61916

Anthony and Gordon Construction Co.

July 1, 2021Judge Herzfeld
Sustained / Appellant PrevailedDefective SpecificationsContract Changes / Constructive ChangesCDA JurisdictionDCAA Involved

Anthony and Gordon Construction Co. appealed a contracting officer's final decision denying its claim for additional costs due to alleged defective design specifications provided by the Navy. The Board denied the Navy's motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction.

Material Facts

  • The Navy awarded A&G contract No. N69450-13-C-0754 for repairs and renovation at the Naval Air Station in Corpus Christi, Texas.
  • A&G alleged that the Navy provided defective design specifications for two mechanical rooms, leading to additional costs.
  • A&G submitted a request for equitable adjustment for $858,992, which was denied by the contracting officer.
  • A&G's certified claim sought $3,990,263 in excess costs over its original bid for mechanical work.
  • The Navy's engineer concluded that A&G's claim had merit regarding design errors but that the quantum costs had no merit.
  • DCAA issued an audit report questioning A&G's claim based on the total cost method used for calculating damages.
  • A&G's complaint sought $2,834,205.65, which included costs for delays and subcontractor payments.

Parties

Appellant
Anthony and Gordon Construction Co.
Respondent Agency
Naval Facilities Engineering Command Southeast
Contracting Agency
Navy
Contract Number
N69450-13-C-0754
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.