{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\uc1\deff0\stshfdbch0\stshfloch0\stshfhich0\stshfbi0\deflang1033\deflangfe1033{\fonttbl{\f0\froman\fcharset0\fprq2{\*\panose 02020603050405020304}Times New Roman;} {\f36\fnil\fcharset0\fprq2{\*\panose 00000400000000000000}WP TypographicSymbols{\*\falt Courier New};}{\f169\froman\fcharset238\fprq2 Times New Roman CE;}{\f170\froman\fcharset204\fprq2 Times New Roman Cyr;} {\f172\froman\fcharset161\fprq2 Times New Roman Greek;}{\f173\froman\fcharset162\fprq2 Times New Roman Tur;}{\f174\froman\fcharset177\fprq2 Times New Roman (Hebrew);}{\f175\froman\fcharset178\fprq2 Times New Roman (Arabic);} {\f176\froman\fcharset186\fprq2 Times New Roman Baltic;}{\f177\froman\fcharset163\fprq2 Times New Roman (Vietnamese);}}{\colortbl;\red0\green0\blue0;\red0\green0\blue255;\red0\green255\blue255;\red0\green255\blue0;\red255\green0\blue255; \red255\green0\blue0;\red255\green255\blue0;\red255\green255\blue255;\red0\green0\blue128;\red0\green128\blue128;\red0\green128\blue0;\red128\green0\blue128;\red128\green0\blue0;\red128\green128\blue0;\red128\green128\blue128;\red192\green192\blue192;} {\stylesheet{\ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext0 Normal;}{\*\cs10 \additive \ssemihidden Default Paragraph Font;}{\* \ts11\tsrowd\trftsWidthB3\trpaddl108\trpaddr108\trpaddfl3\trpaddft3\trpaddfb3\trpaddfr3\tscellwidthfts0\tsvertalt\tsbrdrt\tsbrdrl\tsbrdrb\tsbrdrr\tsbrdrdgl\tsbrdrdgr\tsbrdrh\tsbrdrv \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs20\lang1024\langfe1024\cgrid\langnp1024\langfenp1024 \snext11 \ssemihidden Normal Table;}{\*\cs15 \additive \sbasedon10 \ssemihidden footnote reference;}}{\*\rsidtbl \rsid1010913 \rsid4028744\rsid9508377\rsid14222409\rsid14422613\rsid14504298}{\*\generator Microsoft Word 10.0.6764;}{\info{\title IN THE SUPREME COURT OF GUAM}{\author lroberto}{\operator blake_r}{\creatim\yr2005\mo8\dy12\hr9\min2}{\revtim\yr2006\mo3\dy14\hr14\min3} {\version5}{\edmins2}{\nofpages9}{\nofwords3486}{\nofchars19871}{\*\company Superior Court of Guam}{\nofcharsws23311}{\vern16391}}\margl1440\margr1440 \widowctrl\ftnbj\aenddoc\notabind\wraptrsp\transmf\noxlattoyen\expshrtn\noultrlspc\dntblnsbdb\nospaceforul\truncatefontheight\subfontbysize\sprsbsp\wpjst\lytprtmet\hyphcaps0\horzdoc\dghspace120\dgvspace120\dghorigin1701\dgvorigin1984\dghshow0\dgvshow3 \jcompress\viewkind4\viewscale100\nolnhtadjtbl\rsidroot14504298 \fet0{\*\ftnsep \pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\insrsid14504298 \chftnsep \par }}{\*\ftnsepc \pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\insrsid14504298 \chftnsepc \par }}{\*\aftnsep \pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\insrsid14504298 \chftnsep \par }}{\*\aftnsepc \pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\insrsid14504298 \chftnsepc \par }}\sectd \sbknone\linex0\headery1440\footery1440\sectdefaultcl\sectrsid14504298\sftnbj {\header \pard\plain \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\i\fs20\insrsid14504298 Pacific Rock Corp. v. Department of Educ.}{\fs20\insrsid14504298 , Opinion Page }{\field{\*\fldinst {\fs20\insrsid14504298 PAGE }}{\fldrslt { \fs20\lang1024\langfe1024\noproof\insrsid14222409 9}}}{\fs20\insrsid14504298 of 14 \par \par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\sl-16\slmult0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 {\lang1024\langfe1024\noproof\insrsid14222409 {\shp{\*\shpinst\shpleft1440\shptop0\shpright10800\shpbottom16\shpfhdr1\shpbxpage\shpbxignore\shpbypara\shpbyignore\shpwr3\shpwrk0\shpfblwtxt1\shpz0\shplockanchor\shplid2049{\sp{\sn shapeType}{\sv 1}}{\sp{\sn fFlipH}{\sv 0}}{\sp{\sn fFlipV}{\sv 0}} {\sp{\sn fillColor}{\sv 0}}{\sp{\sn fillBackColor}{\sv 0}}{\sp{\sn fFilled}{\sv 1}}{\sp{\sn lineWidth}{\sv 0}}{\sp{\sn fLine}{\sv 0}}{\sp{\sn fShadow}{\sv 0}}{\sp{\sn posrelh}{\sv 1}}{\sp{\sn fLayoutInCell}{\sv 0}}{\sp{\sn fBehindDocument}{\sv 1}} {\sp{\sn fLayoutInCell}{\sv 0}}}{\shprslt{\*\do\dobxpage\dobypara\dodhgt0\dprect\dpx1440\dpy0\dpxsize9360\dpysize16\dpfillfgcr0\dpfillfgcg0\dpfillfgcb0\dpfillbgcr0\dpfillbgcg0\dpfillbgcb0\dpfillpat1\dplinehollow}}}}{\fs20\insrsid14504298 \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\sl-240\slmult0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 {\fs20\insrsid14504298 \par }}{\*\pnseclvl1\pnucrm\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxta .}}{\*\pnseclvl2\pnucltr\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxta .}}{\*\pnseclvl3\pndec\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxta .}}{\*\pnseclvl4\pnlcltr\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxta )}} {\*\pnseclvl5\pndec\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}{\*\pnseclvl6\pnlcltr\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}{\*\pnseclvl7\pnlcrm\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}{\*\pnseclvl8 \pnlcltr\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}{\*\pnseclvl9\pnlcrm\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}\pard\plain \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4028744 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\b\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF GUAM}{\insrsid4028744 \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4028744 {\insrsid4028744 \par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4028744 {\b\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 PACIFIC ROCK CORPORATION}{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 \par }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 Plaintiff-Appellee}{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4028744 {\b\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 \par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4028744 {\b\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 vs. \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4028744 {\b\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 \par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4028744 {\b\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, \par a department of the Executive Branch \par of the Government of Guam, \par an unincorporated Territory of the \par UNITED STATES OF AMERICA}{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 \par }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 Defendant-Appellant}{\insrsid4028744 \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4028744 {\insrsid4028744 \par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4028744 {\b\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 AMENDED OPINION}{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 \par }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 (The title page of this opinion was amended pursuant to a }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 Notice of \par Amendment to the Title Page of The Opinion Issued on June 2, 2000)}{\insrsid4028744 \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4028744 {\insrsid4028744 \par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4028744 {\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 Supreme Court Case No. CVA98-0003 \par Superior Court Case}{\b\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 No. CV1668-94}{\b\insrsid4028744 \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4028744 {\b\insrsid4028744 \par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4028744 {\b\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 Filed:}{\b\insrsid4028744 }{\b\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 June 2, 2000 \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4028744 {\b\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 \par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4028744 {\b\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 Cite as:}{\b\insrsid4028744 }{\b\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 2000 Guam 19}{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4028744 {\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 \par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4028744 {\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 Appeal from the Superior Court of Guam \par Argued and submitted on August 11, 1999 \par Hag\'e5t\'f1a, Guam}{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4028744 {\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 \par }\trowd \irow0\irowband0\lastrow \ts11\trqc\trgaph120\trleft-120\trftsWidth1\trpaddl120\trpaddr120\trpaddfl3\trpaddfr3\tblrsid4028744 \clvertalt\clbrdrt\brdrtbl \clbrdrl\brdrtbl \clbrdrb\brdrtbl \clbrdrr\brdrtbl \cltxlrtb\clftsWidth3\clwWidth4950\clshdrawnil \cellx4830\clvertalt\clbrdrt\brdrtbl \clbrdrl\brdrtbl \clbrdrb\brdrtbl \clbrdrr\brdrtbl \cltxlrtb\clftsWidth3\clwWidth4410\clshdrawnil \cellx9240\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\intbl\faauto\rin0\lin0\pararsid4028744 {\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 \par }{\ul\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 Appearing for the Plaintiff-Appellee}{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 : \par Thomas M. Tarpley, Jr., Esq. \par A Professional Corporation \par Suite 201, American Life Building \par 137 Murray Boulevard \par Hag\'e5t\'f1a, Guam 96910\cell \par }{\ul\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 Appearing for the Defendants-Appellants}{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 : \par Michael F. Phillips, Esq. \par Phillips & Bordallo, P.C. \par 410 West O'Brien Drive \par Hag\'e5t\'f1a, Guam 96910 \par \cell }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\intbl\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0 {\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 \trowd \irow0\irowband0\lastrow \ts11\trqc\trgaph120\trleft-120\trftsWidth1\trpaddl120\trpaddr120\trpaddfl3\trpaddfr3\tblrsid4028744 \clvertalt\clbrdrt\brdrtbl \clbrdrl\brdrtbl \clbrdrb\brdrtbl \clbrdrr\brdrtbl \cltxlrtb\clftsWidth3\clwWidth4950\clshdrawnil \cellx4830\clvertalt\clbrdrt\brdrtbl \clbrdrl\brdrtbl \clbrdrb\brdrtbl \clbrdrr\brdrtbl \cltxlrtb\clftsWidth3\clwWidth4410\clshdrawnil \cellx9240\row }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4028744 {\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 \par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4028744 {\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 BEFORE: BENJAMIN J.F. CRUZ, Chief Justice; EDWARD S. TERLAJE and HOWARD TRAPP,}{\cs15\super\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 \chftn {\footnote \pard\plain \qj \fi720\li0\ri0\sa240\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\cs15\super\insrsid14504298 \chftn }{\fs20\insrsid14504298 Justice }{\i\fs20\insrsid14504298 Pro Tempore }{ \fs20\insrsid14504298 Trapp heard oral arguments in this case but disqualified himself from deciding the matter prior to issuance of this opinion and did not join in it. }}}{\insrsid4028744 }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 Justices }{ \i\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 Pro Tempore}{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 .