61725-987

AWA Wilson JV

September 17, 2018Judge Thrasher
Sustained / Appellant PrevailedOther

AWA Wilson JV petitioned the Board to direct the contracting officer to issue a decision on a certified claim regarding unsuitable subsurface soils. The Board found the government's proposed decision date unreasonable and directed a new deadline.

Material Facts

  • AWA entered into Contract No. W912QR-14-C-0010, a firm fixed price contract, with the government for work to be done at the Kingsolver/Pierce School in Fort Knox, KY.
  • Range and Civil Construction, LLC (RACC) was hired as the earthwork subcontractor.
  • During its performance in 2014, RACC encountered what it described as 'unsuitable subsurface soils' in greater quantities than what it expected based on its reading of the contract documents.
  • By request for equitable adjustment (REA) dated March 30, 2015, AWA requested a price adjustment based on the alleged unsuitable soils.
  • The government stated that it did not believe the REA had merit and requested additional analysis.
  • AWA resubmitted the REA with additional analysis on July 5, 2016.
  • The government denied the supplemental REA on January 5, 2016.
  • The government again denied the REA on June 27, 2017.
  • A formal meeting was held on October 26, 2017, between AWA and the government to discuss the issues in the REA.
  • The government denied AWA's position memorandum on November 20, 2017.
  • RACC submitted a request to AWA on January 2, 2018, that it sponsor a Contract Disputes Act (CDA) claim against the government.
  • On April 20, 2018, AWA submitted its certified CDA claim in the amount of $911,522 to the government.
  • The CO advised that the decision 'may' be expected on or before December 18, 2018.

Parties

Appellant
AWA Wilson JV
Respondent Agency
U.S. Army Engineer District, Louisville
Contract Number
W912QR-14-C-0010
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.