DENIED: September 28, 2017
CBCA 5696
AVALON PLAZA LLC,
                                                         Appellant,
v.
GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION,
                                                             Respondent.
Joseph Ghadir, Managing Member of Avalon Plaza LLC, Los Angeles, CA, appearing
for Appellant.
Jordan K. Baker, Office of Regional Counsel, General Services Administration, San
Francisco, CA, counsel for Respondent.
Before Board Judges SOMERS, SHERIDAN, and RUSSELL.
SHERIDAN, Board Judge.
Avalon Plaza LLC (Avalon or lessor) has appealed a contracting officer’s (CO) final
decision which was issued by the General Services Administration (GSA or lessee).  Avalon
asserts that it is entitled to recover additional compensation of $43,944.98 for air
conditioning the approximately 200 square foot data communications room (DCR or
computer room) during the fifteen years of its lease with GSA.
The lease in issue required Avalon to maintain the DCR at a temperature range of
between sixty-eight and eighty degrees Fahrenheit.  This is a standard GSA leasing provision
that ensures electronic components in server rooms do not overheat.  The issue under
consideration in this matter is whether GSA owes Avalon additional compensation for
constantly maintaining the DCR temperature between sixty-eight and eighty degrees
Fahrenheit for the lease period.  The appellant argues that the lease failed to include


CBCA 5696 2
compensation for the cost of operating the air conditioning (A/C) unit in the DCR.  We find
that the plain language of the lease includes the cost of operating the A/C unit for the DCR
in the base rental consideration and no additional compensation is owed to Avalon.
The appeal was submitted for decision on the written record pursuant to Board Rule
19 (48 CFR 6101.19 (2015)).  The record consists of the complaint, answer, appeal file, an
affidavit, and the briefs of the parties. 
Statement of Facts
GSA and Avalon entered into lease LCA00052 on May 31, 2000, for a total of 15,710
square feet of space at 12701 Avalon Boulevard, Los Angeles, California.  Exhibit 1.1  The
lease tenant was the Social Security Administration (SSA).  Id.  The lease had a term of ten
years firm with an option to extend for another five years. 
According to Joseph Ghadir, Avalon’s managing member, Royal Cochran was the
GSA contracting officer who executed the lease and:
Mr. Cochran failed to inform [Avalon] that the lessor is allowed to charge and
to be compensated for those expenses such as the overtime (24 hours less than
the 8 normal operation hours) usage of air conditioning in the DCR room
which were not included in the monthly rental payments. 
Affidavit of Joseph Ghadir (July 11, 2017) ¶ 2.
Paragraph 6 of the Standard Form 2 portion of the lease requires the lessor to furnish
“as part of the rental consideration” all “utilities . . . ‘with the sole exception that the
Government, will pay to the extent specifically identified herein as payable to the
Government.”  Exhibit 1 at 0002.
 
Paragraph 7 of the Standard Form 2 portion of the lease incorporated “[a]ll terms,
conditions, and obligations of the Government and Lessor as set forth in SFO [solicitation
for offer] 9CA0777 (35 pages); Agency’s special requirements (15 pages), GSA Form 3517
(26 pages), GSA Form 3518 (4 pages); Sheet Nos. 1 and 2, containing Paragraphs 9 through
18, and Exhibit A, floor plan.” Exhibit 1, at 0002.
1 All exhibits referenced in this decision are found in the appeal file, unless
otherwise noted.

CBCA 5696 3
GSA was responsible for the cost of overtime utilities pursuant to paragraph 15 of the
Standard Form 2 portion of the lease, which read:
Pursuant to Paragraph 7.3, “Overtime Usage”, upon request by the GSA Field
Office Manager, the Lessor shall provide heating, ventilation, and air
conditioning (HVAC) at any time beyond normal service hours (7:00 a.m. –
6:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, except federal holidays) at an hourly rate
of $20.00 per hour.  The Lessor must submit a properly authorized and
certified invoice quarterly to the GSA Field Office Manager. 
Exhibit 1 at 0003.2
Paragraph 6.7 of the SFO portion of the lease, “Heating and Air Conditioning (JAN
1997)”, established the basic obligations with regard to heating, ventilation, and air
conditioning (HVAC) of the leased space as a whole:
(a)  Temperatures shall conform to local commercial equivalent temperature
levels and operating practices in order to maximize tenant satisfaction.  These
temperatures must be maintained throughout the leased premises and service
areas, regardless of outside temperatures, during the hours of operating
specified in the lease.
(b)  During non-working hours, heating temperatures shall be set no higher
than 55N F[arenheit] and air conditioning will not be provided except as
necessary to return space temperatures to a suitable level for the beginning of
working hours.
Exhibit 1 at 0032.
Paragraph 7 addresses “SERVICES, UTILITIES, MAINTENANCE,” and in pertinent
part provides:
2 Paragraph 15 was later amended by Supplemental Lease Agreement 6,
increasing the overtime rate to $31.00 per hour.  Exhibit 1 at 0093.

