ASBCA Holds That Contractor Entitled to Recover Costs of Preparing to Perform, When CO Terminated Contract Before Notice to Proceed
Client Alert | 1 min read | 09.27.17
In Appeal of Pro-Built Construction Firm (ASBCA No. 59278), the Board found that the contractor was entitled to recover nearly $290,000, even though Pro-Built never actually performed the contract. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers contracted with Pro-Built to construct a police station in Afghanistan, but eight months later, terminated the contract for convenience, before the USACE ever issued a notice to proceed with construction to Pro-Built. After the USACE determined Pro-Built was entitled to $48,972 in reimbursable costs, Pro-Built appealed to the Board, arguing it was also entitled to direct labor and subcontractor costs as well as lost profit. In rejecting the USACE’s argument that it was unreasonable to incur “standby” costs prior to the NTP, the Board found that Pro-Built was entitled to three months of these costs and lost profit, holding that it was reasonable for Pro-Built to have staff on standby for three – not eight – months, and Pro-Built properly determined it was in its best interest to retain personnel and subcontractors in advance of construction due to the labor market and security situation in Afghanistan.
Contacts
Insights
Client Alert | 3 min read | 11.21.25
On November 7, 2025, in Thornton v. National Academy of Sciences, No. 25-cv-2155, 2025 WL 3123732 (D.D.C. Nov. 7, 2025), the District Court for the District of Columbia dismissed a False Claims Act (FCA) retaliation complaint on the basis that the plaintiff’s allegations that he was fired after blowing the whistle on purported illegally discriminatory use of federal funding was not sufficient to support his FCA claim. This case appears to be one of the first filed, and subsequently dismissed, following Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche’s announcement of the creation of the Civil Rights Fraud Initiative on May 19, 2025, which “strongly encourages” private individuals to file lawsuits under the FCA relating to purportedly discriminatory and illegal use of federal funding for diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives in violation of Executive Order 14173, Ending Illegal Discrimination and Restoring Merit-Based Opportunity (Jan. 21, 2025). In this case, the court dismissed the FCA retaliation claim and rejected the argument that an organization could violate the FCA merely by “engaging in discriminatory conduct while conducting a federally funded study.” The analysis in Thornton could be a sign of how forthcoming arguments of retaliation based on reporting allegedly fraudulent DEI activity will be analyzed in the future.
Client Alert | 3 min read | 11.20.25
Client Alert | 3 min read | 11.20.25
Client Alert | 6 min read | 11.19.25
