59258

Raytheon Missile Systems Company

September 3, 2015Judge Clarke
Sustained / Appellant PrevailedQuantum / DamagesDCAA Involved

In the quantum phase of Raytheon Missile Systems Company's appeal, the Board determined the damages attributable to the government's increase in the price of JP-10 fuel. The Board awarded Raytheon the proven fuel-cost differential, plus CDA interest, while rejecting a markup request.

Material Facts

  • The missiles under Contract 0569 were delivered to the Navy fully fueled.
  • Raytheon contended that it loaded approximately 128 gallons of fuel into each missile.
  • The Navy's calculations produced a mean of 126.3036 gallons per missile.
  • Raytheon submitted fuel invoices at the higher price and a listing of missiles and DD 250 acceptance dates.
  • The missile listing identified 1,762 missiles delivered between 1 October 2006 and 29 September 2010.
  • The first invoice for fuel at the higher price was dated 29 November 2006.
  • The first missile accepted after that invoice was missile number 19, accepted on 1 December 2006.
  • The first missile accepted in January 2007 was missile number 65.
  • The Navy did not audit Raytheon's Statement of Costs.
  • The government's identified documents did not expressly identify losses attributable only to commodities other than JP-10.

Parties

Appellant
Raytheon Missile Systems Company
Respondent Agency
Navy
Contracting Agency
Navy
Contract Number
N00019-04-C-0569
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.