CBCA 1390

MWH Americas, Inc.

Jan 29, 2009Judge GilmoreAGENCY FOR INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT
Not published in the listingNo disposition announced

Key Facts

Appellant
MWH Americas, Inc.
Respondent agency
AGENCY FOR INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT
Judge
Gilmore
Case number
CBCA 1390
Decided
Jan 29, 2009The decision states Jan 29, 2009 on its own face, which agrees with the listing.
Decision type
Not published in the listingThe Board's year tables for 2007 through 2014 carry no Type column, so no disposition was published for this decision. It is not missing data and nothing is inferred from the document.
Law firm for the appellant
McKenna Long & Aldridge LLP
Outcome
No disposition announcedThis decision announces no disposition we could read, so none is stated. That is a fact about the document, not a gap: an order on a motion, a protective-order amendment and a discovery order all state none.

Topics

The topic rules ran over this decision's own words and none of them matched.

Topics are derived from each decision's own text by keyword rules, not a classification by the Board. A decision matching several topics carries all of them, so topic counts sum above the number of decisions.

Appearances

For the appellant
Steven M. Masiello and Arash Heidarian
McKenna Long & Aldridge LLP
Denver, CO
For the respondent
John B. Alumbaugh and Elizabeth A. Ransom
Office of General Counsel, Agency for International Development
Washington, DC
Decision PDF (cbca.gov) Civilian Board of Contract Appeals, Contract Disputes Act casesThe Board's year listing this row was read fromThe decision document is hosted by the Board itself, so it is an official copy, and the Board's own Contract Disputes Act case listing is the citable source. The topics, the disposition and the appearances above are read deterministically from the decision's own words; no model is involved.

Research This Decision

Create a free account to open this decision in the CBCA workspace: a grounded decision brief drafted from the Board's own words, the Insights dashboard over the whole corpus, and the filtered browser.

CBCA Decision Brief

A Workflows Hub brief on this decision, drafted from the captured text with every quote and authority checked against it.

Insights

Who prevails before the Board, by topic and by judge, with every denominator visible: merits rulings, not decisions.

Browse with Filters

The whole corpus by year, decision type, topic, judge and disposition, searchable across the decisions' own text.

Full Decision

Full text of the decision2 pages, 2,920 characters, read from the Board's own documentDecided Jan 29, 2009 on its own faceRespondent AGENCY FOR INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT Decision documentOfficial source: Civilian Board of Contract Appeals, Contract Disputes Act cases

DISMISSED IN PART: January 29, 2009

CBCA 1390

MWH AMERICAS, INC.,

Appellant,

v.

AGENCY FOR INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT,

Respondent.

Steven M. Masiello and Arash Heidarian of McKenna Long & Aldridge LLP,

Denver, CO, counsel for Appellant.

John B. Alumbaugh and Elizabeth A. Ransom, Office of General Counsel, Agency

for International Development, Washington, DC, counsel for Respondent.

The case caption as the decision prints it. Every word is kept; the rule the Board draws around it is not text, so it is not repeated here.

GILMORE, Board Judge.

Order

On October 27, 2008, appellant, MWH Americas, Inc. (MWH), timely appealed the final decision of the contracting officer (CO) for the Agency for International Development (respondent), who demanded payment from MWH in the amount of $5,182,162, under contract numbers 263-C-00-99-0008-00, 263-C-00-99-0018-00, 263-C-00-01-00007-00, 284 C-00-00-00025-00, LAG-I-00-98-00002-00, LAG-I-00-00034-00, LAG-I-00-98-00004-00, and LAG-I-804-98-00024-00. Appellant filed its complaint on November 26, 2008. On December 9, 2008, the CO issued an amendment to the final decision, allowing previously disallowed costs under contract numbers 263-C-00-99-0018-00, 284-C-00-00-00025-00, __________________________________

2 CBCA 1390

LAG-I-00-98-00002-00, LAG- I-00-00034-00, LAG- I-00-98-00004-00, and LAG-I-804-98 00024-00. The parties requested a conference call with the Board for guidance on how to proceed in light of the amended final decision. A telephonic conference with the parties was convened on January 9, 2009, and it was agreed that the parties would file a stipulation of settlement regarding the costs that were disallowed in the initial final decision, and subsequently allowed in the amended final decision.

The parties filed a joint stipulation on January 21, 2009, stating in pertinent part: 6. The amendment to the Final Decision reduces the amount disallowed by the CO to $2,227,484 and limits the contracts at issue to contract numbers 263-C-00-99-0008-00 and 263-C-00-01-00007-00. Thus, the Final Decision, as amended, no longer raises any actual controversy between the parties concerning MWH’s entitlement to payment of $2,954,678 under contract numbers 263-C-00-99-0018-00, 284-C-00-00-00025-00, LAG-I-00 98-00002-00, LAG-I-00-00034-00, LAG-I-00-98-00004-0 and LAG-I-804-98 00024-00 (the “Undisputed Costs”).

7. In accordance with the Final Decision, as amended, the parties agree that the amount remaining at issue in this appeal is $2,227,484 under contract numbers 263-C-00-99-0008-00 and 263-C-00-01-00007-00.

In light of the above stipulation, appellant’s claims in this appeal pertaining to contract numbers 263-C-00-99-0018-00, 284-C-00-00-00025-00, LAG-I-00-98-00002-00, LAG-I-00 00034-00, LAG-I-00-98-00004-0, and LAG-I-804-98-00024-00, in the amount of $2,954,678, are hereby DISMISSED. The Board retains jurisdiction over appellant’s appeal of disputed costs under contract numbers 263-C-00-99-0008-00 and 263-C-00-01-00007-00, in the amount of $2,227,484.

BERYL S. GILMORE

Board Judge

This is a verbatim capture of the text layer of the Board's own document in MWH Americas, Inc., CBCA 1390. Nothing is summarized or reworded, and the sections run in the order the Board wrote them. What the page shows and the text does not repeat is the pagination furniture: the page numbers and the rules the Board draws around its caption and under its signatures. The signatures are set back into the columns the Board prints them in, each judge under the name he or she signed, and the typed copy of that name the page carries beneath each signature is not repeated.

Related Decisions

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.