Northrop Grumman Corporation
Northrop Grumman Corporation challenged the government's disallowance of unfunded post-retirement benefit costs under FAR 31.205-6(o). The Board held that the costs were unallowable because NGC used the DEFRA method rather than measuring and assigning the costs under GAAP/FAS 106, denied the appeal, and remanded to determine quantum.
Material Facts
- NGC used an accrual cost method under FAS 106 for financial reporting.
- NGC used DEFRA to measure, assign, and fund the Plan's post-retirement benefit costs for government contract purposes from 1995 through 2006.
- FAR 31.205-6(o) required accrual-basis post-retirement benefit costs to be measured and assigned according to GAAP and to be timely funded.
- NGC disclosed its use of DEFRA in its CAS Part VII disclosure statements.
- In 2006, NGC sought an advance agreement concerning its continued use of DEFRA or its conversion to FAS 106, and the government declined both proposals.
- NGC formally notified the government of its switch from DEFRA to FAS 106 in November 2006.
- DCAA issued a report concluding that unfunded FAS 106 costs were unallowable in future accounting periods.
- The test contract was a cost-type contract containing FAR 52.216-7, ALLOWABLE COST AND PAYMENT (DEC 2002).
- The government did not question the lesser-funded DEFRA amounts that NGC funded each year before 2007.
- NGC's 2006 Plan amendments capped future health care cost increases.
- The parties did not address quantum in detail during the entitlement proceeding.
Parties
- Appellant
- Northrop Grumman Corporation
- Respondent Agency
- Defense Contract Management Agency
- Contracting Agency
- Defense Contract Management Agency
- Contract Number
- N68936-05-C-0059
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
- Kellogg Brown & Root Services, Inc.No. 59357, 59358August 29, 2016
- GSC Construction, Inc.No. 59644, 59956, 60069, 60070, 60112, 60113June 21, 2016
- Access Personnel Services, Inc.No. 59900June 15, 2016
- CI², Inc.No. 59948June 6, 2016
- CI², Inc.No. 59948June 6, 2016
- CI², Inc.No. 59948June 6, 2016
Same Year
- Fluor Enterprises, Inc. and Fluor CorporationNo. 59367, 59697December 24, 2014
- The Boeing CompanyNo. 59216December 24, 2014
- Government Services Corp.No. 59654December 23, 2014
- Raytheon Missile SystemsNo. 59432December 23, 2014
- CAE USA, Inc.No. 58957December 23, 2014
- Metal Storm, Inc.No. 58901December 23, 2014
Same Issue
- Africa Transport Logistics CompanyNo. 64120October 1, 2026
- Scot Cardillo dba Engineers Tooling SupportNo. 61612September 22, 2026
- U.S. Aeroteam, Inc.No. 61972, 61973August 6, 2026
- Raytheon Company and Raytheon Missile SystemsNo. 59435, 59436, 59437, 59438, 60056, 60057, 60058, 60059, 60060, 60061May 14, 2026
- IAP Worldwide Services, Inc.No. 62638, 63879May 6, 2026
- CACI International, Inc.No. 63663March 10, 2026