Document: 384 U.S. 394 86 S.Ct. 1545 16 L.Ed.2d 642 UNITED STATES, Petitioner,v.UTAH CONSTRUCTION AND MINING CO. No. 440. Argued March 23 and 24, 1966. Decided June 6, [Syllabus from pages 394-396 intentionally omitted] Irving Jaffe, Washington, D.C., for petitioner. Gardiner Johnson, San Francisco, Cal., respondent. Mr. Justice WHITE delivered the opinion of Court. 1 The typical construction contract between Government a private contractor provides an equitable adjustment price or appropriate extension time, both, if government orders permitted changes in work encounters changed conditions differing materially those ordinarily anticipated. Likewise, it is provided that shall not be terminated nor charged with liquidated damages he delayed completing by unforeseeable beyond his control, including acts Government. See Armed Services Procurement Regulations (hereinafter ASPR), 32 CFR §§ 7.602—3 to 7.602—5; Atomic Energy Commission AECPR), 41 s 9—7.5005—2.1 Article 15 'all disputes concerning questions fact arising under this contract' decided contracting officer subject written appeal head department, 'whose decision final conclusive upon parties thereto.' ASPR, § 7.602—6; AECPR, 9—7.5004—3.2 Appeals are characteristically heard board committee designated department agency. Should dissatisfied administrative bring Tucker Act suit breach Court Claims District Court, 28 U.S.C. 1346(a)(2) (1964 ed.), finality accorded finding clause limited provisions Wunderlich 1954 which directs such 'shall unless same fra(u)dulent capricious arbitrary so grossly erroneous as necessarily imply bad faith, supported substantial evidence.'3 With respect statutory provision we held United States v. Carlo Bianchi & Co., 373 709, 83 1409, 10 652, where evidentiary basis challenged suit, Congress did intend de novo determination facts court, must confine its review record made at time appeal. 2 issues case involve coverage recurring problem application certain findings during process. We granted certiorari because importance these administration contracts. 382 900, 234, 155. I. 3 contractor, Utah Construction Mining Company, executed 1953 build facility Commission. After project January 1955, filed 'Pier Drilling' claim, asked 4, 'changed conditions' clause. asserted had encountered float rock course excavating drilling which, among other things, increased costs work. Contrary officer, Advisory Board Contract found condition within meaning 4. But nevertheless denied request delay damages. It been incurred subcontractor rather than experienced was caused but dispute over quality concrete aggregate furnished Government, then before adjudication. 4 Another claim 'Shield Window' existence calling relief reason inadequate specifications drawings Additional compensation additional were demanded. there no compensation. However, involved result difficulties inherent new field fault either party, therefore authorized 9. 5 In contractor's subsequent contract, both Pier Drilling Shield Window claims alleging Government's unreasonable delay. view, regarding responsibility delays Claims. authority "disputes contract." That meant 'a rights given contract; (did) mean violation contract.' Constr. Co. v, States, 339 F.2d 606, 609—610, 168 Ct.Cl. 522, 527 (1964). Because clearly determine cause granting denying Articles 9, dissenting judge thought reviewable only on objected trial ordered majority. F.2d, 615, Ct.Cl., 537 (Davis, J.). 6 Claims' distinction has clarified holding extent complete available specific provision, clauses, controversy falls cannot tried contract. Morrison-Knudsen 345 833, 837, 170 757, 762 (1965). therefore, exhaust remedies would standards, applied Bianchi. also ruled when partial contract—e.g., 4—the exclusive may secure conduct unreasonable. Fuller 69 F.Supp. 409, 108 70, 90—102 (1947); Kehm Corp. 93 620, 119 454, 465—473 (1950). issue raised respecting whether factual have once properly determined administratively retried actions unavailable 7 significance third involves matter referred disposing claim. do elected purchase stockpile, discovering very shortly dirty poor understrength concrete. suspended directed temporary corrective procedures itself undertook more permanent remedial measures. claimed extra based aggregate, alleged rejected untimely. remarked, however, one unliquidated warranty delay, jurisdiction award monetary relief. Rejecting position even sought remedy 3, scope 'final' determination, 'change' 'excusable delay' 9 adjustable terms provisions, clause, proper court.4 