Among its other duties, the Defense Logistics Agency is charged with disposing of and re-purposing certain surplus military equipment. After several years of failing to keep up with such duties, the Government outsourced the work to a Contractor. With the RFP, the Government’s work estimate included: (1) historical workload data and (2) workload projections.
Soon after performance began, the Contractor encountered a significant backlog of work. No information about a backlog was included in the RFP or related communication. The Government refused to negotiate an equitable adjustment, denied the Contractor’s claim, and the Court of Federal Claims found no fault by the Government.
The Federal Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the decision of the Court of Federal Claims and held the Government’s negligent estimate failed to provide the “most current information available.” Such information included the Government’s knowledge that there was a significant backlog of work facing the Contractor. The Government’s obligation to provide a “realistic estimate [including] the most current information available” doesn’t mean it must go out and create such information. Rather, to the extent such information exists, the Government must share it with the Contractor.
Although the Government’s behavior was only negligent (i.e., not intentional), it seems like a trick to withhold pertinent information while demanding the work be performed and refusing to pay for it.
Ultimately, the Contractor was entitled to an equitable adjustment to the contract price and time for the backlog.
Agility Defense & Government Services, Inc. v. United States, 847 F.3d 1345 (Fed. Cir. 2017)
Roads & Bridges |Let the Contract Lead
LET THE CONTRACT LEAD
Documents offer guidance needed to manage risk without derailing projects
Construction is an industry of managed risk. Whether the prices […]
Roads & Bridges | When is an Invoice Really an Invoice?
WHEN IS AN INVOICE REALLY AN INVOICE?
All court decisions are opinions. Appellate court decisions are typically made by a panel of three […]
Roads & Bridges | Clarifying Punitive Damages
CLARIFYING PUNITIVE DAMAGES
In June 2021, the South Dakota Department of Transportation contracted for the demolition and construction of a bridge on State […]
Roads & Bridges | When Approximate Means Assumed Risk
WHEN APPROXIMATE MEANS ASSUMED RISK
A New York Court Shows How Performance Specifications Can Leave Contractors Holding the Bag
Sometimes when we are told […]
Roads & Bridges | From Roman Arches to AI
FROM ROMAN ARCHES TO AI
Can Construction Evolve Without Risk?
The construction industry blends old with new. From ancient Roman archways and aqueducts and […]
Roads & Bridges | Caught in the Middle
CAUGHT IN THE MIDDLE
New Mexico bridge case highlights the importance of written agreements for changes and delay compensation
In construction contracting, hope for […]
Roads & Bridges | Wait and It’s Waived
WAIT AND IT’S WAIVED
Roads & Bridges | Supreme Court Ruling on Arbitration Delay
Don’t wait to arbitrate! Progressing too far down the litigation […]
Roads & Bridges | Court Defines When Contractors Can Withdraw Due to Mistakes
BIDDING BLUNDER
Roads & Bridges | Court Defines When Contractors Can Withdraw Due to Mistakes
For over 125 years, the vast majority of jurisdictions […]
FEDERAL CONTRACT TERMINATION OR MODIFICATION
The White House has directed Agency heads to “terminate or modify . . . covered contracts.” With some exceptions, there are […]










