) (15-year irrevocable right-of-use lease for segment of telecommunications circuit procured by contractor in preparation to perform was an allowable cancellation cost under the definition of "actual nonrecoverable cost"  in DFARS 252.239.7007 (i.e., the contractor could not recover the cost in its normal business operations) after Government cancelled order (as a result of a successful protest) prior to the time services commenced)

Pro-Built Construction Firm, ASBCA No. 59278 (June 1, 2017) (determination of  recoverable amounts of portions of direct labor, subcontract costs, DBA insurance, G&A and profit claimed by contractor as a result of termination for convenience prior to notice to proceed on contract for construction of police station) 

First Division Design, LLC, ASBCA No. 60951 (Apr. 25, 2017) (contractor entitled to withheld contract price after convenience termination because it completed the work; contractor not entitled to home office overhead in this situation because it is not cost "resulting from" the termination under FAR 52.212-4(l))

Deas Construction, Inc., ASBCA No. 60633 (Dec. 13, 2016) (read as a whole, contract required contractor to fabricate and provide fully functional ISO Stand and Government had not withheld superior knowledge that contractor's price was too low; after convenience termination, Government correctly determined that contractor had performed only 10% of work and, therefore, was entitled to that percentage of contract price)

Missouri Department of Social Services, ASBCA No. 59191 (Nov. 15, 2016) (under FAR 52.249-2(l) contractor entitled to equitable adjustment for increased costs of remaining work caused by Government's partial termination for convenience of requirements contract)

Puget Sound Environmental Corp., ASBCA No. 58828 (July 12, 2016) (Government did not act in bad faith in terminating purchase order and declining to exercise additional options after DOL made preliminary determination contractor failed to pay wages in accordance with Service Contract Act)

Rhodes Research, ASBCA No. 59414 (June 7, 2016) (despite scant documentation submitted by contractor to support termination settlement proposal, Contracting Officer fairly determined percentage of completion pursuant to FAR  52.212-4), contractor's motion for reconsideration denied

Rex Systems Inc., ASBCA No. 59624 (Apr. 16, 2016) (determination of recoverable convenience termination costs under  FAR 52.213-4(f), the termination clause for simplified acquisitions for other than commercial items)

ASFA Construction Industry and Trade, Inc., ASBCA No. 57269 (July 8, 2015) (constructive termination for convenience of implied-in-fact contract)

Dellew Corp., ASBCA No. 58538 (May 1, 2015) (FAR 52.212-4(1) governs a contractor's right of recovery when a commercial items contract is terminated by the government for convenience and that this right is not expanded by DFARS 252.232-7007)

DODS, Inc., ASBCA No. 59510 (Mar. 12,2015) (analysis of elements of convenience termination proposal: work-in-progress, G&A, profit on loss contract, and settlements expenses)

Environmental Safety Consultants, Inc., ASBCA No. 58343 (Mar. 2, 2015) (contractor's price-based convenience termination settlement claim failed for lack of proof because contractor did not maintain a job cost ledger, provided gross payroll records that did not identify the job on which the employee was being paid, and provided copies of checks payable to a subcontractor and vendors that for the most part were unsupported by invoices), motion for reconsideration denied

T.I.F, LLC, ASBCA No. 59303 (Dec. 11, 2014) (contractor failed to prove it was forced to sign bilateral modification (providing amount owed contractor after termination for convenience) under duress)

SWR, Inc., ASBCA No. 56708 (Dec. 4, 2014) (denies bulk of convenience termination claim based on contract termination shortly after award due to lack of proof)

 

 

Inspection

Quantum; Measure and Elements of Damages; Payment

Honeywell International, Inc., ASBCA No. 57779 (Aug. 1, 2017) (determines amount contractor may recover under quantum valebant or quantum meruit remedies for fair market value of the goods and services delivered to Government pursuant to invalid contract)

Northrop Grumman Corp., ASBCA No. 60190 (July 13, 2017) (sustains appeal  of Government's "disallowance" of more than $250 million of contractor's post-retirement benefit costs because contractor underfunded those benefits using a method not sanctioned by FAR 31.205-6(o)  and, thus, did not incur the costs or charge the Government for them so that the Government did not suffer any damages)

Optimum Services, Inc. ASBCA No. 59952 (Sep. 6, 2016) (Board employs Measured Mile Method to determine quantum for differing site condition on dredging contract)