}{\insrsid4028744 \par \par }{\b\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 CRUZ, C.J.:}{\b\insrsid14504298 \par }{\b\insrsid4028744\charrsid4028744 \par }{\b\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 [1]\tab }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 Appellant Department of Education (}{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{ \insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 DOE}{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 ) appeals the trial court}{\insrsid14422613\charrsid4028744 '}{ \insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 s judgment in favor of Appellee Pacific Rock Corporation (}{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 PRC}{ \insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 ).}{\insrsid4028744 }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 Pacific Rock Corporation filed suit under the Government Claims Act, 5 GCA }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 6101 }{ \i\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 et seq.}{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 , praying for final payment of, and an equitable adjustment to, the contract sum of a contract procured pursuant to the Procurement Law, 5 GCA }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 5001 }{\i\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 et seq.}{\insrsid4028744 }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 The trial court invoked jurisdiction under the Government Claims Act and awarded PRC $219,682.34 for cost overruns and $284,363.00 owing under the original contract, as well as prejudgment interest and post-judgment interest.}{\insrsid4028744 }{ \insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 We hold that the Procurement Law controls actions against the Government of Guam for contracts procured under the s tatute and find that PRC failed to timely file its claim at the Superior Court, leaving the court without jurisdiction to decide the case.}{\insrsid4028744 }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 Accordingly, the judgment in favor of PRC is vacated. \par \par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4028744 {\b\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 I. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND}{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 \par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4028744 {\b\insrsid4028744 \par }{\b\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 [2]\tab }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 In 1990, PRC submitted, and DOE accepted, a bid for project no. 710-5-1070-L-TER.}{\insrsid4028744 }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 The project was for the construction of temporary classrooms at J.Q. San Miguel, Agana Heights, Yigo, Wettengel, M.A. Ulloa, and Finegayan elementary schools.}{\insrsid14504298 \par }{\insrsid4028744\charrsid4028744 \par }{\b\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 [3]\tab }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 After the award and upon scrutiny of the project specifications, PRC discovered nonconformities with applicable building codes and lodged a protest of the award.}{ \insrsid4028744 }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 Thus, in a letter dated June 29, 1990, PRC}{\insrsid14422613\charrsid4028744 '}{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 s president , Delbert Swegler, informed DOE that despite the discrepancies, the company would commence construction per DOE}{\insrsid14422613\charrsid4028744 '}{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 s plans and specifications.}{\insrsid4028744 }{ \insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 However, the company would not take liability for building code violations.}{\insrsid14504298 \par }{\insrsid4028744\charrsid4028744 \par }{\b\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 [4]\tab }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 In a letter dated July 6, 1990, the Director of DOE responded that she took PRC}{\insrsid14422613\charrsid4028744 '}{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 s indication of intent to commence construction to mean that the company was rescinding its protest of the bid award.}{\insrsid4028744 }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 Further, the Director informed PRC that the company would be liable for noncompliance with building codes and that it was responsible for resolving violations with the Department of Public Works (}{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 DPW}{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{ \insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 ).}{\insrsid4028744 }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 The Director asked PRC to respond if she mistook PRC}{\insrsid14422613\charrsid4028744 '}{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 s position, but PRC gave no such response.} {\insrsid4028744 }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 Instead, PRC and the government signed a contract on or about August 20, 1990.}{\insrsid14504298 \par }{\insrsid4028744\charrsid4028744 \par }{\b\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 [5]\tab }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 To address concerns over the project, PRC, its consultant, CIC Consultants, Inc., DPW, and DOE}{\insrsid14422613\charrsid4028744 '}{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 s construction manager, E.V. Baldeviso & Associates (}{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 Baldeviso}{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 ) held a technical coordination meeting.}{\insrsid4028744 }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 At the meeting, the parties discussed no less than twenty-one separate issues and appeared to have resolved most of the issues.