Military Aircraft Parts

Material Facts

• MAP filed a motion for reconsideration of the Board's decision that dismissed its appeal.
• The Board found that MAP's claim constituted a challenge to the propriety of DLA's default termination of two purchase orders more than two years earlier.
• MAP argued that the COFDs were deficient in informing it of its appeal rights.
• MAP also argued that there was a mutual mistake regarding the interpretation of certain contract terms.

Parties

Appellant

Military Aircraft Parts

Respondent Agency

DLA Aviation

Contract Number

SPM4A7-12-M-3228, SPM4A7-12-M-3284