CBCA 1779

North Wind, Inc.

Jan 4, 2011Judge DanielsDEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Not published in the listingGranted in part

Key Facts

Appellant
North Wind, Inc.
Respondent agency
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Judge
Daniels
Case number
CBCA 1779
Decided
Jan 4, 2011The decision states Jan 4, 2011 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
The decision's own appearances block names no outside firm, which happens when the appellant appeared pro se, through one of its own officers, or through its in-house counsel.
Outcome
Granted in part
The appeal is GRANTED IN PART.
Read from the shouted disposition line the Board prints above this decision's own date, and quoted from its operative sentence above. No model is involved.

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
Margaret B. Hinman
North Wind, Inc.
Idaho Falls, ID
For the respondent
Heather R. Hinton-Taylor
Office of the General Counsel, Department of Agriculture
Ogden, UT
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, 2,340 characters, read from the Board's own documentDecided Jan 4, 2011 on its own faceRespondent DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Decision documentOfficial source: Civilian Board of Contract Appeals, Contract Disputes Act cases

Authorities cited

2 authorities read from this decision's own text, grouped by the body of law each comes from. Select one to read it at its publisher.

Other statutes1
Agency FAR supplements1

Read from the decision's own words with no model involved. Statutes, regulations, the acts these forums argue by name, and cases at the board, this office or the Comptroller General are recognized; any other citation form is left out rather than guessed at, so this is a floor on what the decision cites.

GRANTED IN PART: January 4, 2011

CBCA 1779

NORTH WIND, INC.,

Appellant,

v.

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE,

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.

Margaret B. Hinman of North Wind, Inc., Idaho Falls, ID, counsel for Appellant.

Heather R. Hinton-Taylor, Office of the General Counsel, Department of Agriculture, Ogden, UT, counsel for Respondent.

Before Board Judges DANIELS (Chairman), BORWICK, and GOODMAN.

DANIELS, Board Judge.

The Department of Agriculture’s Forest Service contracted with North Wind, Inc. for reconstruction of the Little Mill Campground and North Mill Day Use Area in the Uinta National Forest, Utah. In performing this contract, North Wind used more fill material from outside the site (called “select borrow”) than specified in the contract or, the contractor says, than it could reasonably have expected to use. North Wind claimed reimbursement in the amount of $95,910 for the cost of the additional material and associated overhead. A Forest Service contracting officer denied the claim, and the contractor appealed.

After the Board denied cross-motions for summary relief, North Wind, Inc. v. Department of Agriculture, CBCA 1779, 10-1 BCA ¶ 34,419, the parties requested that the _________________________

_________________________ _________________________

2 CBCA 1779

presiding judge assist them in resolving the dispute by providing mediation services. Representatives of the parties and the judge walked through the campground, discussed the strengths and weaknesses of each side’s position, and, seated at campground picnic tables, came to agreement as to resolution.

The Forest Service has agreed to pay to North Wind the sum of $12,372, and the parties have filed a joint stipulation that the Board issue a decision requiring the agency to pay an additional $25,628 to North Wind from the permanent indefinite judgment fund. The parties have stated that they will not seek reconsideration of, or relief from, a Board decision which directs this payment, and that they will not appeal such a decision. Rule 25(b) (48 CFR 6101.25(b) (2009)).

Decision

The appeal is GRANTED IN PART. The Forest Service shall pay to North Wind, Inc. the sum of $25,628. This money shall be paid from the permanent indefinite judgment fund. 31 U.S.C. § 1304 (2006).

STEPHEN M. DANIELS

Board Judge

We concur:

ANTHONY S. BORWICK

Board Judge

ALLAN H. GOODMAN

Board Judge

This is a verbatim capture of the text layer of the Board's own document in North Wind, Inc., CBCA 1779. 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

Same Judge

Same Year

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.