The contractor submitted a claim consisting of a letter and a standard form settlement proposal. The letter was signed but didn’t contain certification language. The standard form contained the correct language but was unsigned. The board said the certification was defective—the signature and the certification must be on the same document.
Appeal of LR General Solutions, LLC, ASBCA No. 63458
- Attempted Claim – The agency terminated a contract for convenience. The contractor sent the agency a letter. The letter stated the contractor was submitting a claim for almost $300,000. The letter also included SF 1437, the form for a settlement proposal for cost-reimbursement contracts. The letter was signed but didn’t contain the proper claim certification language. The SF 1437 contained certification language, but it wasn’t signed. The agency denied the claim.
- Claim Was Not Properly Certified – The CDA requires a claim must be properly certified. Certification requires a signature on the certification document. Here, the SF 1437 submitted by the contractor contained sufficient certification language, but it was not signed. The letter contained a signature, but that signature was not the same document as the certifying language and thus did not count. The board determined the claim was defective so it lacked jurisdiction.
The contractor is represented by H. Todd Whay and Ian A. Cronogue of Baker, Cronogue, Tolle & Werfel, LLP. The government is represented by Scott N. Flesch and Major Brittney N. Montgomery of the Army.
–Case summary by Craig LaChance, Senior Editor
