ARMED SERVICES BOARD OF CONTRACT APPEALS 
Appeal of -- ) 
) 
Sparton DeLeon Springs, LLC ) 
) 
Under Contract Nos. NOO 164-01-D-0027 ) 
N00167-04-D-0024 ) 
APPEARANCES FOR THE APPELLANT: 
APPEARANCES FOR THE GOVERNMENT: 
ASBCA No. 60416 
Nicole J. Owren-Wiest, Esq. 
Gary S. Ward, Esq. 
Wiley Rein LLP 
Washington, DC 
E. Michael Chiaparas, Esq. 
DCMA Chief Trial Attorney 
Gregory T. Allen, Esq. 
Peter M. Casey, Esq. 
Trial Attorneys 
Defense Contract Management Agency 
Chantilly, VA 
OPINION BY ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE MCILMAIL ON THE 
GOVERNMENT'S MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION 
The government requests reconsideration of our 28 December 2016 decision 
granting summary judgment to appellant and sustaining its appeal. There, we found, 
there was no genuine dispute regarding the facts that gave rise to the government's 
overpayment claim, and we concluded as a matter of law that the claim was barred by 
the six-year statute oflimitations set forth in the Contract Disputes Act, 41 U.S.C. 
§ 7103(a)(3)(4). Spartan Deleon Springs, LLC, ASBCA No. 60416, 17-1 BCA 
~ 36,601. Familiarity with that decision is presumed. 
A motion for reconsideration is not intended to allow a party to re-argue issues 
that were previously raised and decided. Precision Standard, Inc., ASBCA No. 59116, 
15-1 BCA ~ 36, 15 5 at 176,448. Nor is it, as a general rule, a vehicle for the introduction 
of evidence not newly-discovered. See Hellenic Express, ASBCA No. 47129, 97-1 BCA 
~ 28,844 at 143,885. However, the government's motion attempts both, and only those. 
Without rehashing what we have already decided, we note the following. First, the 
January 2007 Defense Contract Audit Agency Contract Audit Manual excerpt attached to 
the motion is not newly-discovered evidence. Second, as to the government's contention 
that the Board applied the wrong legal standard for determining whether the claim had 
accrued, we see no conceptual difference between the "should have been known" 

standard set forth in Federal Acquisition Regulation 33.201 (defining "(a]ccrual of a 
claim") and the phrase "reasonably should have known" recited by the government (gov't 
mot. at 7, passim); the one expresses only what the other implies. See Raytheon Co., 
ASBCA No. 58849, 15-1BCAii36,000 at 175,866. 
The motion for reconsideration is denied.* 
Dated: 18 May 2017 
I concur 
MARK N. STEMPLER / 
Administrative Judge 
Acting Chairman 
Armed Services Board 
of Contract Appeals 
Administrativ Judge 
Armed Services Board 
of Contract Appeals 
RICHARD SHACKLEFORD 
Administrative Judge 
Vice Chairman 
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. 60416, Appeal of Sparton 
DeLeon Springs, LLC, rendered in conformance with the Board's Charter. 
Dated: 
JEFFREY D. GARDIN 
Recorder, Armed Services 
Board of Contract Appeals 
*The government's motion contained a request that the Chairman refer the motion to 
the Board's Senior Deciding Group pursuant to paragraph 4 of the Board's 
Charter. The Chairman has denied that request. 
2