Triad Mechanical, Inc.
Triad Mechanical, Inc. appealed an alleged deemed denial of a convenience termination settlement proposal. The Board dismissed the appeal for lack of jurisdiction.
Material Facts
- The government awarded Contract No. W912EF-10-C-0041 for installation of new cable components and weld repairs at a dam in Washington State.
- The firm fixed contract price was $1,147,189 and the specified completion date was 6 March 2011.
- Subsequent contract amendments increased the total contract price to $1,212,920 and extended the specified completion date to 10 March 2011.
- The government issued a partial termination for convenience order on 11 March 2011 and terminated the entire contract for convenience on 6 June 2011.
- Triad submitted an initial termination settlement proposal on 5 July 2011 and a certified final termination settlement proposal on 24 October 2011.
- The proposed total final termination settlement amount was $1,335,329.33, with a proposed net settlement amount of $674,329.96 after payments received.
- The Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA) identified 21 deficiencies in Triad's proposal and stated it was inadequate to plan and perform an audit.
- Triad submitted an appeal to the Board on 29 January 2012, citing the lack of a timely decision from the contracting officer.
Parties
- Appellant
- Triad Mechanical, Inc.
- Respondent Agency
- U.S. Army Engineer District, Walla Walla
- Contract Number
- W912EF-10-C-0041
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
- Phoenix Management, Inc.No. 59273April 8, 2015
- Environmental Safety Consultants, Inc.No. 58343March 2, 2015
- SureTec Insurance CompanyNo. 59343, 59647January 2, 2015
- Environmental Safety Consultants, Inc.No. 58343November 7, 2014
- Environmental Safety Consultants, Inc.No. 58343October 23, 2014
- Environmental Safety Consultants, Inc.No. 58343October 22, 2014
Same Year
- Gray Personnel, Inc.No. 54652, 55833December 31, 2012
- ECC, InternationalNo. 55781December 28, 2012
- DODS, Inc.December 18, 2012
- Raytheon CompanyNo. 57576, 57679December 17, 2012
- TMS Envirocon, Inc.December 12, 2012
- The Public Warehousing CompanyDecember 3, 2012
Same Issue
- Bodell Construction CompanyNo. 63517-ADR, 63850-ADROctober 2, 2026
- Huffman Construction, LLCNo. 62591, 62783September 30, 2026
- Martin Brothers ConstructionNo. 63196, 63431September 30, 2026
- WSP USA Solutions Inc.No. 62674September 1, 2026
- Mvation Worldwide Inc.No. 64633August 18, 2026
- U.S. Aeroteam, Inc.No. 61972, 61973August 6, 2026