Monica Walker, ASBCA No. 60436 (July 27, 2016) (proof required for various claimed damages done to rental property by lessee)

BAE Systems San Francisco Ship Repair, ASBCA No. 58809 (Jan 11, 2016) (neither Government estimate nor what similar work had cost other contractors would adequately compensate contractor for its costs of performing extra work directed by Government; contractor had accounting system adequate to capture its costs for the extra work; contractor not obligated to suspend work on original contract items until it received written, unilateral order from Contracting Officer directing it to perform changed work; contractor's hourly rate for change not limited by clause stating rate to be utilized in "negotiating" changes because there were no such negotiations; contract did not prohibit contractor from recovering overtime for changed work; DCAA audit report, while evidence, is not dispositive on issue of quantum--that responsibility remains with the Board)

International Automotriz, ASBCA No. 59665 (Nov. 16, 2015) (denies contractor's claim because Government already had compensated contractor for all recoverable costs that had been proven  for damage to leased vehicles )

Art Anderson Assocs., ASBCA Nos. 60034, 35 (Nov. 4, 2015) (quantum of allowable convenience termination costs in numerous categories)

Pros Cleaners, ASBCA No. 59797 (Oct. 20, 2015) (awards contractor its post termination costs of attempting to settle quantum after convenience termination of commercial items contract)

Raytheon Missile Systems Co., ASBCA No. 59258 (Sep. 3, 2015) (determination of quantum after prior entitlement decision concerning increased jet fuel costs)

Jaynes Corp., ASBCA No. 59234 (May 19, 2015) (determination of recoverable costs associated with Government's improper rejection of pipe to be used in fire sprinkler system)

Alliance Roofing & Sheet Metal, Inc., ASBCA No. 59663 (May 4, 2015) (contractor failed to prove amount of alleged damages it suffered as a result of government directive to provide warranty beyond that required by specifications), motion for reconsideration denied

Seven Seas Shipchandlers, LLC, ASBCA Nos. 57875, et al. (Mar. 4, 2015) (Government liable to pay contractor because made payment to person who forged a signature, without following proper procedures for verifying his identity)

TriRAD Technologies Inc., ASBCA No. 58855 (Feb. 23, 2015) (determination of amount due contractor pursuant to each prong ("percentage of work performed" and "reasonable charges resulting from the termination") of FAR 52.212-4(1) under commercial items contract after original default termination was converted to convenience termination)

ADT Construction Group, Inc., ASBCA No. 57322 (Feb. 12, 2015) (collateral estoppel precludes appellant from relitigating the existence of a causal nexus between the government-caused preconstruction delays and its trade subcontract cost escalation damages)

EJB Facilities Services, ASBCA No. 57112 (Jan. 22, 2015) (rejects contractor's use of total cost method because contractor failed to establish impracticability of measuring losses directly and failed to establish reasonableness of original bid by rebutting Government expert's allegations regarding mistakes in bid)

Job Options, Inc., ASBCA No. 59314 (Nov. 5, 2014) (calculation of equitable adjustment for increased labor costs associated with the storage of additional goods under a contract  to provide inventory management, shelf stocking, and janitorial services)

Magwood Services, Inc., ASBCA No. 59293 (Sep. 16, 2014) (analysis of various areas of claimed costs in convenience termination settlement proposal)

Bruce E. Zoeller, ASBCA No. 56578 (June 11, 2014) (determination of quantum owed contractor for IBF seed crop), contractor's motion for reconsideration denied

RLB Contracting, Inc., ASBCA No. 57638 (Jan. 3, 2014) (Board uses jury verdict method, rather than total cost approach, to determine quantum of excess costs resulting from required movement of excavation pit from the location the contractor had anticipated), contractor's motion for reconsideration denied

Joe Phillips, ASBCA No. 57280 (Mar. 19, 2013) (measure of damages, in particular lost profit, for Government's breach (by diversion) of requirements contract; jury verdict method; reduces 79% profit rate sought by contractor to 30%), motion for reconsideration denied

Tiger Enterprises, Inc., ASBCA No. 57733 (Mar. 20, 2013) (denies appeal because Government paid contract amounts to bank under valid assignment)

South Carolina Public Service Authority, ASBCA No. 57826 (Feb. 14,2013) (contractor entitled to indemnification from Government for amount found due by jury in separate action on claims against it for flooding by third party landowners plus CDA interest from the time it submitted indemnification claim to Government)

 