}{\insrsid14504298 \par }{\insrsid4028744\charrsid4028744 \par }{\b\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 [6]\tab }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 Pacific Rock Corporation thereafter commenced construction.}{\insrsid4028744 }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 However, to say that the project did not proceed without great difficulty is an understatement as deficient specifications necessitated some eighty-two changes to the project.}{\insrsid4028744 }{\i\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 See }{ \insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 Appellee}{\insrsid14422613\charrsid4028744 '}{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 s Supplemental Excerpts of Record Trial Exhibit 41-1 through 41-9.}{\insrsid4028744 }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 Despite these snags, PRC completed the project, and final inspection was made on August 16, 1991.}{\insrsid14504298 \par }{\insrsid4028744\charrsid4028744 \par }{\b\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 [7]\tab }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 For reasons never fully explained, PRC could neither obtain payment for remaining amounts under contract nor for change orders.}{\insrsid4028744 }{ \insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 For other unknown reasons, PRC took no formal action until December 28, 1992, when its attorney sent a letter to DOE demanding payment of $639,607.60, which included bot h remaining amounts under contract and change order monies.}{\insrsid4028744 }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 The Department of Education responded to this letter on February 2, 1993, wherein a new Director informed PRC that DOE would agree to a total sum of $272, 875.05.}{\insrsid4028744 }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 The new Director also informed PRC that the company could submit change orders with invoices under protest then pursue legal remedies.}{\insrsid4028744 }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 Shortly thereafter, on February 8, 1993, the Director wrote another letter informing PRC that DOE would not process change orders or invoices under protest and that its position was non-negotiable. \par }{\b\insrsid4028744 \par }{\b\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 [8]\tab }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 Instead of pursuing legal action, PRC requested that DOE reconsider its position.}{\insrsid4028744 }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 The Department agreed, and in a letter dated February 24, 1993, the Director offered to form a team consisting of the Attorney General}{\insrsid14422613\charrsid4028744 '}{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 s Office, DOE}{\insrsid14422613\charrsid4028744 '} {\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 s own attorney, and Baldeviso to investigate the matter and participate in negotiations.}{\insrsid4028744 }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 On March 23, 1993, PRC responded that it would be amenable to negotiation and cooperative with investigation of the matter. \par }{\b\insrsid4028744 \par }{\b\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 [9]\tab }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 Investigati on commenced, and Baldeviso formalized its findings in a letter dated June 16, 1993, wherein it recommended that seventy-one of eighty-two change order items be disapproved.}{\insrsid4028744 }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 Baldeviso also calculated that the Government was entitled to $91,500.00 in liquidated damages.}{\insrsid4028744 }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 On July 20, 1993, the Attorney General}{\insrsid14422613\charrsid4028744 '}{ \insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 s office informed PRC in a letter that based on Baldeviso}{\insrsid14422613\charrsid4028744 '}{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 s analysis, the Government would offer a total of $281,399.24, net of liquidated damages. \par }{\b\insrsid4028744 \par }{\b\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 [10]}{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 \tab Unsuccessful in negotiations, on November 4, 1994 PRC filed an administrative claim under the Government Claims Act against DOE.}{\insrsid4028744 }{ \insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 On November 16, 1994, PRC filed a complaint against DOE at the Superior Court.}{\insrsid4028744 }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 A four-week bench trial was held, and subsequently, the trial court decided in favor of PRC, denying DOE liquidated damages but awarding PRC a total of $514,258.76 in damages}{\cs15\super\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 \chftn {\footnote \pard\plain \qj \fi720\li0\ri0\sa240\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\cs15\fs20\super\insrsid14504298 \chftn }{\fs20\insrsid14504298 In its February 26, 1997 Decision and Order, the trial court originally awarded $514,258.76 in damages. The trial court subsequently reduced Item 1 of PRC}{\fs20\insrsid14422613 '}{\fs20\insrsid14504298 s claim by $4,597.50 and Item 23 by $5615.92 in an Amended Decision and Order entered on the docket on December 1, 1997. However, on January 7, 1998, the Clerk of the Superior Court entered a Stipulation and Amended Judgment filed on December 1, 1997 indic ating a total damages award of $526,602.04 on the docket.}}}{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 plus prejudgment and post-judgment interest.}{\insrsid4028744 }{\i\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 Pacific Rock Corp. v. Department of Educ.