The Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals (ASBCA) released for publication October 21 its decision on an appeal of a default termination of Huffman Construction, LLC on a U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) pumping station in De Valls Bluff, Arkansas. Beyond granting the motion to strike for fictitious case law and false citations to the record, the opinion says nothing further about AI.

While this case will be covered in more detail in a future CCRM case summary, it’s posted now because contractors and their attorneys need to be very wary of the use of AI. Ultimately, spoiler alert, the Board denied the appeal and upheld the default termination.

The decision also includes a detailed review of the CPM schedule analyses performed by the parties’ scheduling experts. The Board found the Corps’ expert’s retrospective delay analysis reliable because it relied on unaltered, contemporaneous schedule updates. As described in the opinion, the analysis followed AACE Recommended Practice No. 29R-03, Forensic Schedule Analysis, Method Implementation Protocol (MIP) 3.3, commonly known as a contemporaneous observational windows analysis. By contrast, the Board found the contractor’s analysis—which appeared to use an impacted as-planned approach—not credible for several reasons.

A copy of the Board’s decision can be downloaded by clicking on the link below.