CBCA 5041, 5042

B.C. Construction Co., Inc.

May 26, 2016Judge SheridanDEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS
DecisionGranted in partby agreement

Key Facts

Appellant
B.C. Construction Co., Inc.
Respondent agency
DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS
Judge
Sheridan
Case number
CBCA 5041, 5042This cell names 2 dockets: 5041, 5042.
Decided
May 26, 2016The decision states May 26, 2016 on its own face, which agrees with the listing.
Decision type
Decision
Law firm for the appellant
Manfredonia Law Offices, LLC
Outcome
Granted in partEntered by agreement of the parties.
Accordingly, these appeals are 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

Payment and interestDelay, suspension and acceleration

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. They are ordered strongest first.

Appearances

For the appellant
John M. Manfredonia and James Petersen
Manfredonia Law Offices, LLC
Cresskill, NJ
For the respondent
Jennifer L. Hedge
Office of General Counsel, Department of Veterans Affairs, Pittsburgh
Leeds, MA
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 decision3 pages, 2,775 characters, read from the Board's own documentDecided May 26, 2016 on its own faceRespondent DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS Decision documentOfficial source: Civilian Board of Contract Appeals, Contract Disputes Act cases

Authorities cited

3 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

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: May 26, 2016

CBCA 5041, 5042

B.C. CONSTRUCTION CO., INC.,

Appellant,

v.

DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS,

Respondent.

John M. Manfredonia and James Petersen of Manfredonia Law Offices, LLC,

Cresskill, NJ, counsel for Appellant.

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.

Jennifer L. Hedge, Office of General Counsel, Department of Veterans Affairs, Pittsburgh, PA, and Jeanne S. Morris, Office of General Counsel, Department of Veterans Affairs, Leeds, MA, counsel for Respondent.

Before Board Judges DANIELS (Chairman), SHERIDAN, and LESTER.

SHERIDAN, Board Judge.

In these appeals, appellant, B.C. Construction Co., Inc. (BC), sought damages and interest pursuant to the Contract Disputes Act, 41 U.S.C. §§ 7101-7109 (2012) (CDA), under Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) contract VA241-C-1301, task order VA 523-Z15001, referred to as the GI/Endoscopy Renovation at the VA Medical Center, Jamaica Plains, Massachusetts. Among other things, BC’s claims sought extended field office and home office overhead, alleging that it had incurred 873 days of compensable delay under the contract.

On May 25, 2016, the parties filed a joint motion for judgment on settlement agreement, stating:

1. This Board docketed as CBCA 5041 and 5042 two appeals relating to Contract No. VA241-C-1301/Task Order VA 523-Z15001.

2. The VA and Appellant have entered into a Settlement Agreement under which the issues and disputes that are the subject of this appeal have been amicably resolved. Attached is a copy of the Settlement Agreement for the Board’s consideration.

3. Pursuant to the terms of their Settlement Agreement, the parties jointly move the Board for Judgment in favor of BC in the amount of $3,950,000.

4. Per the terms of the Settlement, Contract Disputes Act (CDA) interest on said Settlement amount will begin to accrue on June 21, 2016, if payment thereof has not been made to BC by that date. Said CDA interest shall continue to accrue until payment of the Settlement amount has been made and shall be payable to BC along with payment of said Settlement amount.

5. BC waives any further right it may have to claim for recovery of interest other than that provided for in paragraph 4 above or of any attorney’s fees and expenses it may have incurred in conjunction with the claims or appeals.

6. The parties will not seek reconsideration of, or relief from the Board’s decision, and they will not appeal the decision.

Decision

Accordingly, these appeals are GRANTED IN PART. In accordance with the parties’ motion, the Board awards the sum of $3,950,000 plus CDA interest to run from June 21, 2016, until payment. Payment shall be made from the permanent indefinite judgment fund, 31 U.S.C. § 1304 (2012).

PATRICIA J. SHERIDAN

Board Judge

We concur:

STEPHEN M. DANIELS

Board Judge

HAROLD D. LESTER, JR.

Board Judge

This is a verbatim capture of the text layer of the Board's own document in B.C. Construction Co., Inc., CBCA 5041, 5042. 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 Topic

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.