Discovery; Evidence; Procedure; Motion Practice; Stay of Appeal; Summary Judgment; Motions for Reconsideration

 

John Shaw LLC d/b/a Shaw Building Maintenance, ASBCA No. 61379 (Apr. 3, 2018) (denies contractor's motion for leave to amend complaint to include count for exemplary damages)

Bellal Aziz Construction Co., ASBCA Nos. 60717, 61035 (Apr. 3, 2018) (dismisses appeal for failure to prosecute because contractor failed to respond to several Board orders that contractor address question whether it had submitted timely claim certification to Contracting Officer)

DynCorp International LLC, ASBCA No. 61274 (Mar. 20, 2018) (denies Government's motion for partial summary judgment based on collateral estoppel because the issue (data incompleteness) in a prior appeal on which the Government's motion is based is different from the issue in the current appeal (data inaccuracy))

UNIT Co., ASBCA No. 60581 (Feb. 12, 2018) (denies Government's motion for summary judgment that contractor failed to provide timely, contractually-required notice of discrepancy in the specifications or drawings under clause 52.236.21(a); nothing precludes such notice from being found in an RFI; Government provided no evidence of prejudice, which is a requirement for such issues)

Rover Construction Co., ASBCA No. 60703 (Feb. 5, 2018) (dismisses appeal for failure to prosecute after unexplained failure to file brief by scheduled date set by the Board)

Buck Town Contractors & Co., ASBCA No. 60939 (Jan. 11, 2018) (denies contractor's motion for partial summary judgment because plain meaning of contract is at variance with contractor's proposed interpretation)

Fluor Federal Solutions, LLC, ASBCA No. 61431-983 (Dec. 28, 2017) (directs Contracting Officer to issue decision on claim after two years of inaction)

Horton Construction Co., ASBCA No. 61085 (Sep. 1, 2017) (denies Government's motion for summary judgment based on final payment and release document allegedly signed by contractor because contractor raised genuine issue of material fact by maintaining individual that signed documents lacked authority to do so)

ABS Development Corp., ASBCA Nos. 60222, 60223 (Aug. 30, 2017) (grants Government's requests to amend its answers to include contentions that (i) contract was obtained, and is tainted, by fraud, and hence is void ab initio, and (ii) Government is not responsible for sovereign acts of foreign government)

Afghan Active Group (AAC), ASBCA No. 60387 (Aug. 1, 2017) (dismisses appeal for failure to prosecute)

Government Services Corp., ASBCA Nos. 59209, et al. (May 5, 2017) (denies Government's motion to dismiss for failure to prosecute because contractor had not "repeatedly" missed filing deadlines and there was no showing of prejudice to the Government from the deadline the contractor had missed)

Fluor Intercontinental, Inc., ASBCA No. 60729 (May 3, 2017) (denies Government's motion for summary judgment because of material issues of fact concerning meaning of contract modification)

Public Warehousing Co., K.S.C., ASBCA No. 59020 (2017) (denies contractor's motion (i) to lift Board's earlier order imposing one-year stay of contractor's affirmative claims and (ii) to certify Board's earlier order for interlocutory appeal to CAFC)

Public Warehousing Co., K.S.C., ASBCA No. 57510 (Mar. 21, 2017) (Board stays appeal for one year to permit parallel criminal case in district court to proceed; grants Government's motion to amend answer to include additional affirmative defenses, except laches)

Rohulhameed Construction Co., ASBCA No. 61034-978 (Feb. 27, 2017) (Board directs Contracting Officer to issue decision)

Platinum Logistics Services Co., ASBCA No. 61018-976 (Feb. 27, 2017) (Board directs Contracting Officer to issue decision)

Agility Services Logistics Co., KSC, ASBCA Nos. 57415, et al. (Feb. 14, 2017) (on remand from CAFC, identity of real party in interest is irrelevant to Board's original decision that it lacks jurisdiction over contracts with Coalition Provisional Authority of Iraq; parties have not provided Board with information necessary to determine real party in interest and Board lacks expertise to answer question under Iraqi law)

Niking Corp., ASBCA No. 60731 (Jan. 27, 2017) (denies contractor's motion to strike (as insufficiently vague) Government's affirmative defenses or require more definite statement of them)

Public Warehousing Co., K.S.C., ASBCA No. 59020 (Jan 12, 2017) (grants government motion to stay proceedings for one year pending resolution of pending fraud case in district court involving many of same issues)

