Fluor Federal Solutions, Inc.
Fluor Federal Solutions, Inc. challenged the Navy’s unilateral six-month extension of services under FAR 52.217-8 after the Board had held a preceding option-year exercise unenforceable. The Board granted Fluor’s summary judgment motion, denied the Navy’s cross-motion, sustained the appeal, and remanded for negotiation of quantum.
Material Facts
- The Navy awarded Fluor a regional base operations support contract for four Navy installations in the Jacksonville, Florida area.
- The contract contemplated a base year, four option years, and three award option years, with a total performance period not exceeding 96 months.
- The contract incorporated FAR 52.217-8, which permitted the government to require continued performance of services for a total extension not exceeding six months.
- The contract incorporated the standard disputes clause and its alternate, including the requirement that the contractor proceed diligently with performance pending final resolution of a contractual dispute.
- The Navy exercised all four non-award options but did not exercise award option years 1 or 2.
- The Navy issued a unilateral modification purporting to exercise award option year 3 for the period from July 1, 2017 through June 30, 2018.
- Fluor objected to the award option year 3 modification and performed that period under protest and with a complete reservation of rights.
- The Board previously held that the Navy’s exercise of award option year 3 was unenforceable.
- While Fluor was performing award option year 3 under protest, the Navy issued Modification No. P00211 purporting to extend Fluor’s performance under FAR 52.217-8 for six months through December 31, 2018.
- Fluor objected to the unilateral extension and represented that its continued performance was subject to protest.
Parties
- Appellant
- Fluor Federal Solutions, Inc.
- Respondent Agency
- the Navy
- Contracting Agency
- Naval Facilities Command Southeast
- Contract Number
- N69450-12-D-7582
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
- The Haskell CompanyNo. 63332, 63586October 1, 2025
- Planetary Science InstituteNo. 64123August 26, 2025
- Desbuild IncorporatedNo. 64278August 12, 2025
- Pontchartrain Partners, LLCNo. 63615May 19, 2025
- Frank O'Connor Inc.No. 64065May 7, 2025
- HD Inc.No. 63794March 24, 2025
Same Year
- KiewitPhelpsNo. 61184December 30, 2022
- Wright Brothers, the Building Company, Eagle LLCNo. 62285December 30, 2022
- Bhayana Brothers LLCNo. 63377December 23, 2022
- GMA-AVM Joint VentureNo. 63254December 21, 2022
- Global Technical SystemsNo. 63296December 21, 2022
- Fluor Intercontinental, Inc.No. 63182December 16, 2022
Same Issue
- Africa Transport Logistics CompanyNo. 64120October 1, 2026
- Huffman Construction, LLCNo. 62591, 62783September 30, 2026
- Martin Brothers ConstructionNo. 63196, 63431September 30, 2026
- Vigor Marine, LLCNo. 63405September 24, 2026
- US Military CorpNo. 64321September 24, 2026
- Scot Cardillo dba Engineers Tooling SupportNo. 61612September 22, 2026