The Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals has issued its annual report for FY 2023, shedding light on how often contractor appeals reach a successful result, and what agencies are most frequently involved in contract litigation.

The report shows that the Board disposed of 132 contractor appeals on the merits, and in 67% of these dispositions the Board found that the appeal had merit in whole or in part.  The Board also dismissed 243 cases, a majority of which were dismissals due to settlement by the parties.  That means that in more than half of all cases resolved in FY 2023, the contractor received some manner of a favorable outcome.

The Board’s report also indicated that its Alternate Dispute Resolution program remains a strong option for settling disputed matters.  The Board addressed 78 cases through the ADR process, resolving 67.  Of the remaining 11 cases, four were not successful, and 7 remained pending as of the close of FY 2023.  These data are consistent with the Board’s policy statement of providing “to the fullest extent practicable” the “informal, expeditious, and inexpensive resolution of disputes.” 

Separately, the Board provided a breakdown of appeal figures by agency.  The Army Corps of Engineers and the Army had the most appeals pending, followed by the Navy and the Defense Contract Management Agency (“DCMA”), which handles appeals of cost disallowances and Cost Accounting Standards (“CAS”) noncompliance determinations.

Source of Cases Pending October 1, 2023

Army146
Navy145
Air Force75
Corps of Eng.304
DCMA134
DLA66
Other Agencies57
    TOTAL927

Sources of Cases Disposed During FYs 2019-2023

 FY19FY20FY21FY22FY23
Army10463626342
Navy80956865102
Air Force5247433952
Corps of Eng.15982115142132
DCMA5645625522
DLA3218261415
Other Agencies23131519­­­10
     TOTAL506363391397375

Disposition of Cases During FY 2023

Sustained73656810188
Denied8158614144
Dismissed352240262255243
    TOTAL       506363391397375

As a final matter, litigants docketed 14 appeals from Board decisions to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, in addition to previously-pending appeals.  The Federal Circuit disposed of 11 Board cases in FY 2023, issuing 4 affirmances, 3 reversals/remands, and 4 dismissals.

Print:
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn
Photo of Evan R. Sherwood Evan R. Sherwood

Evan Sherwood counsels federal contractors on Contract Disputes Act (CDA) claims, the cost accounting standards (CAS), cost allowability, requests for equitable adjustment (REAs), contract terminations for convenience / default, and related audits, litigations, and investigations. He also advises on contract compliance and formation…

Evan Sherwood counsels federal contractors on Contract Disputes Act (CDA) claims, the cost accounting standards (CAS), cost allowability, requests for equitable adjustment (REAs), contract terminations for convenience / default, and related audits, litigations, and investigations. He also advises on contract compliance and formation issues, including TINA / defective pricing, data rights, mandatory disclosure rules, ethics, conflicts of interest, teaming arrangements, and other transaction agreements (OTAs). He has litigated matters before the Court of Federal Claims, the Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals, and the Government Accountability Office. Evan was partially seconded to Northrop Grumman from 2019 to 2022 as business unit counsel.

In his work for defense and civilian agency contractors, Evan:

  • Prepares CDA claims and REAs;
  • Litigates and counsels on matters involving CAS compliance, cost accounting practice changes, and cost allowability under the FAR and agency supplements;
  • Defends contractors during audits and investigations involving the Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA), Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA), and the Office of the Inspector General (OIG);
  • Advises on constructive changes, work delays, defective specifications, stop-work orders, government-furnished property, CPARS, warranty matters, data rights, and quality controls;
  • Counsels on disputes between primes and subcontractors, including teaming disputes;
  • Conducts internal investigations and defends clients in federal investigations involving whistleblower allegations and retaliation claims.

Evan is a Vice Chair of the ABA Public Contract Law Section’s Contract Claims & Disputes Resolution Committee. He routinely writes and speaks about legal issues in federal contracting.

Photo of Peter B. Hutt II Peter B. Hutt II

Peter Hutt represents government contractors in False Claims Act and fraud matters, and accounting, cost, and pricing disputes and counseling matters.

Peter is a leading False Claims Act lawyer in the government contracts arena. He has represented contractors for 35 years in matters

Peter Hutt represents government contractors in False Claims Act and fraud matters, and accounting, cost, and pricing disputes and counseling matters.

Peter is a leading False Claims Act lawyer in the government contracts arena. He has represented contractors for 35 years in matters alleging cybersecurity noncompliance; cost mischarging; CAS violations; quality assurance deficiencies; substandard products and services; defective pricing; health care fraud; price reduction issues; inadequate subcontractor oversight; and reverse false claims. He has testified before Congress concerning the False Claims Act, and is a thought leader in the field. Peter also conducts internal investigations and advises clients on whether and how to make disclosures of potential wrongdoing.

Peter also represents contractors and grantees in accounting, cost, and pricing matters, and other contract and grant matters. He has addressed issues concerning pensions and post-retirement benefits; TINA and defective pricing; alleged CAS violations; cost accounting practice changes; alleged charging of unallowable and expressly unallowable costs; terminations; contract financing; price reduction clause issues; subcontracting and supply chain compliance; specialty metals compliance; and small business and DBE compliance. He has litigated cost, accounting, and contract breach matters in the Court of Federal Claims and the ASBCA.

Peter is recognized for his work both in False Claims Act and government contract disputes by Chambers USA, which notes that “He is absolutely outstanding. He is thoughtful and client-focused.” Chambers also notes that “Peter’s judgment and problem solving ability is unique. He is a very good False Claims Act lawyer.”