DynCorp International LLC
DynCorp International LLC appealed the deemed denial of a request for an equitable adjustment concerning allegedly inaccurate aircraft-parts consumption data used to develop site-specific pricing. The Board denied the Government's motion for partial summary judgment, holding that collateral estoppel did not apply because the issue in the appeal was not identical to the completeness issue decided in DynCorp I.
Material Facts
- The T-6A/B aircraft was used by the United States Air Force and the United States Navy for pilot training and was stationed at multiple sites.
- The 6208 RFP included 3XXX CLINs for maintenance, repairs, overhauls, and replenishments or replacements of T-6A/B aircraft at various sites.
- The Government stated that it would pay on a fixed-rate cost per flight hour basis for a variable number of flight hours.
- Offerors required historical aircraft-parts and component-consumption information to propose site-specific cost-per-flight-hour prices.
- The USAF provided historical consumption data in the bidder's library.
- DynCorp alleges that parts for T-6B aircraft from Whiting Field were incorrectly coded as issued from Pensacola during the first quarter of 2010.
- DynCorp alleges that its Whiting Field pricing was lower than it would have been if the correct consumption data had been provided.
- DynCorp's complaint alleged a constructive change based on inaccurate consumption data and sought reformation based on mutual mistake regarding the accuracy of that data.
- DynCorp I involved another appeal arising out of the COMBS contract and addressed the completeness of the consumption data.
Parties
- Appellant
- DynCorp International LLC
- Respondent Agency
- United States Air Force
- Contracting Agency
- United States Air Force
- Contract Number
- FA8617-12-C-6208
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
- AT&T Corp.No. 61868December 21, 2018
- Gilbane Federal Joint VentureNo. 61590December 21, 2018
- WIT Associates, Inc.No. 61547December 19, 2018
- Avis Industries, Inc.No. 61609December 19, 2018
- Tetra Tech Tesoro, Inc.No. 61209, 61210, 61211, 61212 61213, 61214December 19, 2018
- J.F. Brennan Co., Inc.No. 60737December 19, 2018
Same Issue
- Africa Transport Logistics CompanyNo. 64120October 1, 2026
- Martin Brothers ConstructionNo. 63196, 63431September 30, 2026
- Vigor Marine, LLCNo. 63405September 24, 2026
- Hensel Phelps Construction CompanyNo. 64327September 14, 2026
- WSP USA Solutions Inc.No. 62674September 1, 2026
- Hensel Phelps Construction Co.No. 63316, 63397, 63398August 28, 2026