ASBCA 61503

ARMED SERVICES BOARD OF CONTRACT APPEALS Appeal of-- ) ) Alutiiq Commercial Enterprises, LLC ) ASBCA No. 61503 ) Under Contract No. FA8 l Ol-16-C-0006 ) APPEARANCES FOR THE APPELLANT: Stowell B. Holcomb, Esq. Mark G. Jackson, Esq. Jackson Rosenfield, LLP Seattle, WA APPEARANCES FOR THE GOVERNMENT: Jeffrey P. Hildebrant, Esq. Air Force Deputy Chief Trial Attorney Colby L. Sullins, Esq. Jason R. Smith, Esq. Trial Attorneys OPINION BY ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE CATES-HARMAN ON CROSS-MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT This appeal involves Alutiiq Commercial Enterprises, LLC ' s (ACE's) claim for $1 ,744.330.37 to compensate it for increased costs incurred during the first option period resulting from a revised Collective Bargaining Agreement. The parties filed cross-motions for summary judgment. We have jurisdiction pursuant to the Contract Disputes Act of 1978 (CDA), 41 U.S.C. §§ 7101-7109. For the reasons stated below, we grant summary judgment in favor of ACE and sustain the appeal. STATEMENT OF FACTS (SOF) FOR PURPOSES OF THE MOTIONS 1 The TSS Contract 1. On November 19, 2007, the Department of the Air Force (Air Force) awarded to Tinker Support Services, JN (TSS) the base civil engineering (CE) support services contract, No. FA8101-08-D-0006 (TSS Contract), for Tinker Air Force Base (AFB), OK (R4, tab 1 at 1). The contract had six options running through January 31, 2016 (id. at 4). 1 By Air Force letter, on behalf of both parties, dated January 25, 2018, the parties agreed that they did not dispute each other's material facts. We therefore use many of the parties' statements of undisputed material facts (SUMF). The TSS Contract incorporated by reference Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 52.217-8, OPTION TO EXTEND SERVICES (NOV 1999) (id. at 411), which allowed for the contract services to be extended up to an additional six months. 2. On August 26, 2013 , TSS entered into a collective bargaining agreement (CBA) with the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers, (IAM&A W or Union) (R4, tab 17 at 650-707). The CBA between TSS and the IAM&A W was effective from August 26, 2013 to August 21 , 2016 (id. ). Solicitation No. FA8101 -l 5-R-0007 3. On October 29, 2013 , the Air Force posted a synopsis for the Tinker AFB CE Services Operations Management procurement to https://www.fbo.gov (FBO) (R4, tab 3). The Air Force also posted a draft performance work statement (PWS); a draft Request for Proposal (RFP), Solicitation No. FA8101-14-R-0002; pertinent Oklahoma wage determinations; Department of Labor (DOL) Wage Determination No. 2005-2431 ; and the newly-consummated CBA between TSS and the IAM&A W (R4, tab 3 at 4-5). 4. The CBA between TSS and the IAM&A W was incorporated into the Option V period of performance of the TSS Contract (R4, tab 45). 5. A pre-solicitation conference was held on April 16, 2015 . Questions and answers were documented. One question relating to the transition period read as follows : Q. Does the incumbent have transition out? What responsibilities does the new contractor have transitioning in? A. The incumbent contractor will be responsible for full performance during the transition out period. The incoming contractor shall perform during the transition IA W PWS para 1.6.1 , which includes becoming familiar with the work, obtaining security clearances, vehicle registration, training etc. (R4, tab 12 at 2) Contracting Officer (CO) DeLong recalled that prospective offerors "were repeatedly advised that the CBA between TSS and the IAM&AW would apply to the contract, but that renegotiation of some terms was necessary. " 2 (DeLong decl. at 2 , 7) 2 The Board asked the parties to comment on this statement in CO DeLong' s declaration. Both parties agreed that the statement was correct in their response to the Board. (See the parties' February 5, 2019 letters including CO DeLong' s supplemental declaration listing the questions and answers she relied upon) 2  6. On July 8, 2015, the Air Force posted the RFP, Solicitation No.