ASBCA 61584

ARMED SERVICES BOARD OF CONTRACT APPEALS Petition of -- ) ) Rizzani de Eccher (USA), Inc. ) ASBCA No. 61584-984 ) Under Contract No. W912ER-l l-C-0001 ) APPEARANCES FOR THE PETITIONER: Jeffrey G. Gilmore, Esq. John M. Neary, Esq. Daniel R. Miktus, Esq. Akerman LLP Washington, DC APPEARANCES FOR THE GOVERNMENT: Michael P. Goodman, Esq. Engineer Chief Trial Attorney Regina L. Schowalter, Esq. Nancy L. Pell, Esq. Engineer Trial Attorneys U.S. Army Engineer District, Middle East Winchester, VA ORDER PURSUANT TO BOARD RULE l(a)(S) DIRECTING CONTRACTING OFFICER TO ISSUE DECISION The contractor filed, under Rule l(a)(S), a request for an order directing the contracting officer (CO) to render a decision on a December 29, 2017 certified claim in the amount of $10,248,275. The contractor requested that the CO issue a decision by August 2, 2018. The government has advised that a final decision on the claim will be issued by November 16, 2018. We find this date unreasonable and direct the contracting officer to issue a decision by September 12, 2018. STATEMENT OF FACTS (SOF) FOR PURPOSES OF THE PETITION 1. On December 16, 2010, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (government or USA CE) awarded Contract No. W9 l 2ER- l l-C-OOO 1 to Rizzani de Eccher (USA), Inc. (the contractor) to construct two billets facilities and a subsistence warehouse at Al Udeid Air Base, State of Qatar (pet. at 2). 2. By letter dated December 29, 2017, the contractor submitted a certified claim to the CO for a time extension, compensable delays and costs, and remission of liquidated damages in the amount of $10,248,275. The claim was 80-pages long and contained 108 exhibits. (Pet., ex. 1)  3. On January 8, 2018, the CO acknowledged receipt of the claim via email (pet., ex. 2). 4. By letter dated February 23, 2018, the CO stated that due to the size and complexity of the claim, a final decision would be issued by February 27, 2019.* The CO's letter also requested that the contractor submit the exhibits for the subject claim and certain scheduling files. (Pet., ex. 3) 5. The contractor submitted the exhibits and scheduling files on April 16, 2018 (pet. resp. at 2). DECISION When a CO receives a certified claim over $100,000, the Contract Disputes Act (CDA), 41 U.S.C. §§ 7101-7109, requires that within sixty days of receipt of the claim, the CO shall (a) issue a decision or (b) notify the contractor of the time within which a decision will be issued. 41 U.S.C. § 7103(f)(2). The CDA also requires that the decision of the CO on a contractor claim "shall be issued within a reasonable time ... taking into account such factors as the size and complexity of the claim and the adequacy of information in support of the claim provided by the contractor." 41 U.S.C. § 7103(f)(3). Under the CDA, "[a] contractor may request the tribunal concerned to direct a contracting officer to issue a decision in a specified period of time, as determined by the tribunal concerned, in the event of undue delay on the part of the contracting officer." 41 U.S.C. § 7103(f)(4). Board Rule l(a)(5) implements this section providing that "[i]n lieu of filing a notice of appeal under paragraph (a)(l) or (a)(2) of this Rule, the contractor may petition the Board to direct the contracting officer to issue a decision in a specified period of time as determined by the Board." Whether the time in which a CO states he or she will issue a decision is reasonable must be determined on a case-by-case basis. Eaton Contract Services, Inc., ASBCA Nos. 52686, 52796, 00-2 BCA ~ 31,039 (finding eight months reasonable given the volume of documentation, number of issues and time needed to gather information due to relocation of personnel); Defense Systems Co., ASBCA No. 50534, 97-2 BCA ~ 28,981 (finding nine months reasonable when claimed amount exceeded $71 million and narrative portion of the claim alone exceeded 162 pages); Dillingham/ABB-SUSA, a Joint Venture, ASBCA Nos.