CBCA 5696 4
7.1 SERVICES, UTILITIES, MAINTENANCE 
Services, utilities , and maintenance shall be provided by the Lessor as part of
the rental consideration. . . .
7.2 NORMAL HOURS
Services, utilities, and maintenance will be provided daily, extending from
7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. except Saturdays, Sundays, and Federal Holidays.” 
7.3 OVERTIME USAGE (JAN 1997)
(a)  The Government shall have access to the leased space at all times without
additional payment, including the use, during other than normal hours, of the
necessary services and utilities such as elevator, toilets, lights, and electric
power.
(b)  If heating or cooling is required on an overtime basis, such services will
be ordered orally or in writing by the Contracting Officer or Buildings
Manager.  When ordered, services shall be provided at the hourly rate
established in the contract . . . .
. . . .
7.4 UTILITIES
The Lessor shall ensure that utilities necessary for operation are provided and
all associated costs are included as part of the established rental rate.
7.5 UTILITIES: SEPARATE FROM RENTAL (JAN 1997)
(a)  The Offeror must specify which utilities, if any, are excluded from the
rental consideration.  If any such utilities are excluded, the Offeror must obtain
a statement from a registered professional engineer stating that all heating,
ventilation, air conditioning, plumbing, and other energy intensive building
systems can operate under the control conditions stated in this SFO . . . . 
(b)  The Lessor shall provide separate meters for utilities to be paid for by the
Government.  The Lessor shall furnish in writing to the Contracting Officer,
prior to occupancy by the Government, a record of the meter numbers and
verification that the meters measure Government usage only . . . .
Exhibit 1 at 0035.

CBCA 5696 5
Paragraph 16(B), under the “SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION SPECIAL
SPACE REQUIREMENTS” portion of the lease, provided special requirements related to
the DCR, including the room’s HVAC:
16.  DATA COMMUNICATIONS ROOM (DCR)
An approximate 200 square foot DCR (...minimum of 200 square feet) with
painted ceiling-high walls and vinyl tile on the floor must be provided.  The
entry door should be of solid wood core or metal sheathed with hinges inside
the room . . . .
. . . .
B.  Heating, Ventilating, and Air-conditioning system (HVAC) Requirements
HVAC must be maintained at a temperature range of between 68 and 80
degrees Fahrenheit.  The HVAC system must be capable of maintaining plus
or minus 2 degrees of the thermostat setting.  Relative humidity will be
maintained between 10 and 90 percent.  The room shall be separately zoned
and have its own separate thermostatic control inside the room.  The HVAC
system shall be designed to supply, on the average, 6 complete air changes per
hour with a minimum of 20 percent fresh air.  The air conditioning unit for the
DCR is to be maintained/serviced at no cost to SSA.
Exhibit 1 at 0047.
The lease contained no provisions providing for an hourly utility rate specific to the
DCR.  Avalon provided HVAC for the DCR without incident from January 11, 2001, to
shortly before September 2014, when it first raised the electrical bill with Debra Williams,
a GSA lease administration specialist and contracting officer’s technical representative
(COTR) who Mr. Ghadir describes as being “in charge of maintenance” for the leased space. 
According to Mr. Ghadir, COTR Williams told him that the cost of running the air
conditioning in the DCR was normally not included in the rental amount of the lease.  Ghadir
Affidavit ¶ 4.
In September 2014, Mr. Ghadir began corresponding with Clara Lee, GSA’s lease
contracting officer (LCO), via email messages about the concern Mr. Ghadir had regarding
the high HVAC costs for the DCR.  Mr. Ghadir and LCO Lee discussed amending the lease
to add the following clause:

