(1) In general.— The decision of an agency board is final, except that—
(A)a contractor may appeal the decision to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit within 120 days from the date the contractor receives a copy of the decision; or
(B)if an agency head determines that an appeal should be taken, the agency head, with the prior approval of the Attorney General, may transmit the decision to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit for judicial review under section
1295 of title
28, within 120 days from the date the agency receives a copy of the decision.
(2) Tennessee valley authority.— Notwithstanding paragraph (1), a decision of the board of contract appeals of the Tennessee Valley Authority is final, except that—
(A)a contractor may appeal the decision to a United States district court pursuant to section
1337 of title
28, within 120 days from the date the contractor receives a copy of the decision; or
(B)the Tennessee Valley Authority may appeal the decision to a United States district court pursuant to section
1337 of title
28, within 120 days from the date of the decision.
(3) Review of arbitration.— An award by an arbitrator under this chapter shall be reviewed pursuant to sections
13 of title
9, except that the court may set aside or limit any award that is found to violate limitations imposed by Federal statute.
(b) Finality of Agency Board Decisions on Questions of Law and Fact.— Notwithstanding any contract provision, regulation, or rule of law to the contrary, in an appeal by a contractor or the Federal Government from the decision of an agency board pursuant to subsection (a)—
(1)the decision of the agency board on a question of law is not final or conclusive; but
(2)the decision of the agency board on a question of fact is final and conclusive and may not be set aside unless the decision is—
(A)fraudulent, arbitrary, or capricious;
(B)so grossly erroneous as to necessarily imply bad faith; or
(C)not supported by substantial evidence.
(c) Remand.— In an appeal by a contractor or the Federal Government from the decision of an agency board pursuant to subsection (a), the court may render an opinion and judgment and remand the case for further action by the agency board or by the executive agency as appropriate, with direction the court considers just and proper.
(d) Consolidation.— If 2 or more actions arising from one contract are filed in the United States Court of Federal Claims and one or more agency boards, for the convenience of parties or witnesses or in the interest of justice, the United States Court of Federal Claims may order the consolidation of the actions in that court or transfer any actions to or among the agency boards involved.
(e) Judgments as to Fewer Than All Claims or Parties.— In an action filed pursuant to this chapter involving 2 or more claims, counterclaims, cross-claims, or third-party claims, and where a portion of one of the claims can be divided for purposes of decision or judgment, and in any action where multiple parties are involved, the court, whenever appropriate, may enter a judgment as to one or more but fewer than all of the claims or portions of claims or parties.
(f) Advisory Opinions.—
(1) In general.— Whenever an action involving an issue described in paragraph (2) is pending in a district court of the United States, the district court may request an agency board to provide the court with an advisory opinion on the matters of contract interpretation under consideration.
(2) Applicable issue.— An issue referred to in paragraph (1) is any issue that could be the proper subject of a final decision of a contracting officer appealable under this chapter.
(3) Referral to agency board with jurisdiction.— A district court shall direct a request under paragraph (1) to the agency board having jurisdiction under this chapter to adjudicate appeals of contract claims under the contract being interpreted by the court.
(4) Timely response.— After receiving a request for an advisory opinion under paragraph (1), an agency board shall provide the advisory opinion in a timely manner to the district court making the request.
Pub. L. 95–563, § 10(c), Nov. 1, 1978, 92 Stat. 2388; Pub. L. 97–164, title I, § 157, Apr. 2, 1982, 96 Stat. 47.
Pub. L. 95–563, § 10(d), Nov. 1, 1978, 92 Stat. 2388; Pub. L. 97–164, title I, § 160(a)(15), Apr. 2, 1982, 96 Stat. 48.
Pub. L. 95–563, § 10(f), as added Pub. L. 103–355, title II, § 2354, Oct. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 3323.
In subsection (a)(1)(B), the words “may transmit” are substituted for “transmits” to correct the grammatical structure of the provision in accordance with the probable intent of Congress. The words “the decision” are substituted for “the decision of the board of contract appeals” and for “the board’s decision” to eliminate unnecessary words and for consistency with 41:607(g)(1)(A).
In subsection (a)(2)(B), the words “in any case” are omitted as unnecessary.
In subsection (d), the words “United States Court of Federal Claims” are substituted for “United States Claims Court” because of section 902(b)(1) of the Federal Courts Administration Act of 1992 (Pub. L. 102–572, 106 Stat. 4516, 28 U.S.C. 171 note).
In subsection (f)(1), (3), and (4), the words “agency board” are substituted for “board of contract appeals” to eliminate unnecessary words and for consistency with the definition of “agency board” in section 7101 of the revised title.
In subsection (f)(1), the words “under consideration” are substituted for “at issue” to avoid potential confusion with the words “issue described in paragraph (2)”.
The table below lists the classification updates, since Jan. 3, 2012, for this section. Updates to a broader range of sections may be found at the update page for containing chapter, title, etc.
The most recent Classification Table update that we have noticed was Tuesday, August 13, 2013
An empty table indicates that we see no relevant changes listed in the classification tables. If you suspect that our system may be missing something, please double-check with the Office of the Law Revision Counsel.