554 Bloomfield, LLC, ASBCA No. 58819 (Dec. 12,2016) (denies tardy request to reinstate appeal to Board's docket because contractor offered no excuse for tardiness), contractor's motion for reconsideration denied

Public Warehousing Co., K.S.C., ASBCA No. 58088 (Dec. 8, 2016) (grants government motion to stay appeal (for one year) pending Government's criminal case against contractor in Northern District of Georgia that involves many of same issues and factual allegations)

ABB Enterprise Software, Inc. f/k/a Ventyx, ASBCA No. 60314 (Dec. 5, 2016) (permits Government to amend answer to add affirmative defense of equitable estoppel but allows contractor opportunity to set discovery schedule to have ample opportunity to examine and respond to it)

Public Warehousing Co., K.S.C., ASBCA No. 58088 (Nov. 2016) (grants Government's motion to amend Answer to add affirmative defenses of fraud in the inducement, first material breach, sovereign acts doctrine, political question doctrine, assumption of risk, and failure to mitigate, after finding that Government did not unduly delay seeking to amend and contractor was not prejudiced)

DCX-CHOL Enterprises, Inc., ASBCA No. 58742 (Oct. 11, 2016) (denies contractor's motion for summary judgment to overturn default termination because contractor failed to present evidence that Government waived contract delivery date)

Volmar Construction, Inc., ASBCA No. 60710-910 (Oct. 7, 2016) (order directing Contracting Officer to issue decision on claim)

BAE Systems Tactical Vehicle Systems LP, ASBCA No. (July 25, 2016) (denies Government's motion to stay proceedings on appeal from Government's TINA claim pending resolution of Government's FCA suit on same dispute in District Court)

Kellogg Brown  & Root Services, Inc., ASBCA Nos. 57530, 58161 (July 25, 2016) (denies Government's motion to suspend or dismiss appeals from denial of contractor's claim for certain subcontractor costs for indefinite duration pending FCA suit by Government in District Court), Government's motion for reconsideration denied

GSC Construction, Inc., ASBCA Nos. 59046, 59957 (July 12, 2016) (denies contractor's motion for summary judgment on quantum because contractor's motion lacked proof)

GSC Construction, Inc., ASBCA No. 59046 (June 14, 2016) (denies Government's motion to dismiss for failure to prosecute because contractor had produced documents in response to Board's prior order and only inadvertently had neglected to make some written responses)

Maersk Line, Limited, ASBCA Nos. 59791, 58792 (June 13, 2016) (denies Governments' motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction (because claim presented to Board based on same operative facts as claim presented to Contracting Officer) and cross motions for summary judgment (because of disputed material facts and the advisability of hearing extrinsic evidence))

Columbia State Bank (formerly Appeal of Castle-Rose, Inc.), ASBCA No. 59531 (June 9, 2016) (denies contractor's summary judgment motion on all aspects of its claims for constructive change, differing site conditions, delays, and consulting fees due to material issues of fact)

Tokyo Co., ASBCA No. 59906 (May 24, 2016) (dismissal for failure to prosecute after contractor failed to explain its contention that it had been unable to access its yahoo.com email account for five months)

Nexagen Networks, Inc., ASBCA No. 60523-697 (May 5, 2016) (directs Contracting Officer to issue decision)

GSC Construction, Inc. ASBCA No. 59402 (May 5, 2016) (denies Government's motion for summary judgment re propriety of default termination because of material disputed fact concerning whether the contractor and the DOL had settled a dispute over whether the contractor had violated labor laws)

Raytheon Co., ASBCA Nos. 57743, et al., (Mar. 29, 2016) (denies contractor's motion to strike certain testimony at hearing that allegedly conflicted with interrogatory answer because fact that answer was inadvertently incomplete did not merit sanction requested by appellant)

Ahjar Shat Alarab Albidhaa Co., ASBCA No. 59868 (Mar. 24, 2016) (dismissal for failure to prosecute after repeated failures to respond to orders to propose schedule for proceedings)

Suodor Al-Khair Co - SAKCO for General Trading, ASBCA Nos. 59036, 59037 (Mar. 21, 2016) (dismissal for failure to prosecute based on silence in response to order to propose schedule for proceedings)

