On October 31, 2024, the Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals (ASBCA or Board) published its FY 2024 Report of Transactions and Proceedings, which provides statistics regarding the "adjudication of appeals, petitions for contracting officer final decisions, applications for fees and costs under the Equal Access to Justice Act, and other matters" of the Army, Navy, Air Force, Corps of Engineers, Defense Logistics Agency, Defense Contract Management Agency, Central Intelligence Agency, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, or the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority.
The ASBCA disposed of 419 cases in FY 2024, an increase from 375 in FY 2023. The agencies with the most docketed cases were the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the U.S. Navy, which were involved in 71 and 58 cases, respectively.
In a year that saw the ASBCA resolve 126 cases on the merits, the Board considered issues of claim accrual, improper terminations for default, Contracts Disputes Act (CDA) jurisdiction, and compensable delay, among others. Crowell stays up to date on cases being decided by the ASBCA, and reports of these cases can be found on our Government Contracts Group's "Insights" page here. A few of the noteworthy cases include:
- In Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Company, ASBCA No. 62209 (Apr. 23, 2024), a C&M case, the Board issued a landmark decision awarding $131,888,860 in damages plus interest in connection with Lockheed Martin's claim for cumulative disruptive impacts—highlighting the Board's willingness to consider multiple forms of evidence to demonstrate the impacts of cumulative disruption. (Discussed here).
- In JE Dunn Construction Company, ASBCA No. 63183 (Dec. 13, 2023) and in ECC International Constructors, LLC, ASBCA Nos. 59586, 59643 (Jan. 2, 2024), the Board applied the Federal Circuit's holding in ECC Int'l Constructors Inc. v. Army, that the sum-certain requirement is non-jurisdictional and subject to forfeiture or waiver. First, in JE Dunn, the Board found that the government forfeited its argument that JE Dunn did not satisfy the sum-certain requirement because it waited until after the hearing on the merits to raise the issue. (Discussed here). Second, in ECC International Constructors, the Board held, on remand, that the defense was waived after the government did not raise it for over six years after the appeal was filed. (Discussed here).
- Aviation Training Consulting, LLC, ASBCA No. 63634 (Jan. 11, 2024), clarified that the Board has CDA jurisdiction over properly asserted claims for relief pursuant to the authority of CARES Act. (Discussed here).
Furthermore, the Federal Circuit disposed of nine ASBCA decisions on appeal with seven affirmed, one affirmed in part and vacated and remanded in part, and one dismissed.
The FY 2024 report also demonstrates that Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) remains a successful tool for resolving disputes at the ASBCA. The report indicates that the Board's ADR program resolved 100% of cases in which the parties completed formal mediation sessions.
The full report can be found here.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
