1. Home
  2. |Insights
  3. |If It’s Not One Thing, It’s Another: Claiming Alternative Sums Not Fatal Under CDA

If It’s Not One Thing, It’s Another: Claiming Alternative Sums Not Fatal Under CDA

Client Alert | 1 min read | 12.24.20

In Constellation NewEnergy, Inc., ASBCA No. 62518 (December 8, 2020), the Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals addressed whether a claim satisfied the Contract Disputes Act’s “sum certain” requirement when it listed two alternative amounts of recovery.  The contractor initially submitted a “Change Order Request” in which it sought (1) a certain amount for completed work, and (2) also stated that additional work could be completed for a greater amount.  A Navy contract specialist responded, in part, that the Government did not want to pursue or order the proposed additional work.  The contractor later converted the submission into a claim for the performed work, without amending the proposed amounts.  The contracting officer issued a final decision in which she noted that she was only addressing the amount sought for the performed work.  On appeal, the Board requested that the parties address whether the “sum certain” requirement was met.  The Navy moved to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction.  The Board ultimately held that the requirement was met because the contracting officer understood what amount had actually been claimed.  Specifically, when issuing the decision, the contracting officer recognized that the second, additional amount was not part of the dispute because the Government had declined to order the proposed work.  This decision affirms the Board’s precedents maintaining jurisdiction over claims that present an alternative sum certain, where the amount sought is understood and/or can be calculated.

Insights

Client Alert | 7 min read | 12.17.25

CARB Proposes Regulations Implementing California GHG Emissions and Climate-Related Financial Risk Reporting Laws

After hosting a series of workshops and issuing multiple rounds of materials, including enforcement notices, checklists, templates, and other guidance, the California Air Resources Board (CARB) has proposed regulations to implement the Climate Corporate Data Accountability Act (SB 253) and the Climate-Related Financial Risk Act (SB 261) (both as amended by SB 219), which require large U.S.-based businesses operating in California to disclose greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and climate-related risks. CARB also published a Notice of Public Hearing and an Initial Statement of Reasons along with the proposed regulations. While CARB’s final rules were statutorily required to be promulgated by July 1, 2025, these are still just proposals. CARB’s proposed rules largely track earlier guidance regarding how CARB intends to define compliance obligations, exemptions, and key deadlines, and establish fee programs to fund regulatory operations....