Raytheon Missile Systems Company
Raytheon Missile Systems Company sought reconsideration of the Board's prior denial concerning the portion of a JP-10 jet-fuel price increase attributable to losses on other commodities managed by the Defense Energy Support Center. The Board reaffirmed its factual and legal analysis and denied reconsideration.
Material Facts
- Raytheon manufactured Tomahawk Missiles under Contract No. N00019-04-C-0569.
- The appeal involved liability for a price increase in JP-10 jet fuel used in the Tomahawk Missiles.
- DESC Aerospace Energy issued annual pricing memoranda for the aerospace fuels it managed.
- The pricing memoranda identified the fuels managed by DESC Aerospace Energy CBU and provided their price histories.
- DESC published a description of its standard price.
- Raytheon based its pricing of JP-10 on the price history for JP-10 alone.
- Raytheon did not seek an economic price adjustment clause for JP-10 because it viewed the risk of price fluctuation as low.
- The prior decision sustained the appeal as to the portion of the price associated with construction of a DFSP and purchase of JP-10 to stock it.
- The prior decision denied the appeal as to the portion associated with losses experienced by DESC's Aerospace Energy CBU on other commodities.
Parties
- Appellant
- Raytheon Missile Systems Company
- Contract Number
- N00019-04-C-0569
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
- Metal Trades, Inc.No. 62966November 2, 2021
- Powertronic Systems Florida, Inc.No. 62174October 19, 2021
- Huffman Construction, LLCNo. 62591, 62783August 5, 2021
- U.S. Pan American Solutions, LLCNo. 62629August 5, 2021
- URS Federal Support Services, Inc.No. 59998-QUANAugust 3, 2021
- G&S Carpet Mills, Inc.No. 62799June 25, 2021
Same Year
- WorleyParsons International, Inc.No. 57930December 20, 2013
- TTF, L.L.C.No. 58452December 19, 2013
- Bruce E. ZoellerNo. 56578December 17, 2013
- New Iraq Ahd CompanyNo. 58800December 17, 2013
- Linc Government Services, LLCNo. 58561, 58562, 58563, 58565, 58566, 58567December 5, 2013
- Fluor CorporationNo. 57852December 5, 2013
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