Supreme Foodservice, GmbH, ASBCA Nos. 57884, et al. (Mar. 17, 2016) (Board has jurisdiction to entertain DLA's claim and affirmative defense that the contract is void ab initio due to fraud in the inducement; Board has jurisdiction to entertain DLA's claim and affirmative defense that contract is void ab initio due to conflict of interest; DLA's affirmative defenses are not claims and, thus, are not subject to contractor's untimeliness (limitations) contentions; DLA's conflict-of-interest claims under 18 U.S.C. §§ 207(a)(l), 207(a)(2), and 208(a) are barred by the CDA's limitations period because DLA knew or should have known of post employment conflict of interest issue at time of contract award; bilateral settlement agreement bars DLA's subsequent fraud in the inducement claims pertaining to affiliated subcontractor, but not its affirmative defenses based on this same ground; genuine issues of fact preclude summary judgment in favor of Government on its affirmative defense of first material breach), Government's motion for partial reconsideration of denial of its motion for summary judgment on issue of first material breach is denied

Al Nawars Co., ASBCA No. 59044 (Jan. 19, 2016) (dismisses appeal for failure to prosecute after numerous failures to respond to correspondence and orders from Board)

Al Nawars Co, ASBCA No. 59043 (Jan. 19, 2016) (dismisses appeal for failure to prosecute after numerous failures to respond to correspondence and orders from Board)

Baghdadi Swords Co., ASBCA No. 59063 (Jan. 8, 2016) (dismissal for failure to prosecute)

AISG, Inc., ASBCA Nos. 58696, 59151 (Sep. 23, 2015) (denies contractor's supplemental motion for summary judgment because record is "virtually devoid of evidence of the SOW and specifications from which [the Board] can determine certain contractual rights and obligations of the parties" related to the motion)

Kuwait Leaders General Trading, ASBCA No. 58213 (Sep. 21, 2015) (dismisses appeal for failure to prosecute after appellant failed to designate representative to prosecute appeal despite Board's orders)

Jeffrey C. Stone, Inc., d.b.a. Summit Builders, ASBCA No. 58372 (Sep. 17, 2015) (denies contractor's requests for sanctions based on the Government's repeated delays in discovery and in responding to Board's orders because Government's actions were not "contumacious or contemptuous to the extent that a default judgment is warranted")

Vertex Construction & Engineering, ASBCA Nos. 58989, et al. (Aug. 27, 2015)  (dismisses appeals for failure to prosecute after appellant's repeated failures to comply with Board's orders) 

Herai Alpha Construction Consultancy and Engineering Company, ASBCA Nos. 59386, 59774 (Aug. 17, 2015) (denies contractor's motion for summary judgment re alleged impropriety of default termination because of disputed material issues of fact)

Highland Al Hujaz Co. Ltd., ASBCA Nos. 59746, 59818 (July 13, 2015) (directs Government to file complaint on its claims for excess reprocurement costs and amounts allegedly overpaid to contractor)

KKOT Assocs., LLC (ASBCA No. 59898 (July 8, 2015) (dismisses appeal for failure to prosecute after appellant ignored order to file complaint)

Enola Contracting Services, Inc., ASBCA No. 59526 (July 8, 2015) (Government's pleading contains sufficient information to establish cause of action against contractor for terminated task orders)

ESCgov, Inc., ASBCA No. 58852 (June 16, 2015) (denies government motion for summary judgment as to contractor's claims for software procurement costs and intellectual property costs in part because of disputed issues as to which of two termination for convenience clauses in contract is applicable)

The Ryan Co., ASBCA No. 58137 (May 27, 2015) (denies Government's motion for summary judgment on CDA's six-year limitations period because: (i) after the CAFC's decision in Sikorsky, such motions involve affirmative defenses which should normally be heard after discovery; and (ii) because there are disputed questions of fact concerning when contractor had reason to know of claims for purposes of claim accrual)

Raytheon Co., ASBCA No. 58849  (May 27, 2015) (denies contractor's motion for summary judgment on CDA's six-year limitations period because: (i) after the CAFC's decision in Sikorsky, such motions involve affirmative defenses which should normally be heard after discovery; and (ii) because there are disputed questions of fact concerning when the Government had reason to know of claims for purposes of claim accrual)

Engineering Solutions & Products, LLC, ASBCA No. 58633 (May 13, 2015) (denies cross motions for summary judgment concerning existence and scope of alleged agreement because of disputed issues of fact)

Phoenix Management, Inc., ASBCA No. 59273 (Apr. 8, 2015) (denies Government's motion for summary judgment because of many open questions of fact)