CBCA 5696 6
24-HOUR HVAC REQUIREMENT (APR 2011)
The hourly overtime HVAC rate specified above shall not apply to any portion
of the Premises that is required to have heating and cooling 24 hours per day. 
If 24-hour HVAC is required by the Government for any designated rooms or
areas of the Premises, such services shall be provided by the Lessor at an
annual rate of $X.XX per ABOA [American National Standards
Institute/Building Owners and Managers Association (ANSI/BOMA) Office
Area] [square feet] of the area receiving the 24-hour HVAC.  Notwithstanding
the foregoing, Lessor shall provide this service at no additional cost to the
Government if the Lessor provides this service to other tenants in the Building
at no additional charge.
Exhibit 3.  LCO Lee asked Mr. Ghadir to send Avalon’s offered rate and the supporting
documents that it used to calculate the rate.  Exhibit 4.
On September 5, 2014, Mr. Ghadir provided LCO Lee with a rate of $164.41 per
month, together with Avalon’s method of calculating the rate.  Exhibit 6.  Using Avalon’s
methodology, GSA owed it $26,963.24, based on a lease start of February 2001 (164 months
x $164.41 = $26,963.24).  Id.  Another calculation Avalon provided stated: “[B]ased on
overtime consumption of 16 hours per day, the cost of electricity should be: 16 hours x
$.0226KWH = $2.6652/day x 365 days = $972.77 per year.”  Id.  
Another LCO, Veronica Gonzalez, informed Mr. Ghadir on September 30, 2014, that
GSA was still reviewing Avalon’s proposal for reasonableness.  Exhibit 7.  LCO Gonzalez
wrote that the proposed rate would need to be memorialized via a supplemental lease
agreement and that “since the lease did not address anything previously, [GSA] cannot pay
you retroactively.  In addition, per the lease, (Paragraph 16 B of Special Requirement) last
sentence, it is the lessors [sic] responsibility to maintain/service the unit used in this space.” 
Id.  On November 19, 2014, LCO Gonzalez reaffirmed her position that GSA would not
retroactively pay for an increase “since it was not discussed until September 5, 2014.” 
Exhibit 8.
Avalon did not pursue the proposed supplemental agreement, and the lease expired
on January 11, 2016.  Around the same time, Avalon entered into a new lease with GSA,
lease LCA03420, at the same location.  Exhibits 9, 17.  The new lease contained a higher
utility rate of $65 per hour for the entire space and a HIGHER OVERTIME HVAC USAGE
(JUN 2012) clause that read:

CBCA 5696 7
A.  If there is to be a change for heating or cooling outside of the Building’s
normal hours, such services shall be provided at the hourly rate set forth
elsewhere in the Lease.  Overtime usage services may be ordered by the
Government’s authorized representative only.
B.  When the cost of service is $3,000 or less, the service may be ordered
orally.  An invoice shall be submitted to the official placing the order for
certification and payment.  Orders for services costing more than $3,000 shall
be placed using GSA Form 300, Order for Supplies or Services, or other
approved service requisition procurement document.  An invoice conforming
to the requirement of this Lease shall be submitted to the official placing the
order for certification and payment.
Exhibit 17.3
On December 5, 2016, Mr. Ghadir submitted a claim seeking $43,944.98 based on
GSA’s failure to pay for overtime utility usage for the DCR from January 11, 2001, through
January 11, 2016.  Exhibit 9.
Another LCO, Brandy Ocker, issued a contracting officer’s final decision denying
Avalon’s claim on March 9, 2017.  Exhibit 25.  LCO Ocker wrote:
Paragraph 16(B) of the “Special Requirements” requires that the “HVAC must
be maintained at a temperature range between 68 and 80 degrees Fahrenheit.” 
This is a lease requirement that is covered by the rent, and there are no special
provisions requiring the Government to provide additional compensation for
the Data Communication Room (DCR).  Therefore, as stated, your claim is
denied.
Id.
Avalon timely appealed the contracting officer’s final decision to the CBCA, where
it was docketed as CBCA 5696.
3 Neither party submitted a copy of the new lease; however, correspondence
indicates that a new lease was executed.

