Contractor Argued Termination for Default Was Uncalled For. CBCA Agreed.

GSA said the contractor installed a faulty security system, so GSA terminated for default. But CBCA found termination was not warranted. GSA had not demonstrated a faulty installation. The contractor, on the other hand, had shown that the problems with the security system were likely due to user error and environmental conditions. 

Adapt Consulting, LLC v. General Services Administration, CBCA 7213, 7393 

• Termination – GSA awarded a contract for modernizing a security system. The contractor completed the work and demobilized. But shortly after that, GSA noted problems with the security system. The contractor investigated but determined the problems were due to user error. GSA disagreed. It terminated the contract for default, claiming the contractor had not installed it correctly. 

• Appeal and Claim – The contractor appealed the termination to the CBCA. In addition, the contractor submitted claims for differing site conditions and for costs incurred in investigating problems with the security system. 

• Termination Was Unreasonable – The board granted the contractor’s appeal on the termination. The board found that GSA had not established that the problems with the system were due to a defective installation. The contractor, on the other hand, had provided credible witness testimony showing that the problems were due to user error and environmental factors. 

• Monetary Claims – The board found the contractor was also entitled to reimbursement for costs incurred due to power outages, flooding, and different site conditions. The contractor had also sought to recover costs incurred in investigating the alleged problems with the security system. But the board found the contractor had not provided adequate proof of quantum for investigation costs. 

The contractor is represented by Andrew Gillman, Nathan McKibben, Patrick B. Kernan, and Joseph A. Whitcomb of Whitcomb Selinsky, P.C. Michael Converse and David C. Charin of the General Services Administration represent the government. 

–Case summary by Craig LaChance, Editor in Chief