}{ \insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 , CV1668-94 (Super. Ct. Guam Feb. 26 1990).}{\insrsid4028744 \par \par }{\b\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 [11]\tab }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 Although not clear in its decision, the court apparently took jurisdiction over the matter pursuant to Guam}{\insrsid14422613\charrsid4028744 '}{ \insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 s claims statute, 5 GCA }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 6101 }{\i\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 et seq}{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 .}{\insrsid4028744 }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 The court determined that PRC substantially complied with the Claims Act procedures and that its claim arose based on a rule that, }{ \insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 in order for a claim to arise, a claim made by the Plaintiff must first be de nied, thus creating a disputed claim with the Government.}{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid4028744 }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 The court used this rule to conclude that the July 20, 1993 letter from the Attorney General}{\insrsid14422613\charrsid4028744 '}{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 s office was the final decision required under the Procurem ent Law to start the running of the limitations period under the Claims Act.}{\insrsid4028744 }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 Since the administrative claim under the Claims Act would be barred if no claim was filed within eighteen months of the claim arising, PRC would be barred if it failed to file its administrative claim by January 20, 1995.}{\insrsid4028744 }{ \insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 However, as PRC filed its claim on November 4, 1994, the court found the action timely, thus conferring jurisdiction on the trial court and allowing the court to proceed to the merits of the claim.}{\insrsid4028744 \par \par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4028744 {\b\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 II. ANALYSIS}{\insrsid4028744 \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4028744 {\insrsid4028744 \par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4028744 {\b\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 [12]\tab }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 We have jurisdiction over the appeal of the final judgment of the court below pursuant to 7 GCA }{ \insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 3107 and 3108 (1994).}{\insrsid4028744 \par \par }{\b\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 [13]\tab }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 Although the contract at issue was made pursuant to authority granted DOE under the Procurement Law, the parties allege that jurisdiction over this action is properly found under the Government Claims Act.}{\insrsid4028744 }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 We are called upon to review the statutory scheme and jurisdiction and our review is }{\i\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 de novo}{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 .}{\insrsid4028744 }{\i\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 Taijeron v. Kim}{ \insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 , 1999 Guam 16, }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 38 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 9.}{\insrsid4028744 \par \par }{\b\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 A. \tab Waiver of sovereign immunity}{\insrsid4028744 \par \par }{\b\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 [14]\tab }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 Guam}{\insrsid14422613\charrsid4028744 '}{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 s waiver of sovereign immunity for actions in contract is found at 48 U.S.C. }{ \insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 1421a, which provides in relevant part:}{\insrsid4028744 \par \par }\pard \qj \li720\ri720\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin720\lin720\itap0\pararsid4028744 {\b\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 Unincorporated Territory--Government.}{\b\insrsid4028744 }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 Guam is hereby declared to be an unincorporated territory of the United States and the capital and seat of government thereof shall be located at the city of Agan a, Guam. The government of Guam shall have the powers set forth in this Act, shall have power to sue by such name, and, }{\i\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 with the consent of the legislature evidenced by enacted law, may be sued upon any contract entered into with respect to}{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 , or any tort committed incident to, }{\i\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 the exercise by the government of Guam of any of its lawful powers}{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 .}{\insrsid4028744 \par }\pard \qj \li0\ri720\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin720\lin0\itap0\pararsid4028744 {\insrsid4028744 \par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4028744 {\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 48 U.S.C. }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{ \insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 1421a (1987) (emphasis added).