Meltech Corporation, Inc.

ASBCA No. 61765 · Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals · January 6, 2026 · No. ASBCA No. 61765

Summary

The Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals denied Meltech Corporation, Inc.'s appeal seeking compensation and additional contract time for alleged delays resulting from changes to Fort Meade's base-access and badging procedures. The Board held that the access-policy changes were public and general sovereign acts for which the government was not liable for monetary damages. It also concluded that Meltech failed to prove government-caused delays warranting a contract time extension.

Court
Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals
Writing for the Court
Stephanie Cates-Harman; Owen C. Wilson; Michael N. O'Connell
Jurisdiction
Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals
Decision date
January 6, 2026
Docket number
ASBCA No. 61765
Procedural posture
Contractor appealed to the Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals from the contracting officer's deemed denial of a claim for equitable adjustment and contract time extension arising from Fort Meade base-access and badging changes.
Standard of review
The appellant bore the burden of proving that government-caused delays entitled it to compensation or an extension of the contract performance period.
Precedential value
Published Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals opinion
Parties
Meltech Corporation, Inc. v. United States, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Disposition
denied

Topics

government contractscontract disputes actconstruction lawadministrative lawcontracts

Practice areas

government contractscontract disputesconstruction contractsmilitary installation access

Questions Presented

  1. Whether Fort Meade's changed base-access and security procedures constituted sovereign acts that barred Meltech's claim for monetary compensation.
  2. Whether Meltech proved that the base-access changes caused compensable project delays or entitled it to an extension of the contract performance period.
  3. Whether Meltech established that the access requirements were unreasonable or caused additional costs and delay attributable to USACE.

Holdings

  1. The implementation of Fort Meade's new access procedures was a public and general sovereign act undertaken for general security purposes, not to nullify contract rights or obtain an economic advantage; therefore, the government was not liable for monetary damages resulting from the policy.
  2. Although a contractor may in some circumstances receive additional performance time despite a sovereign act, Meltech was not entitled to an extension because it failed to prove that USACE caused or contributed to the claimed delays.

Key quotations

We conclude that the implementation of the “New Installation Access Procedures” effective April 4, 2016, by the Fort Meade Director, Directorate, Plans, Training, Mobilization, and Security, was a sovereign act, and the government is not liable for damages that this decision may have caused. (9-10)
Meltech has not met its burden of showing that USACE caused or contributed to the delay by the implementation of the new base access security procedures. (13)
For these and other reasons recited in our findings, we conclude that Meltech has not demonstrated that the additional security requirements to obtain access to Fort Meade were unreasonable or whether they caused it to incur any delays or additional costs. (13)

Factual background

USACE awarded Meltech a firm-fixed-price task order to renovate Building 8609 at Fort Meade. Fort Meade changed its installation-access procedures in 2016, requiring passes, background checks, additional documentation, and eventually contractor responsibility for sponsorship, escorts, and delivery-driver badging. Meltech sought compensation and an extension for alleged delays, but the evidence showed late, incomplete, and inaccurate submissions, insufficient documentation of project impacts, and no reliable analysis separating base-access delays from contractor-caused delays. The Board also found that the access changes were general security measures applicable to all visitors and were not directed specifically at Meltech.

Procedural history

Meltech submitted a request for equitable adjustment on November 1, 2017, and converted it to a claim on April 30, 2018. The contracting officer did not issue a final decision, and Meltech timely appealed on a deemed-denial basis on August 23, 2018. The appeal was consolidated with fourteen related appeals, and the Board held a nine-day videoconference hearing. The Board denied Appeal No. 61765.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…