CBCA 5696 8
Discussion
The central issue in this appeal is whether the lease terms required GSA to pay Avalon
extra compensation for HVAC in the DCR.  Avalon’s argument seems to revolve around a
purported duty of the GSA contracting officer to inform Avalon that in some leases GSA
pays a separate rate for certain rooms using excessive electricity, such as computer rooms. 
Avalon posits that GSA’s failure to include a right to extra compensation for HVAC in the
DCR entitles Avalon to recover the $43,944.98 it claims it would have garnered had the right
been included in the lease.  Avalon also seems to aver in its notice of appeal that paragraph
16(B) of the “Special Requirements” clause does not apply to the issue before us.  GSA
asserts Avalon is not entitled to extra payment because consistently maintaining the DCR
between 68 and 80 degrees was required under the base lease.  GSA also argues that Avalon
failed to submit properly authorized and certified quarterly invoices for the costs it now seeks
as required under the lease and the Board lacks jurisdiction over claims that arose before
December 5, 2010.
This Board, and one of its predecessor boards, the General Services Board of Contract
Appeals (GSBCA), have grappled with issues and clauses similar to these in several other
cases.  The facts and lease clauses in Rincon Center Associates v. General Services
Administration, GSBCA 11927, 96-1 BCA ¶ 28,126 (1995), aff'd sub nom. Rincon Center
Associates v. Johnson, 108 F.3d 1393 (Fed. Cir. 1997) are substantially identical to the
clauses in the appeal before us.  In Rincon, the GSBCA concluded that the applicable lease
provisions, when read as a whole, clearly required the continuous cooling of the computer
room as part of the basic rental consideration.  Id. 
The Rincon panel found that a contract must be interpreted “as a whole in a manner
which gives reasonable meaning to all its parts and avoids conflict or surplusage of its
provisions.”  96-1 BCA at 140,408 (citing Granite Construction Co. v. United States, 962
F.2d 998, 1003 (Fed. Cir. 1992); B.D. Click Co. v. United States, 614 F. 2d 748, 753 (Ct. Cl.
1980)).  Similar to the facts here, a Rincon lease provision had a specific requirement for
continuous air conditioning of the building's computer room.  The HVAC provision further
stated the room should be individually zoned and maintained 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. 
96-1 BCA at 140,408-09.  When interpreting the meaning of the provision in light of the
general HVAC provision, the GSBCA noted: 
We do not view the specific requirement for continuous cooling of the
computer room as being in conflict with the more general provisions regarding
cooling which appear in clauses 62 and 72.  Rather, in an effort to harmonize
these contract provisions among themselves, we interpret the latter two clauses
as applying to the general office area while that dealing with the cooling of the

CBCA 5696 9
computer room is, on its face, limited to that area alone.  As to payment
provisions covering the cost of running the cooling equipment in the computer
room, we see no reason why the provisions of paragraph six of Standard Form
2 do not apply.  Under that provision, lessor is required to furnish all utilities
as part of the rental consideration.
96-1 BCA at 140,409.  
Although Avalon makes several statements asserting its entitlement to extra
compensation, it provides no compelling facts or legal theory to actually support entitlement. 
There is no evidence that the GSA contracting officer erred in not including a clause that
allowed Avalon to separately bill for the DCR’s HVAC.  Applying the precedent articulated
in Rincon, as well as the clear terms of this lease, Avalon is responsible for providing HVAC
for the DCR 24-hours a day as part of its basic rental consideration. 
In so far as GSA argues that the Board lacks jurisdiction over the part of Avalon’s
claim that arose before December 5, 2010, we noted in Systems Management and Research
Technologies Corp. v. Department of Energy, CBCA 4068, 15-1 BCA ¶ 35,976 at 175,787-
88, that our controlling authority, the Federal Circuit, has held that the Contract Disputes Act
(CDA), 41 U.S.C. §§ 7101-7109 (2012), does not establish a jurisdictional bar for claims that
have not been submitted within six years of claim accrual.4  Having found the claim lacks
4 The CDA provides that “[e]ach claim by a contract against the Federal
Government relating to a contract . . . shall be submitted within 6 years after the accrual of
the claim.”  41 U.S.C. § 7103(a)(4)(A); see 48 CFR 33.206(a).  We concluded in Systems
Management that:
The transformation of the CDA’s six-year statute of limitations from
jurisdictional to non-jurisdictional changes how we must approach a motion
to dismiss a case for failure to meet that deadline.  No longer can the
Government, through a motion to dismiss, challenge the factual allegations
that the contractor has made in its complaint and require the contractor to
prove jurisdictional facts by a preponderance of the evidence.  Instead, the
CDA’s six-year statute of limitations is now an affirmative defense that the
Government must plead in its answer to the appellant’s complaint.
15-1 BCA at 175,788 (citing Sikorsky Aircraft Corp. v. United States, 773 F.3d 1315 (Fed.
Cir. 2014)).  

CBCA 5696 10
merit, we need not go into an extensive analysis of whether a portion of the claim is time
barred.
Decision
CBCA 5696 is DENIED.
                                                                             _________________________
PATRICIA J. SHERIDAN
Board Judge
We concur:
_________________________ _________________________
JERI KAYLENE SOMERS BEVERLY M. RUSSELL
Board Judge Board Judge