58672

Electric Boat Corporation

January 28, 2019Judge D'Alessandris
Denied / Government PrevailedContract Changes / Constructive ChangesEquitable Adjustment (REA)Quantum / Damages

Electric Boat Corporation sought an equitable adjustment for increased subcontractor costs allegedly caused by OSHA Subpart P's revised fire-watch requirements. The Board denied the Navy's motion for summary judgment regarding entitlement, holding that material factual disputes existed concerning causation and the reliability and feasibility of HII's cost estimates.

Material Facts

  • The contract was primarily firm-fixed-price, with some cost-reimbursement line items and cost sharing for costs above or below target cost.
  • The contract covered construction of six Block II Virginia Class submarines.
  • Huntington Ingalls, Inc. was Electric Boat's subcontractor.
  • OSHA Subpart P modified fire-watch requirements for hot work and became effective on December 14, 2004.
  • HII developed its estimated cost impact using its 2005 Labor Resources Plan as a baseline and department-by-department estimates of fire-watch work before and after Subpart P.
  • HII's executive responsible for cost and financing issues testified that separately accounting for Subpart P costs would be impractical and that measuring ancillary fire-watch costs would be nearly impossible.
  • Electric Boat's cost-estimating expert opined that HII's methodology was based on information from supervisors familiar with HII's practices before and after Subpart P.
  • The Navy's Technical Advisory Report recommended compensation for an increase of 13,548 direct labor hours resulting from Subpart P.
  • Navy witnesses testified that OSHA Subpart P had some impact on Electric Boat and HII.
  • The contract did not contain FAR 52.243-6, Change Order Accounting.

Parties

Appellant
Electric Boat Corporation
Respondent Agency
Department of the Navy
Contracting Agency
Department of the Navy
Contract Number
N00024-03-C-2101
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 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.