Sang Kash Company
Sang Kash Company appealed the Army's termination for default of its contract for bulk concrete supply after losing base access at Bagram Airfield, Afghanistan. The Board granted the government's motion for summary judgment and denied the appeal.
Material Facts
- The contract was a requirements contract awarded to Sang Kash on July 8, 2015, by CENTCOM to obtain bulk concrete for Bagram Airfield.
- The contract required Sang Kash to supply and deliver quantities of bulk concrete as requested by JTSCC, without a guaranteed minimum quantity.
- Bilateral Modification No. P00002 added CENTCOM clause 5152.225-5916, requiring the contractor to maintain installation access eligibility.
- On March 25, 2016, the BSG Commander revoked Sang Kash's access to Bagram Airfield.
- The contracting officer terminated the contract for default citing violation of the mandatory eligibility for base access clause.
- Sang Kash appealed the termination to the Board on April 13, 2016.
Parties
- Appellant
- Sang Kash Company
- Respondent Agency
- Army
- Contracting Agency
- Joint Theater Support Contracting Command
- Contract Number
- W91B4N-15-D-8013
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
- Arctic Swan Construction Inc.No. 64085September 22, 2026
- WSP USA Solutions Inc.No. 62674September 1, 2026
- Jaxon Construction, Inc.No. 64432June 24, 2026
- Arctic Swan Construction Inc.No. 63510, 64085June 16, 2026
- Eleven Bravo Group, LLCNo. 63932April 8, 2026
- Penna Group, LLCNo. 61708-ADR, 61641-ADR, 61642-ADRFebruary 20, 2026
Same Year
- Club Car, Inc.No. 61710December 30, 2019
- Universal Service Provider, LLCNo. 62021December 23, 2019
- Technica CorporationNo. 62160December 20, 2019
- AXXON International, LLCNo. 61224, 61268, 61625December 20, 2019
- Naseem Al-Oula CompanyNo. 61321, 61322, 61323, 61324, 61325, 61326December 20, 2019
- Ford Lumber & Building Supply, Inc.No. 61618December 18, 2019
Same Issue
- Huffman Construction, LLCNo. 62591, 62783September 30, 2026
- US Military CorpNo. 64321September 24, 2026
- Relyant Global LLCNo. 64032, 64111, 64230, 64231, 64517August 24, 2026
- Visionary Construction, Inc. dba Visionary ServicesNo. 64426August 20, 2026
- Peritia LLCNo. 64495, 64586August 20, 2026
- J.A.M. Construction Services, Inc.No. 63378, 64226, 64439July 28, 2026