______________________________________________ MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION GRANTED: October 13, 1995 ______________________________________________ GSBCA 12215-R P.J. DICK, INCORPORATED, Appellant, v. GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION, Respondent. John T. Flynn and Thomas J. Kelleher, Jr., of Smith, Currie & Hancock, Atlanta, GA, counsel for Appellant. Sharon A. Roach, Gerald L. Schrader, Martin A. Hom, Robert C. Smith, and M. Leah Wright, Office of General Counsel, General Services Administration, Washington, DC, counsel for Respondent. Before Board Judges DANIELS (Chairman), BORWICK, and NEILL. BORWICK, Board Judge. Appellant, P.J. Dick, Incorporated, seeks reconsideration of our decision in P.J. Dick Inc. v. General Services Administra- tion, GSBCA 12215, 95-1 BCA 27,574. There we determined that GSA was entitled to a credit of $1,220,315.50 for termination of a substantial portion of the fourth floor work on a contract for renovation of certain floors of the Post Office and Courthouse in Pittsburgh, PA. In making our determination, we concluded that the Government was entitled to deduct overhead and profit; we determined the reasonable profit and commission rate to be ten percent, based upon the rate of profit and commission P.J. Dick used for its change order work. Id. at 137,417. We grant reconsideration and modify our earlier decision. We now deter- mine that eight percent is the more appropriate rate of profit for estimated contractor work and commission on estimated subcon- tracted work for this large termination claim. We also grant reconsideration as it pertains to the calculation of the amount of the credit; we made a computational error in applying commis- sion, profit and overhead to the estimated direct costs of P.J. Dick and its subcontractors. Discussion P.J. Dick seeks reconsideration of the ten percent profit rate, arguing that on major changes, GSA paid eight percent, not ten percent profit. We grant reconsideration on this point and determine that the more appropriate commission and profit rate is eight percent, based upon the parties' agreement on that rate for a large asbestos change order, contract modification AC17. P.J. Dick, Inc. v. General Services Administration, GSBCA 11772, 94-3 BCA 27,266, at 135,850-51 (Finding of Facts 40, 46). The rate of eight percent, moreover, is in line with P.J. Dick's expecta- tion of between seven and eight percent profit when it bid the job. P.J. Dick, Inc., 95-1 BCA at 137,417 (Finding of Fact 8). P.J. Dick points out a mathematical computation error. In our original opinion, in calculating the credit due GSA for the fourth floor termination, we erroneously applied P.J. Dick's profit and commission to that portion of the t erminated work to be performed by subcontractors as well as to that portion of the terminated work to be performed by P.J. Dick. We did not break out P.J Dick's portion of the work from the subcontractor portion of the work, and give GSA credit for profit and overhead only for work to be performed by P.J. Dick's own forces. We thus failed to follow the formula of the equitable adjustment clause in pricing the deductive change. We correct our calculation, using DCAA audit figures, which we accepted in our original decision as determinative of the amount owed. See Appellant's Motion for Reconsideration, Exhibit B. The correct breakout, using DCAA audit figures, follows: P.J. Dick's Work P.J. Dick Direct Cost $60,285.00 P.J. Dick Overhead @ 15% 9,042.75 Subtotal $69,327.75 P.J. Dick Profit @ 8% 5,546.22 Total $74,873.97 Subcontracted Work Subcontracted work $908,698.00 Less Marble Credit (24,700.00)[foot #] 1 Subtotal $883,998.00 P.J. Dick Commission @ 8% 70,719.84 Total $954,717.84 Totals Credit for P.J. Dick's Direct Cost $74,873.97 Credit for subcontractor's work $954,717.84 Subtotal $1,029,591.61 Less settlement expenses (10,748.00) Subtotal $1,018,843.61 Bond, Insurance and B&O Tax @ 1.912% 19,480.29 Marble settlement 30,000.00 Total Credit $1,068,324.10 Decision Appellant's motion for reconsideration is GRANTED and our decision modified accordingly. GSA is entitled to a credit of $1,068,324.10 for termination of the fourth floor work. ________________________________ ANTHONY S. BORWICK Board Judge We concur: ____________________________ _________________________________ STEPHEN M. DANIELS EDWIN B. NEILL Board Judge Board Judge ----------- FOOTNOTE BEGINS --------- [foot #] 1 In its motion, P.J. Dick uses a credit for marble restoration work of $24,000, which it thinks DCAA used. We found, however, that DCAA took no exception to the credit of $24,700 sought by P.J. Dick for the marble restoration. See Appeal File, GSBCA 12130, Exhibit 324, Recapitulation, at 2; P.J. ____ Dick, Inc., 95-1 BCA at 137,414-15. __________