II. 8 deal first treatment reasserts here Claims5 authorizes compels action connection all contract—Articles case—that contemplate occurrence specified contingencies. If correct, handling substandard From Anthony Grace Sons, Inc., U.S., p. 424, S.Ct., 1539, sustain, follow underlying reject position, judges power tribunal make rests specifically contained 15. This basic proposition does challenge; short signed 1953, neither could understood extended redressable clauses contract.6 Our conclusion examination uniform, continuous, long-standing judicial after question executed. Reference decisions justified many cases practical parties, (for frequently urged narrow various Boards Appeals),7 any event showing innumerable contractors relied presenting now forever barred interpretation contractual limitations presentation appeals.8 Beginning 1937, series prior execution established adjustments, extensions, authorizing accordingly need process pure through machinery filing court action. See, e.g., Phoenix Bridge 85 603, 629—630 (1937); Plato 665, 677—678 (1938); John A. Johnson Contracting 98 f.Supp. 154, 156, 707, 745 (1951); Continental Illinois Nat. Bank Trust Chicago 115 892, 897, 126 631, 640—641 (1953). continued view E.g., Railroad Waterproofing 137 713, 715—716, 133 911, 915—916 (1956); Ekco Products 312 768, 773, 160 75, 84 (1963); see Hunter C.C.F., 72,647 (D.C.E.D.N.C.1963), aff'd per curiam, 331 741 (C.A.4th Cir. 1964). 11 creation 1942, War Department quickly accepted principle cases, Boyer t/a Harry Boyer, Son p C.C.F. 53 (1943); Kirk Bldg. 67, 70—71 (1943), long settled practice refuse consider claims, Asbestos Wood Mfg. 203 (WDBCA 1944); Specer B. Lane 500, 505 Rust Engr. 1210 (NDBCA 1945). indeed, grudgingly concedes boards 'have frequently, perhaps usually,' declined jurisdiction. Such rulings legion, see, Dean 1965—2 B.C.A. 4888 (GSBCA 1965); Prototype Development, B.C.A., 4993 (ASBCA Electrical Builders, 1964 4377 (IBCA 1964); E. J. Pfotzer, 5144 (ENG BCA 1965), cited therein below, 616, n. 2, 538 J., concurring), include bodies appointed administer behalf Commission, agency case, Claremont Dkt. 64 (Feb. 14, 1955); Frontier 74 (July 1, 91 (Dec. 12, 1956); Tiberti CA—126 (May 1961); cf. Fick Foundry 5052, 23,786. AEC reaffirmed discussion respondent's supra, 403. 12 past standard authorize finally determine, grant for, related contracted work.9 Instead, attacks premised principles since cases. if, original matter, language might susceptible restrictive words 'arising used them 1953. us what intended, they erroneous. 13 alternative argument, limit described above availability remedy, contends without binding disputes. argument main unique charter Appeals, successor Appeals. Special attention ASBCA large caseload consequent model development Boards. 14 Originally WDBCA took jurisdiction, Shedd, Disputes Appeals: 29 Law Contemp. Prob. 39, 55 (1964), Secretary issued July 1944, memorandum directing Board, inter alia, '(f)ind out arises against expressing liability damages.' Fed.Reg. 9463. Similarly, present '(w)hen consideration appears cognizable may, insofar evidence permits, liability.' 30.1, App. A, Part I, 5. 17 will noted their face relies phase conclusively refute broader contention afford recognize some 'cognizable should express liability.10 Nor terms, provide support binding, distinguished advisory, fact. 18 1944 directive, retain hold hearing though expressly recognized 'doubtful * *.' Columbia Constructors, 942 1944). willingness theretofore keeping dual function adjudicatory body advisor exercised WDBCA, appeals advisory contracts designation representative hear appeals, generally Smith, Fed.B.J. 74, 77 sometimes investigated extraordinary Title II First Powers Act, Stat. 838 (1941), Ardmore 255, 265 Subsequently Constructors dismissed represented desire relief, thus confirming parties' understanding require prerequisite 1162 later special findings, intimation effect. Swords-McDougal 238 Fiske-Carter 415 1945); Hargrave 1113, 1120 19 evidenced narrower expression liability. merits jurisdictional accordance charter. Specialty Assembling Packing 1959—2 2370; W. Bateson 1962 3293; Metrig Corp., 1963 3658. Simmel-Industrie Meccaniche Societa Azioni, 1961—1 2917, '(t)he duty lacked appellant,' id., 15,233. interpreted 'appeals completed rule show motion dismiss.' Id., 15,235. More recently explained 20 '(g)enerally, sound policy, Board's discretionary right instances exercised, simply way logically flow found. wherein method confines described, inaptly, being our consider. Basically, lack dispose administratively.' Lenoir Finishing 4111, 20,061. 