ARMED SERVICES BOARD OF CONTRACT APPEALS 
 
OPINION BY ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE MELNICK DENYING APPELLANT’S 
REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION 
 
Appellant, Heart & Core LLC, has moved for reconsideration of the Board’s 
January 11, 2023, decision denying the appeal.  Heart & Core had elected to conduct 
the appeal under the Board’s Rule 12.2, Small Claims (Expedited) procedure and the 
parties agreed to brief the matter under Board Rule 11.  A response from the 
government is deemed unnecessary.   
 
 Heart & Core was awarded firm-fixed price contracts to provide, among other 
things, comforters and bathrobes for the United States Air Force Academy and sought 
price increases to account for unexpected cost increases.  The Board denied the appeal 
given the fixed price nature of the contracts.   
 
 “Reconsideration might be appropriate if the request ‘is based upon newly 
discovered evidence, mistakes in the findings of fact, or errors of law.’”  Green Valley 
Co., ASBCA No. 61275, 18-1 BCA ¶ 37,044 at 180,330 (quoting Alliance Roofing & 
Sheet Metal, Inc., ASBCA No. 59663, 15-1 BCA ¶ 36,063).  However, reconsideration 
is not an opportunity for a party to reargue its position.  Id.  Motions for reconsideration 
are granted when we have made an oversight affecting the outcome of the appeal.  
Kellogg Brown & Root Servs, Inc., ASBCA Nos. 57530, 58161, 19-1 BCA ¶ 37,321 
at 181,535.   
 
Heart & Core complains that the Board’s decision did not adequately address a 
reference in its Rule 11 reply brief to generalized government communications about 
Appeal of - )  
 )  
Heart & Core LLC ) ASBCA No. 63403 
 )  
Under Contract Nos. FA7000-18-D-0004 )  
   
APPEARANCE FOR THE APPELLANT: Ms. Jen Swendseid 
    President 
    Minnetonka, MN 
 
APPEARANCES FOR THE GOVERNMENT: Caryl A. Potter, Esq. 
  Air Force Deputy Chief Trial Attorney 
 Isabelle P. Cutting, Esq. 
Maj Alissa J. Schrider, USAF 
    Trial Attorneys 

2 
 
the impact of inflationary pressures upon small contractors and possible solutions that 
might be mutually agreeable.  Heart & Core is simply rearguing its case, which did not 
establish contractual entitlement to recovery.  It has not persuaded us that we have 
made an oversight that affects the outcome of the appeal.  Accordingly, the motion for 
reconsideration is denied.  
 
 Dated:  February 1, 2023 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
MARK A. MELNICK 
Administrative Judge 
Armed Services Board 
of Contract Appeals 
 
 I certify that the foregoing is a true copy of the Opinion and Decision of the 
Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals in ASBCA No. 63403,
 Appeal of Heart & 
Core LLC, rendered in conformance with the Board’s Charter. 
 
 Dated:  February 1, 2023 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
PAULLA K. GATES-LEWIS 
Recorder, Armed Services 
Board of Contract Appeals