SkyQuest Aviation, LLC
SkyQuest Aviation, LLC appealed the government's termination of its contract for cause and sought monetary damages and correction of a contractor performance assessment report. The Board found it lacked jurisdiction over the monetary claim and the CPAR claim but had jurisdiction over the termination for cause claim.
Material Facts
- The government awarded SQA Contract No. FA5682-19-P-A040 to provide functional check flight pilot, flight engineer, and related services in exchange for $429,600.
- A dispute arose as to whether the 040 Contract required that pilots possess current Air Force (AF) Form 8s.
- SQA sent the government an email on October 30, 2019, indicating that it was withdrawing from continued performance under the 040 Contract.
- The government sent SQA a Cure Notice on November 21, 2019, asking SQA to notify the CO if it could provide a pilot who met the 040 Contract’s requirements.
- SQA responded to the Cure Notice on November 30, 2019, asserting that the 040 Contract did not require that pilots possess current AF Form 8s.
- The Cure Notice Response did not include a sum certain or a certification.
- The government terminated the 040 Contract for cause on April 7, 2020, citing SQA's failure to provide a compliant pilot.
- SQA filed an appeal with the Board, alleging that the 040 Contract did not require that pilots possess a current AF Form 8.
Parties
- Appellant
- SkyQuest Aviation, LLC
- Respondent Agency
- Air Force
- Contract Number
- FA5682-19-P-A040
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
- Procal Electric, Inc.No. 63580-ADROctober 2, 2026
- VESEQU LLCNo. 64468August 21, 2026
- PDO Ahuska Joint Venture LLCNo. 64164July 13, 2026
- First Street Contractors, LLCNo. 64028June 10, 2026
- VESEQU LLCNo. 64468May 21, 2026
- First Street Contractors, LLCNo. 64028February 20, 2026
Same Year
- Cellular Materials International, Inc.No. 61408December 27, 2021
- Meltech Corporation, Inc.No. 61706, 61768December 17, 2021
- Telos CorporationNo. 62950December 16, 2021
- General Dynamics Mission Systems, Inc.No. 62180-ADRDecember 13, 2021
- Adjuvant/Capital, LLCNo. 62760December 13, 2021
- Veteran Facility Services, LLCNo. 61855, 61983, 62386December 9, 2021
Same Issue
- Africa Transport Logistics CompanyNo. 64120October 1, 2026
- Huffman Construction, LLCNo. 62591, 62783September 30, 2026
- Scot Cardillo dba Engineers Tooling SupportNo. 61612September 22, 2026
- DCS CorporationNo. 64648September 22, 2026
- VAE, Inc.No. 64437, 64464, 64465September 9, 2026
- Hensel Phelps Construction Co.No. 63316, 63397, 63398August 28, 2026