# I

ARMED SERVICES BOARD OF CONTRACTAPPEALS Appeal of

-- ) ) GSC Construction, Inc. ) ) Under ContractNo. W9126G-11-D-0061 )
APPEARANCES FORTHE APPELLANT:

APPEARANCES FORTHE GOVERNMENT: ASBCA No. 59401

Karl Dix, Jr., Esq. Douglas L. Tabeling, Esq.

Smith Currie & Hancock LLP Atlanta, GA
Thomas H. Gourlay, Jr., Esq.

Engineer ChiefTrial Attorney Keith J. Klein, Esq.

District Counsel Stephanie R. Darr, Esq. AlexandriaA. Polk, Esq.

EngineerTrial Attorneys U.S. Army Engineer District, Tulsa
OPINION BYADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE MCILMAIL ON THE GOVERNMENT'S MOTION TO DISMISS FORLACK OF JURISDICTION
The government moves to dismiss this appeal for lack of jurisdiction because, the government contends, appellant did not certify the claim that it presentedto the contracting officer for a final decision. 1 We grantthe motion.
On 3 July 2014, appellant, GSC Construction, Inc. (GSC), appealed from a 28 April 2014 contracting officer's final decision denying a request for a 148-day time extension and $212,580 in costs that GSC contends are associated with warehouse building pads pursuantto a contract with the Department ofthe Army (R4, tab 1, tab 2 at 1-3). GSC requested the contracting officer's final decision by letter dated 18 February 2013, and clarified that request by letter dated 28 January 2014 (R4, tab 2 at 1-3). Neither letter was accompanied by the certificationrequired by the Contract Disputes Act, 41 U.S.C. § 7103(b)(l), for contractor claims ofmore than $100,000. Such certification is a prerequisite for Boardjurisdiction. NewportNews Shipbuilding & DryDock Co. v. Garrett, 6 F.3d 1547, 1552-53 (Fed. Cir. 1993); accord Truesdale Construction Co., ASBCA No. 33864, 88-1 BCA

### ii 20,222 at 102,416. Because GSC's claim is ofmore than $100,000, and is not certified, the Board does not possess jurisdictionto entertain this appeal.

1 Although this appeal has been consolidated with ASBCANos. 59402 and 59601, the government's motion pertains only to this appeal, ASBCANo. 59401.GSC contendsthat it certifiedthe claim on 26 June 2014 (in a certified claim that is the subject ofASBCA No. 59601, which GSC filed on 25 September 2014), and on 14 August 2014, but those certifications post-datethe 28 April 2014 contracting officer's final decision. Indeed, the 14 August 2014 certification also post-dates the 3 July 2014 filing ofthe appeal. Consequently, neither certification can cure the Board's lack of jurisdiction to entertain the appeal from the contracting officer's final decision. See RomarkIndustries, Inc., ASBCA No. 25153, 83-2 BCA**~** 16,788 at 83,436; Truesdale Construction,**88-1BCA~20,222** at 102,416 (post-appeal certification). GSC cites no authority to the contrary.
Forthese reasons, the motion to dismiss this appeal for lack of jurisdiction is granted, and the appeal is dismissed, withoutprejudice.
Dated: 11 February 2015

I concur

# ~~ MARKN. STEMPLER Administrative Judge Acting Chairman Armed Services Board ofContractAppeals Administrative Judge Armed Services Board ofContract Appeals
I concur

RICHARD SHACKLEFORD Administrative Judge Vice Chairman Armed Services Board ofContract Appeals
I certify that the foregoing is a true copy ofthe Opinion and Decision ofthe Armed Services Board ofContract Appeals in ASBCA No. 59401, Appeal ofGSC Construction, Inc., rendered in conformance with the Board's Charter.
Dated:

2 JEFFREYD. GARDIN Recorder, Armed Services Board ofContract Appeals