CBCA 6032

DENIED: September 24, 2024 CBCA 6032 UNITED FACILITY SERVICES CORPORATION dba EASTCO BUILDING SERVICES, Appellant, v. DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY, Respondent. William Weisberg of Law Offices of William Weisberg PLLC, McLean, VA, counsel for Appellant. Jonathan D. Tepper, Holly H. Styles, Justin M. Wakefield, and Richard L. Hatfield, Office of Chief Counsel, Internal Revenue Service, Department of the Treasury, Washington, DC, counsel for Respondent. Before Board Judges SHERIDAN, SULLIVAN, and O’ROURKE. O’ROURKE, Board Judge. This case involves allegations that the equipment inventory list contained in a facilities maintenance contract changed significantly during the nearly six-year period of performance. Appellant, United Facility Services Corporation doing business as EastCo Building Services (EastCo), contends that the agency, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), replaced multiple legacy systems with modern systems and installed new equipment throughout the facilities yet refused to approve any updates to the equipment inventory list. This refusal, appellant argues, forced it to perform additional work without compensation. CBCA 6032 2 Appellant submitted a claim to the contracting officer for the extra work in the amount of $4.6 million, which was deemed denied, and then appealed to the Board. During a hearing on the merits, the agency argued that appellant was not entitled to additional compensation because the equipment inventory and maintenance hours actually decreased over the life of the contract. After a detailed review of the appeal file, the hearing transcript, and arguments by counsel, we deny the appeal based on insufficient evidence to support the claim. Findings of Fact Contract Solicitation and Award On August 9, 2010, the IRS solicited offers from small businesses to perform facilities operations, maintenance, repairs, and construction services at the IRS Service Center campus in Fresno, California. Appeal File, Exhibit 1 at 1.1 The period of performance consisted of a two-month phase-in term followed by a one-year base period and four option years. Id. at 20. The agency structured the contract as a firm-fixed-price (FFP) service contract with an indefinite delivery, indefinite quantity (IDIQ) component, against which the Government could issue task orders for work that met specified requirements under paragraph 2.3 of the performance work statement (PWS). Id. at 62–64. The PWS divided the work into two categories: basic services and additional services. Exhibit 1 at 61–64. The basic services category included all services necessary to operate the facility, respond to service calls and repair requests, perform preventive maintenance (PM), conduct testing, and certify the equipment. Basic services also included project planning, proposal development activities, and cost estimating for all IDIQ work requested by the agency. Additional services included service call repairs, new project work exceeding $3000,2 and any work over $500 that was required to correct deficiencies discovered during the phase-in period. Paragraph 3.17 of the PWS identified and explained the function of the Computerized Maintenance Management Systems (CMMS) as systems for tracking and documenting all contract activities and deliverables related to the operation and maintenance of the facilities. Exhibit 1 at 108. The contractor was responsible for updating the CMMS and ensuring its accuracy. Id. at 78. Relevant to this dispute was the requirement to update the system when new equipment was installed or when equipment was upgraded or removed from a facility. Technical exhibit 5 (TE-5), also referred to as the equipment inventory, was generated within 1 All exhibits are found in the appeal file, unless otherwise noted. 2 Work that exceeded that threshold cost was authorized by the contracting officer in the form of an FFP or time and materials (T&M) task order. Exhibit 1 at 62. CBCA 6032 3 the CMMS and represented the site-specific list of equipment requiring preventive maintenance. Id. at 79–80. The TE-5 contained 1559 line items of equipment. Exhibit 21. While most of those line items described an individual piece of equipment, others described dozens or even hundreds of pieces of equipment on a single line.