Watts-Granite, A Joint Venture, ASBCA No. 59878-961 (Mar. 26, 2015) (Board directs Contracting Officer to issue decision)

Laguna Construction Co., Inc., No. 59108 (Mar. 17, 2015) (denies cross motions for summary judgment because of disputed material issues of fact)

Carro & Carro Enterprises, Inc., ASBCA No. 59485 (2015) (denies contractor's motion for board order directing Government to file complaint because appeal involves claim by contractor for percentage of progress payments retained by Government and contractor has sufficient information concerning basis of withholding to file complaint)

ECC International LLC, ASBCA No. 58856 (Feb. 20, 2015) (denies cross motions for summary judgment because of disputed questions of fact regarding prior course of dealing and waiver issues)

Kellogg Brown & Root Services, Inc. ASBCA No. 59557 (Jan. 22, 2015) (directs Government to file complaint on government claim because Contracting Officer's decision did not contain sufficient information on basis for claim for contractor to file complaint)

Shubhada Industries, ASBCA No. 58173 (Jan. 20, 2015) (dismisses appeal for failure to prosecute)

Advanced Technology International d/b/a SCRA Applied R&D, ASBCA No. 59698-952 (Jan. 7, 2015) (Board orders Contracting Officer to issue decision)

Delfasco, LLC, ASBCA No. 59153 (Jan. 5, 2015) (denies Government's motion for summary judgment because there is at least one material issue of disputed fact)

BAE Systems Land & Armaments, Inc., ASBCA No. 59374 (Nov. 18, 2014) (directs Government to file complaint on its defective pricing claim)

Aegis Defence Services Ltd., ASBCA No. 59082 (Nov. 14, 2014) (issue of fact concerning meaning of contract's right of first refusal precludes summary judgment)

IAP Worldwide Services, Inc., ASBCA No. 59610-949 (Nov. 13, 2014) (order directing Contracting Officer to issue decision on claim)

Environmental Safety Consultants, Inc., ASBCA No. 58343 (Oct. 23, 2014) (imposes evidentiary sanctions as remedy for contractor's failure to comply with Board's discovery order)

Capy Machine Shop, Inc., ASBCA No. 59085 (Oct. 22,2014) (denies government motion for summary judgment because it had not established contractor anticipatorily repudiated contract)

ZAAZTC Co., ASBCA No. 59194 (Oct. 9, 2014) (dismisses appeal for failure to prosecute after contractor failed to respond to Board order)

Jaynes Corp., ASBCA No. 59453-947 (Sep. 3, 2014) (arguments over when Contracting Officer should be required to issue decision)

Lael Al Sahab & Co., ASBCA No. 58346 (Sep. 2, 2014) (denies government motion to dismiss because contractor's representative had submitted satisfactory evidence that he is officer of company)

GSC Construction, Inc., ASBCA No. 59046 (Sep. 2, 2014) (denies government motion for summary judgment)

Environmental Safety Consultants, Inc., ASBCA No. 58343 (Sep. 2, 2014) (denies contractor's motion for judge and presiding panel to recuse themselves)

MIC/CCS Joint Venture, ASBCA No. 58023 (July 22, 2014) (denies contractor's motion for summary judgment because of unresolved questions of fact and law)

BAE Systems San Francisco Ship Repair, ASBCA No. 58810 (July 15, 2014) (contractor not entitled to summary judgment as to allowability of disputed costs simply because DCAA audit took no exception to claimed costs)

So-Co Piedmont, J.V., LLC, ASBCA No. 59318-946 (July 11, 2014) (denies contractor's request for board order directing Contracting Officer to issue a decision on complex claim in advance of date established by Contracting Officer)

Al Barih for General Contracting Ltd., ASBCA Nos. 57148, et al. (July 7, 2014) (dismisses appeals for failure to prosecute--financial hardship in locating attorney is not adequate excuse), affirmed on reconsideration 

Automotive Management Services, ASBCA No. 58352 (June 26, 2014) (denies cross motions for summary judgment because of multiple open fact issues)

Caddell Constr. Co., ASBCA No. 57831 (June 19, 2014) (denies government motion for summary judgment because of disputed material facts)

BAE Systems San Francisco Ship Repair, ASBCA No. 58809 (June 19, 2014) (DCAA audit report approval of disputed costs is not dispositive; it is Contracting Officer's role to make final determination)

