Anaconda Construction Company
Anaconda Construction Company appealed the government's decision denying costs for two destroyed loaders and a settlement proposal. The Board dismissed the appeal for lack of jurisdiction due to untimely filing.
Material Facts
- The government awarded Contract No. W91B4N-12-P-5086 to ACC to operate and maintain a burn pit for solid waste at Bagram Airfield in Afghanistan.
- The government terminated the contract for convenience, effective 15 October 2013.
- ACC submitted a claim on 24 October 2013 for the cost to replace two loaders destroyed by fire, totaling $160,000.
- The contracting officer issued a final decision on the October claim on 28 October 2013, denying any funds were owed to ACC.
- ACC submitted a settlement proposal on 7 November 2013 for $451,600, which the contracting officer intended to reject due to lack of documentation.
- ACC submitted a revised settlement proposal within 15 days, seeking $160,000 for the loaders and $112,900 in other costs.
- The contracting officer issued a final decision on the revised settlement proposal on 26 November 2013, denying all claimed costs.
- ACC filed a notice of appeal on 7 November 2016, more than 90 days after both final decisions.
Parties
- Appellant
- Anaconda Construction Company
- Respondent Agency
- Department of the Army
- Contract Number
- Contract No. W91B4N-12-P-5086
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
- Procal Electric, Inc.No. 63580-ADROctober 2, 2026
- VESEQU LLCNo. 64468August 21, 2026
- PDO Ahuska Joint Venture LLCNo. 64164July 13, 2026
- First Street Contractors, LLCNo. 64028June 10, 2026
- VESEQU LLCNo. 64468May 21, 2026
- First Street Contractors, LLCNo. 64028February 20, 2026
Same Year
- Columbia State Bank f/k/a Castle-Rose, Inc.No. 59531December 28, 2017
- Fluor Federal Solutions, LLCNo. 61431-983December 28, 2017
- Goodwill Services, Inc.No. 61439December 27, 2017
- Suffolk Construction Company, Inc.No. 60990December 27, 2017
- Parsons Government Services, Inc.No. 60218December 21, 2017
- Parsons Government Services, Inc.No. 60221December 21, 2017
Same Issue
- Scot Cardillo dba Engineers Tooling SupportNo. 61612September 22, 2026
- Wild Hare Haulers, LLCNo. 64596, 64597, 64598September 15, 2026
- Hensel Phelps Construction CompanyNo. 64327September 14, 2026
- Bahadir Construction Engineering Contracting & Trading Inc. Co. and Impreza Costruzioni Giuseppe Maltauro S.p. A Joint VentureNo. 64038, 64336, 64428September 9, 2026
- VAE, Inc.No. 64437, 64464, 64465September 9, 2026
- Dubai Pearl CompanyNo. 64444August 26, 2026