21 As indicates, ASBCA, like disclaimed effect solely provision. 15,235; 16,985. Since declared mandatory seem strange indeed interpret embodying administratively. 22 expand empower determinations fact, well ask purpose authority, pursuant it, can possibly serve. One obvious answer facilitate settlement For example, General Accounting Office, settle Budget 1921, 305, 42 31 71 procedure resolution disputes, Comp.Gen. 244, refuses undertake Comp.Gen.Dec. B—147326, May 25, 1962; B 149795, Jan. 1963. Accordingly, acceptance necessary requisite intervention GAO.11 Thus excludes coverage, purposes making standards novo. say powerful construing wider spectrum parties. argued, persuasively does, considerations initially led providing situations covered reading permitting requiring Moorman, 338 457, 70 288, 94 L.Ed. 256, imposed expected modification encompass unduly hinder contracting. attempted wholesale revision cover Instead acted create disestablish others fashioning contemplating reached 24 An example afforded times World II, (1941); 1951, 1257, contractors. Pursuant delegation President statute presently effect, Public 85—804, 72 972, 50 1431 departments agencies exercising functions national defense 'facilitate defense,' enter into amendments modifications regard law modifications. implemented departmental procurement regulations, 17.000 et seq.; 9—17.000 seq., conferred encompasses consideration, correction mutual mistakes, formalization informal commitments. respects analogous delegated Adjustment concerned separate regulations preclude resort powers 85—804 '(u)nless legal deemed lacking inadequate,' 17.205—1(b)(2), Army required Blaw-Knox ACAB 1019, Nov. 1960. Bendix 1050, Sept. 11, 1962, failure site body's Further, confirmed empowered consistently while themselves breaches presented 468 82 Doyle Russell, 4912, 23,220 (NASA BCA). quite evident predecessors military Congress.12 25 illustration disestablishment designed just here. response importunings following Court's ruling Rice, 317 61, 63 120, 87 53, 'Suspension Work' adopted use contracts, T. C. 1960—1 2552 1960), 12,347—12,348,13 allowance numerous A extensive 'Price Suspension, Delays, Interruption Work,' 7.604—3, promulgated 1961 optional Defense fixed-price Effective April 1965, ASPR 7—602.46,14 Committee proposed supply well. Kelly, Contractors' Remedies: Regulatory Reform, Admin.L.Rev. 145, 148—152 Interagency Task Group currently reviewing form, Changes, Changed Conditions Suspension Work expanded prevent fragmentation remedies. Federal Contracts Report, 79, Aug. 23, pp. A—6—A—7. While said broadening dissatisfaction unavailability taken measured form manifested reliance tended reinforce it. remarked Simmel-Industrie, '(i)t noteworthy intended delays, developed set forth purpose,' 15,234. 26 Finally, note Clause illustrates clause; indicates compelling overturning late stage. Inclusion naturally limits area falling outside framework expansive existing clauses. member remarked: 27 '* started several years ago adding convert otherwise payable and, hence, regarded trend point becoming indeed. Also increasing tendency give broad vehicles meritorious claims. Decisions dismisses involving increasingly rare.' reasons stated covers relating III. unable accept, disposition Although two requests extensions called facts. satisfy policies general collateral estoppel. 30 Both categorically state relevant parties.15 There room others. disregard agreement conclude, did, decide, accept appropriately obviously another board. permit erosion behind Any couched language.16 scheme too easily avoided party compel relitigation mere exercise semantics. Certainly, held, refusing give, sufficiently supported, labeling refusal asserting primary law, 757; Allied Paint Color Works, Inc. Cir., 309 133. agreed conclusive, disregarded sues give. requires. adjudicating reviewed record. result, avoids needless duplication hearings heavy burden expense litigation end,'17 717, 1415, encourages disclosure level, back litigation. H.R.Rep. 1380, 83d Cong., 2d Sess., (1954). These finality, damages, valid already resolving under' 33 modified reach harmonious estoppel.18 Occasionally courts res judicata apply proceedings,19 certainly broad.20 When acting capacity resolved disputed adequate opportunity litigate, hesitated enforce repose. Sunshine Anthracite Coal Adkins, 310 381, 60 907, 1263; Hanover 285 455, 152 391; Fairmont Aluminum Commissioner Internal Revenue, 222 622; Seatrain Lines, Pennsylvania R. 207 255.21 Goldstein Doft, 236 730, 353 484, cert. denied, 383 960, 1226, estoppel arbitrator. 