62221

Metro Machine dba General Dynamics NASSCO-Norfolk

March 29, 2022Judge Prouty
Denied / Government PrevailedLiquidated DamagesDelay / Disruption / SuspensionAccord & Satisfaction / Release / WaiverAuthority of Government AgentsContract InterpretationInspection / Acceptance / Warranty / Latent Defects

Metro Machine dba General Dynamics NASSCO-Norfolk challenged liquidated damages assessed after a Navy destroyer overhaul was completed late, attributing the delay to the Navy's designated sole-source OEM and Navy oversight. The Board rejected the accord-and-satisfaction defense, held that responsibility for the delay rested with NASSCO and its subcontractor, and denied the appeal.

Material Facts

  • The Navy awarded NASSCO a multiple award task order contract for maintenance, modernization, and repair of U.S. Navy warships.
  • The delivery order concerned overhaul of the USS Bulkeley and included repair of boat-handling equipment, including a davit, winch assembly, and control panel.
  • The work item required use of a technical representative of North American Crane and Equipment, and identified North Pacific Crane Company as the known source for that representative.
  • NASSCO subcontracted the boat-handling-equipment repair work to AIT.
  • AIT installed and powered the SLAD control console without the OEM representative present, and incorrect wiring damaged the console's mother board.
  • AIT improperly installed the brake assembly, and additional problems occurred with hydraulic hoses and solenoids.
  • NASSCO issued a stop-work order to AIT and directly hired NPCC to complete the SLAD work.
  • Modification 03 extended the completion date from February 17, 2017, to March 21, 2017.
  • The Navy deemed the work complete on April 5, 2017.
  • The contracting officer assessed 14 days of liquidated damages and later reduced the assessment to $334,425.
  • NASSCO's internal investigation attributed the console and brake problems to AIT.

Parties

Appellant
Metro Machine dba General Dynamics NASSCO-Norfolk
Respondent Agency
Navy
Contracting Agency
Navy
Contract Number
N00024-16-D-4408
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.