CBCA 7547

GRANTED: March 24, 2025 CBCA 7547 CRYSTAL CLEAR MAINTENANCE, Appellant, v. GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION, Respondent. Marques O. Peterson of Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP, Washington, DC; and Mary E. Buxton and Dinesh C. Dharmadasa of Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP, Los Angeles, CA, counsel for Appellant. Justin S. Hawkins and David C. Charin, Office of General Counsel, General Services Administration, Washington, DC, counsel for Respondent. Before Board Judges BEARDSLEY (Chair), SULLIVAN, and CHADWICK. SULLIVAN, Board Judge. Crystal Clear Maintenance (CCM) appealed the General Services Administration’s (GSA) claim for the costs to repair flood damage allegedly caused by CCM’s failure to perform aspects of its maintenance contract for the Little Rock, Arkansas bankruptcy courthouse building. The parties submitted the appeal for a decision under Board Rule 19. We find that GSA has failed to carry its burden to prove its claim and grant the appeal. CBCA 7547 2 Findings of Fact I. Contract and Its Terms In September 2019, GSA awarded to CCM a maintenance services contract for five federal buildings in and around Little Rock, Arkansas. Exhibit 22 at 239, 241.1 The contract required CCM to “provide management, supervision, labor, materials, equipment and supplies” and be “responsible for the efficient, effective, economical, and satisfactory operation, scheduled and unscheduled maintenance, and repair of equipment and systems” located within the five buildings. Id. at 293. The contract term was one base year and four option years. Id. at 246. The contracting officer’s representative (COR) was identified as the “primary Government representative[] for the administration of the contract” but did not have authority to modify the contract. Id. at 254. Contract performance began on November 1, 2019. Complaint, ¶ 19. As part of the transition from the previous contract, the scope of work for the contract provided that CCM, GSA and the previous contractor would conduct “a complete and systematic initial inspection together during the startup or transition phase of the contract. The purpose of this inspection shall be to discover and list all deficiencies that may exist in the equipment and systems.” Exhibit 22 at 302.2 The contract also required CCM “to inspect the condition of all equipment and systems” as part of the transition and provide an itemized estimate for repairing any deficiencies identified in the initial inspection with GSA. Id. at 303. Neither the report of the initial inspection, nor any testimony about that initial inspection, is included in the record. “Normal working hours” were defined in the contract as “the hours of building operations under most circumstances when all services shall be provided to all occupants.” Exhibit 22 at 300. The contract also contemplated that CCM would not provide services when the building was closed for weather resulting in a reduction of the payment due to CCM for those days that “the building(s) is closed due to inclement weather.” Id. at 348. CCM was responsible for responding to emergency service requests, defined as “service requests where the work consists of correcting failures that constitute an immediate danger to personnel or property, including but not limited to: broken water pipes” among other emergencies. Id. at 312. During normal working hours, CCM was required to “respond to 1 “Exhibit XX at XX” refers to the exhibits and the bates numbers on those exhibits in the appeal file submitted by the parties. 2 The predecessor contractor was C&W Government Services (C&W), which held a contract from November 2018 to November 2019. Exhibit 23 at 1-2. CBCA 7547 3 emergency service request[s] immediately (within the shortest possible time consistent with the mechanic’s location).” Id. After working hours, CCM was obligated to respond within one hour. Id. II. Events Surrounding the Flood In November 2020, GSA issued an email with an attached document entitled “Freeze Protection,” which included a section on testing the low temperature detection thermostat (or freeze stat sensor).3 Exhibit 3 at 5, 8-9. The first step listed was to verify that the sensor was installed in the correct location (i.e., downstream of the hot water coil). Id.