Todd Pacific Shipyards Corporation
Todd Pacific Shipyards Corporation appealed the contracting officer's denial of its claims under Contract No. N00024-01-C-4115 regarding costs associated with the Emerald Sea dry dock. The Board denied the appeal, concluding that the claimed costs were not properly classified as direct costs under the contract.
Material Facts
- Todd Pacific Shipyards Corporation appealed the contracting officer's denial of its claims under Contract No. N00024-01-C-4115.
- The contract involved advance planning for repair and alteration of Auxiliary Oiler Explosive (AOE) ships.
- Todd sought to charge its Emerald Sea repair costs directly to Contract 4115 instead of treating them as indirect costs.
- The Board held a nine-day hearing on entitlement and quantum.
- Todd's claims included a $5.99 million claim for Emerald Sea costs, which later increased to $10.952 million.
- The Navy moved to dismiss Todd's claims on various grounds, including timeliness and jurisdiction.
- The Board found that Todd's costs were not incurred specifically for Contract 4115 and were not properly classified as direct costs.
Parties
- Appellant
- Todd Pacific Shipyards Corporation
- Respondent Agency
- United States Navy
- Contract Number
- N00024-01-C-4115
Full Legal Analysis
Create a free account to read the complete grounded legal brief for this decision, including the holding, every issue the Board decided, quantum, verified citations, and the case's citation graph.
Holding & Legal Reasoning
The Board's holding, background, and procedural posture for this decision.
Issues Presented
Every issue the Board decided, with its determination, reasoning, and supporting authority.
Quantum & Recovery
The claimed, awarded, and net dollar amounts at issue, itemized where the record supports it.
Verified Authorities & Citations
Every cited FAR, DFARS, CAS, and case-law authority, cross-checked against the source text.
Practitioner Takeaways
Practical guidance for contractors and counsel, distilled from the Board's ruling.
Similar Cases
Related decisions surfaced by semantic search across the full analyzed corpus.
Citation Graph
An interactive graph of this case's cited authorities, judge, agency, and related decisions.
Related Decisions
Same Judge
- Pratt & Whitney, a division of Raytheon Technologies CompanyNo. 59222November 22, 2021
- Raytheon CompanyNo. 58212, 58753June 14, 2021
- Raytheon CompanyNo. 58841June 14, 2021
- Raytheon CompanyNo. 58842June 14, 2021
- Raytheon Company and Raytheon Missile SystemsNo. 59439, 59440, 59441June 14, 2021
- Raytheon Company and Raytheon Missile SystemsNo. 60699June 14, 2021
Same Year
- Joint Venture Makyal Ins. Ve Tic. A.S. & Mehmet Erdal Kamisli Co. Ltd.No. 56956December 28, 2011
- Distributed Solutions, Inc.No. 57266December 28, 2011
- Quimba Software, Inc.No. 57636December 19, 2011
- American General Trading & Contracting, WLLNo. 56758December 13, 2011
- Harry RichardsonNo. 57582December 9, 2011
- Sharp Electronics CorporationNo. 57583December 6, 2011
Same Issue
- Africa Transport Logistics CompanyNo. 64120October 1, 2026
- Huffman Construction, LLCNo. 62591, 62783September 30, 2026
- Martin Brothers ConstructionNo. 63196, 63431September 30, 2026
- Vigor Marine, LLCNo. 63405September 24, 2026
- US Military CorpNo. 64321September 24, 2026
- Scot Cardillo dba Engineers Tooling SupportNo. 61612September 22, 2026