Tele-Consultants, Inc., ASBCA No. 58129 (June 9, 2014) (denies contractor's motion to dismiss appeal without prejudice under Rule 30 so that it could seek relief from Congress because it lacked resources to pursue appeal)

MIC/CCS, Joint Venture, ASBCA No. 58242 (May 14, 2014) (denies contractor's motion for summary judgment because factual issues remain as to propriety of default termination of delivery order)

Beechcraft Defense Co., ASBCA No. 59173 (Apr. 24, 2014) (grants contractor's request to require Government to file complaint in case involving government allegations of CAS 402 noncompliance by contractor)

Lobar, Inc., ASBCA No. 59178 (Apr. 18, 2014) (Board stays proceedings on appeal of deemed denial of claim to allow Contracting Officer time to issue decision as a means to facilitate potential settlement of claim)

Public Warehousing Co., K.S.C., ASBCA No. 58078 (Apr. 10, 2014) (dismisses appeal without prejudice pursuant to Rule 30 due to pending criminal case in district court with overlapping issues)

Eyak Services, LLC, ASBCA Nos. 58556, 58557 (Apr. 1, 2014) (denies cross motions for summary judgment on government claims for return of alleged overpayments to contractor because of open issues of fact)

Eyak Technology, LLC, ASBCA Nos. 58552, et al. (Apr. 1, 2014) (denies cross motions for summary judgment on government claims for return of alleged overpayments to contractor because of open issues of fact)

HTA Aviation, LLC, ASBCA Nos. 57891, et al. (Mar. 27, 2014) (denies Government's motions for partial summary judgment on contractor's claims for aircraft-repair work because of material issues of fact concerning the manner in which the Government administered the contract, the authority of various government employees with regard to authorizing repair work, and the course of dealing between the parties concerning how certain types of repair work were to be accomplished and paid for)

Mylene Will Company LLC, ASBCA No. 58332 (Mar. 18, 2014) (dismisses appeal for failure to prosecute)

Advanced Technology Logistics, Inc., ASBCA No. 58665 (Mar. 11, 2014) (dismisses appeal for failure to prosecute)

Thorpe Seeop Corp., ASBCA No. 58961 (Feb. 27, 2014) (denies contractor's motion for sanction of default judgment against Government due to its failure to file a timely answer)

Jayco International, LLC, ASBCA No. 58461 (Feb. 12, 2014) (denies government motion for summary judgment because of fact issues over whether contract was modified to allow "or equal" batteries)

Teledyne Brown Engineering, Inc., ASBCA No. 58636 (Jan. 6, 2014) (denies government motion for summary judgment that, because contract was cost-plus-fixed fee, contractor could not possibly have earned full fee because contract's ceiling cost was only approximately half funded)

Bruce E. Zoeller, ASBCA No. 56578 (Dec. 17, 2013) (motion for reconsideration filed 32 minutes past 30-day deadline will not be considered)

The Boeing Co., ASBCA No. 58587 (Dec. 3, 2013) (refuses to dismiss claims related to several contracts because Government misidentified one contract number; allows Government to correct the number in the record)

Teddy's Cool Treats, ASBCA No. 58384 (Dec. 3, 2013) (denies Government's motion for summary judgment concerning default termination of concession contract because of disputed factual issues concerning (i) the extent to which contractor had made improper sexual comments and actions and (ii) whether contractor's actions had brought discredit on agency)

Laguna Construction Co., ASBCA No. 58324 (Nov. 22, 2013) (grants Government's motion to amend its answer to include affirmative defense of fraud after contractor's vice president pleaded guilty to soliciting and receiving kickbacks from subcontractors involved in a number of contracts, including the one involved in the current appeal)

SERDI, LLC, ASBCA No. 58507 (Oct. 29, 2013) (disputed material issues of fact as to whether Government failed to cooperate with contractor and delayed commencement of the work preclude summary judgment for Government)

Newhall Telecom, LLC, ASBCA No. 57438 (Aug. 15, 2013) (grants government motion to dismiss for failure to prosecute)

Alderman Building Co., ASBCA No. 58082 (Aug. 8, 2013) (denies majority of cross motions for summary judgment, including those regarding alleged release of claims, because of disputed issues of fact)

Bruce E. Zoeller, ASBCA No. 56578 (June 27, 2013) (grants Government's motion for summary judgment as to contractor's claims of superior knowledge and bad faith in lease cancellation)

