Philips Lighting North American Corporation

Material Facts

• The Lighting Contract permitted Philips to receive payment from WMATA based on energy savings realized through the installation of energy-efficient lighting.
• WMATA contended that the Board's interpretation of the payment provisions was inconsistent with the parties' original intent.
• The Board found that WMATA's reliance on extrinsic evidence to support its position was flawed and that the contract language was not ambiguous.
• The Board concluded that Philips understood the guaranteed energy savings to be an estimate rather than a strict guarantee.

Parties

Appellant

Philips Lighting North American Corporation

Respondent Agency

Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority

Contract Number

CQ-12077