34 considered full fair argue version seek adverse findings. is, justification second matters parties.22 35 light above, affirm reverse Board. ordered. 36 Affirmed part reversed part. read follows: 'Article 3. Changes.— 'The order, notice sureties, and/or thereof. increase decrease amount due performance, writing accordingly. article days date change ordered: Provided, determines justify action, receive consider, approval duly representative, adjust fail agree hereof. nothing excuse proceeding prosecution changed. conditions.— 'Should encounter, discover, progress subsurface latent shown drawing indicated specifications, unknown unusual nature inhering character plans immediately disturbed. thereupon promptly investigate conditions, finds differ cost difference resulting conditions. Delays—Damages.— 'If fails prosecute work, separable thereof, diligence insure completion terminate proceed take completion, otherwise, sureties liable excess occasioned thereby. terminated, possession utilize materials, appliances, plant therefor. proceed, continue impossible actual lieu thereof pay fixed, agreed, each calendar day until accompaning papers thereof: causes control negligence including, restricted to, God, public enemy, performance fires, floods, epidemics, quarantine restrictions, strikes, freight embargoes, unusually severe weather subcontractors causes, beginning (unless further period contract) notify who ascertain extend judgment extension, thereon hereto, appeal, days, whose hereto.' instant reads: Disputes.— 'Except thereto. meantime diligently directed.' '(N)o entered conclusiveness pleaded limiting fraud official alleged: fradulent (sic) evidence. 'Sec. 2. No contain official, board.' 68 81, 321—322 ed.). decide condition' Commissioner. hold, fell erroneously refused untimely, proceedings completed. latter 439, 1539. Before contrary position. 7, infra. makes particular converted 757 (1965); 147 ease reference term 'breach claims' refer provisions. attorney appearing moved dismiss ground fall By contrast, six years. 2501 assert NASA 'apparently asserts contract,' citing 1965 4912. recognizing 20,060—20,061. Of foundation compromise Boards, text, whole settlement, early belief officers abandoned. Cannon 319 173, 162 (1963). established, continues, error differentiate advance bound power, agreement, mutually differences. escaped although subscribes negotiate settlements negotiation settlement. 20,061; accord, McShain, 1965—1 4844 (GSBCA). reports indicate aware 'to waive provisions' '(a)mendments losses resulted inequitable H.R.Rep.No.2232, 85th (1958); S.Rep.No.2281, (1958), Code Congressional Administrative News, 4043. House subcommittee employed proper. (1958). clear type normal procedures, necessitating 85—804. provided: Officer order Contractor suspend him desirable convenience Unless suspension unreasonably loss Contractor, allowed. length causing loss, modify accordingly.' Barnet Brezner, 2895, 15,119 (ASBCA). 2552, 12,319 provides: '(a) '(b) If, suspended, delayed, interrupted act (or reasonable time), (excluding profit) suspension, interruption, prevented interrupted. allowed (i) twenty notified (but requirement issued), (ii) stated, soon practicable termination interruption payment clause.' course, whatsoever. supra; 617, 539—540 (dissenting Judge Davis). 611, 530, addition adjective 'unreasonable' felt sufficient transform rejected. supra. observed, testimony three transcript runs 453 length. Davis, dissent wrote: 'This policy nourishes doctrine reluctant, principal genesis boards. Bianchi, dispel doubts. Supreme plain (and representatives) fact-finders competence, Interstate Commerce Trade National Labor Relations purposes. Bianchi's evaluation squint crabbed board's stayed sphere, fact-finding (in received, valid, independent agencies. Under modern latter, least capacity, final, directly proceeding, good inquiry 566 (of Revenue), 622, 627 (4th 1955). majority offers re-trial discarded opinion.' 618, 541—542. quoted similar arbitrator, Bower Eastern Airlines, 214 623, 626. Pearson Williams, 202 281, 608, 1029; Churchill Tabernacle FCC, 81 U.S.App.D.C. 411, 244. generally, Treatise 18.01—18.12 Groner Sternstein, Res Judicata Law, 39 Iowa L.Rev. 300 Revenue Sunnen, 333 591, 715, 92 898, International Building 502, 73 807, 97 1182, contemplated applied. Had forfeited 'under But, introduction

Category: 8