58212

Raytheon Company

May 27, 2015Judge Dickinson
Partially SustainedCost Allowability / Allocability (FAR 31)Contract InterpretationCost Accounting Standards (CAS)DCAA InvolvedDCMA InvolvedCAS at Issue

Raytheon Company sought partial summary judgment concerning the allowability of certain 2005 airfare expenses under the pre-2010 version of FAR 31.205-46. The Board denied summary judgment on the interpretation, discount, and travel-policy issues, but granted Raytheon summary judgment on the allocability issue because the government did not oppose it.

Material Facts

  • Congress expressed a procurement policy that costs for travel by commercial aircraft exceeding the amount of the standard commercial fare are not allowable.
  • FAR 31.205-46(b) provided, before its 2010 amendment, that airfare costs exceeding the lowest customary standard, coach, or equivalent airfare offered were unallowable unless specified conditions were documented and justified.
  • The contract was awarded to Raytheon on 21 May 2003 and incorporated FAR 52.216-7 and the allowability provisions of FAR Part 31.2 in effect on the contract date.
  • Raytheon incurred airfare costs in 2005, including coach fares, premium airfares, and costs associated with certain multi-leg flights.
  • DCAA issued an audit report on 24 August 2009 addressing Raytheon's incurred airfare costs for 2005.
  • The contracting officer divided the costs determined to be unallowable into four categories, including unused negotiated corporate discounts and unjustified premium airfares.
  • Raytheon requested summary judgment on four issues concerning the airfare baseline, application of discounts, DCMA's alleged reliance on a misstatement of travel policy, and allocability to Department of Defense contracts.
  • The government did not oppose Raytheon's motion with respect to Issue 4.

Parties

Appellant
Raytheon Company
Respondent Agency
Defense Contract Management Agency
Contract Number
F08635-03-C-0002
Open Official Decision PDF (asbca.mil)AI-analyzed, grounded in the decision text. Verify against the official PDF before relying on it.

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

Same Year

Same Issue

Newsletter

New decisions every Monday

GovConDash Weekly lists the decisions GAO, the boards, the courts and SBA OHA released that week, alongside the FAR Overhaul deviations and proposed rules that reach every contractor. Free.

Free, weekly, and one click to unsubscribe. We send a confirmation email first. See our Privacy Policy.