62165

Northrop Grumman Corporation

July 5, 2023Judge Stinson
Denied / Government PrevailedCost Allowability / Allocability (FAR 31)Indirect Rates / Incurred CostCost Accounting Standards (CAS)Quantum / DamagesDCAA InvolvedDCMA InvolvedCAS at Issue

Northrop Grumman Corporation challenged the disallowance of portions of its FY 2012 pay-as-you-go, nonqualified defined-benefit pension costs derived from compensation exceeding the FAR 31.205-6(p) cap. On cross-motions for partial summary judgment, the Board denied Northrop Grumman's motion and granted the government's cross-motion, holding that the challenged pension costs were unallowable directly associated costs and, alternatively, unreasonable costs.

Material Facts

  • Northrop Grumman performed flexibly-priced contracts containing FAR 52.216-7.
  • Northrop Grumman accounted for the relevant nonqualified defined-benefit pension plans on a pay-as-you-go basis.
  • The pension plans provided supplemental retirement benefits to selected executives and other key or highly compensated employees.
  • The pension formulas used final average earnings or annual compensation as a factor in calculating retirement benefits.
  • The compensation factors included salary and bonus amounts exceeding the applicable FAR 31.205-6(p) limitation in effect when the participants earned the compensation.
  • Northrop Grumman's FY 2012 Incurred Cost Submission included pension costs incurred under the identified pension plans.
  • DCAA issued a September 29, 2017, audit report questioning portions of the proposed pension costs as directly associated with expressly unallowable costs under FAR 31.205-6(p).
  • The DCMA CACO's final decision disallowed portions of Northrop Grumman's FY 2012 pension costs and assessed no penalties.
  • The parties stipulated that there was no genuine issue as to any material fact.

Parties

Appellant
Northrop Grumman Corporation
Respondent Agency
Defense Contract Management Agency
Contracting Agency
Defense Contract Management Agency
Contract Number
F33657-01-C-4600
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.