Government Technical Services, LLC, ASBCA No. 57744 (June 21, 2013) (grant's pro se appellant's motion to dismiss without prejudice (for 12 months) under Rule 30 due to pending criminal matter in another court; dismissal becomes with prejudice unless either party moves to reinstate within 12 months)

Ensign-Bickford Aerospace & Defense Co., ASBCA No. 57929 (May 23, 2013) (denies government motion for dispositive sanction of adverse inference against contractor for discarding evidence (tested items) primarily because Government has not been prejudiced since other evidence is available on the issue in question)

Laguna Construction Co., ASBCA No. 58292 (May 13, 2013) (grants Government's motion to stay pending outcome of related criminal proceedings)

The Public Warehousing Co., ASBCA No. 57510 (May 13, 2013) (denies contractor's motion for summary judgment because its interpretations of the the contract provisions are inconsistent with the provisions and intent of a relevant contract modification)

Tri-County Contractors, Inc., ASBCA No. 58167 (May 6, 2013) (denies Government's motion for summary judgment because of material issues of fact whether contractor's signature of general release in connection with final invoice was intended to release two previously-submitted claims)

Pratt & Whitney Rocketdyne, Inc., ASBCA No. 58307 (Mar. 4, 2013) (refuses to dismiss proceedings, but suspends them to permit consolidation with closely related dispute that has only reached the REA submission stage)

Kellogg Brown & Root Services, Inc., ASBCA No.57530, 58161 (Feb. 20, 2013) (dismisses appeals without prejudice under ASBCA Rule 30 because of False Claims Act litigation in federal district court covering same claims), contractor's motion for reconsideration denied.

Macro-Z-Technology, ASBCA No. 56711 (Jan. 29, 2013) (denies cross motions for summary judgment involving validity of nonstandard "Order of Precedence" clause)

 

 

Equal Access to Justice Act; Prompt Payment Act

Pro-Built Construction Firm, ASBCA No. 59278 (Feb. 2018) (denies EAJA application because Government's position that contractor's claimed costs were not reasonable involved often close questions of fact and determinations as to witness credibility and the Government prevailed on a significant number of costs; thus, its position was substantially justified)

E.C. London & Assocs. , ASBCA No. 60273 (Sep. 1, 2017) (no jurisdiction over contractor's request for Prompt Payment Act interest on portions of its claim that were allowed because contractor had not submitted Prompt Payment Act claim to Contracting Officer)

Optimum Services, Inc., ASBCA No. 58755 59952(July 20, 2017)  (Board lacks authority to award EAJA attorneys' fees in excess of statutory cap of $125 per hour absent agency regulation authorizing such enhancement or to award expert fees at hourly rates higher than the Government pays its own experts)

Seven Seas Shipchandlers LLC, ASBCA No. 60602 (Oct. 25, 2016) (denies Prompt Payment Act interest claim because payment delays fell under exception in statute for "a dispute between the head of an agency and a business concern over the amount of payment or compliance with the contract")

Dellew Corp., ASBCA No. 58538 (Oct. 20, 2016) (awards contractor portion of claimed fees applicable to part of appeal in which contractor was prevailing party)

Tech Projects, LLC,  ASBCA No. 58789 (July 21, 2016) (denies EAJA recovery (after Contracting Officer amended decision to concede quantum and Board had dismissed appeal) because contractor  was not a "prevailing party" that had obtained either a decision  or a consent judgment from the Board), contractor's motion for reconsideration denied

Avant Assessment, LLC, ASBCA No. 58867 (July 12, 2016) (contractor entitled to EAJA recovery after summary judgment converting termination for cause to termination for convenience in appeal that was factually distinct from two other, still-pending, appeals that were consolidated with it for purposes of judicial economy)

Military Aircraft Parts, ASBCA No. 59978 (Nov. 17, 2015) (denies EAJA recovery because Government's position was substantially justified in three of four areas in dispute)

Military Aircraft Parts, ASBCA No. 59632 (Feb. 25, 2015) (denies EAJA recovery because the Government had voluntarily satisfied the contractor's claim without a board decision)

Amaratek, ASBCA Nos. 59149, 59395 (Jan. 22, 2015) (awards prevailing pro se party $33.47 in EAJA expenses for FedEx and notary costs), motion for reconsideration denied


This website links to resources on the web concerning government contracting. It is not intended to provide legal advice. Moreover, I do not vouch for the completeness, currency, or accuracy of the sites to which it links. If you have comments, suggestions, or corrections, please email me