}{\insrsid4028744 }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 The Legislature saw fit to waive sovereign immunity as to contract actions fo r reliance and expectation damages under the Government Claims Act at 5 GCA }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 6105:}{\insrsid4028744 \par \par }\pard \qj \li720\ri720\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin720\lin720\itap0\pararsid4028744 {\b\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 Waiver of Immunity.}{\b\insrsid4028744 }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 Pursuant to Section 3 of the Organic Act of Guam, the Government of Guam hereby waives immunity from suit, but only as hereinafter provided: (a) for all expenses incurred in reliance upon a contract to which the Government of Guam is a party, but if the contract has been substantially completed, expectation damages may be awarded. . . . }{\insrsid4028744 \par }\pard \qj \li0\ri720\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin720\lin0\itap0\pararsid4028744 {\insrsid4028744 \par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4028744 {\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 5 GCA }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{ \insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 6105 (1993).}{\insrsid4028744 \par \par }{\b\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 [15]\tab }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 Litigants have used the Government Claims Act to plead jurisdiction and the defense of lack of jurisdiction for all contract and tort actions against the government.}{ \insrsid4028744 }{\i\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 See}{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 }{\i\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 Guam Econ. Dev. Auth. v. Island Equip. Co., Inc.}{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 , 1998 Guam 7; }{ \i\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 Agustin v. Government of Guam}{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 , Civ. No. CV96-00039A, 1996 WL 875740 (D. Guam App. Div. Nov. 6 1996); }{\i\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 Lampley v. Government of Guam}{ \insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 , 882 F.Supp. 957 (D. Guam App. Div. 1995); }{\i\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 Ciesiolka v. San Nicolas}{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 , Civ. No. CV-90-00076A, 1991 WL 336902 (D. Guam App. Div. June 11 1991); }{ \i\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 Maquera v. RCA Global Communication}{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 , Civ. No. 87-00074A, 1988 WL 242616 (D. Guam App. Div. Nov. 7 1988); }{\i\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 Intercontinental Trading Corp. v. Guam Housing & Urban Renewal Auth.}{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 , DCA Civ. No. 87-00001A, 1987 WL 109897 (D. Guam App. Div. Nov. 27 1987); }{\i\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 Pacific Drilling, Inc. v. Marianas Drilling, Inc.}{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 , DCA Civ. No. 85-0016A, 1985 WL 56585 (D. Guam App. Div. Sept. 27 1985); }{\i\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 Quenga v. Government of Guam}{ \insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 , D.C. Civ. No. 83-00015A, S.C. Civ. No. 136-80, 1984 WL 48865 (D. Guam App. Div. May 22 1984); }{\i\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 Desoto v. Guam}{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 , D.C. Civ. No. 82-0002A, S.C. Civ. No. 484-81, 1983 WL 30218 (D. Guam App. Div. Sep. 9 1983); }{\i\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 Carltom Enters., Inc. v. Government of Guam}{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 , Civ. No. 81-0060A, 1983 WL 30210 (D. Guam App. Div. Aug. 25 1983); }{\i\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 Mariano v. Guam Civil Serv. Comm}{\i\insrsid14422613\charrsid4028744 '}{\i\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 n Bd.}{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 , D.C. Civ. Appeal No. 810052A, 1983 WL 30227 (D. Guam App. Div. June 20 1983); }{\i\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 Santos v. Calvo}{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 , D.C. Civ. No. 80-0223A, S.C. Civ. No. 663-80, 1982 W L 30790 (D. Guam App. Div. Aug. 11 1982); }{\i\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 Munoz v. Government of Guam}{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 , Civ. No. 76-16A, 1978 WL 13511 (D. Guam App. Div. Mar. 13 1978). }{\insrsid4028744 \par \par }\pard \qj \fi-720\li720\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin720\itap0\pararsid4028744 {\b\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 B. \tab A party who seeks judicial relief from administrative action taken under the Procurement Law is not required to co mply with the Government Claims Act}{\insrsid4028744 \par \par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4028744 {\b\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 [16]\tab }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 In }{\i\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 Ciesiolka v. San Nicolas}{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 , }{ \i\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 supra}{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 , the District Court of Guam}{\insrsid14422613\charrsid4028744 '}{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 s Appellate Division followed the Ninth Circuit}{ \insrsid14422613\charrsid4028744 '}{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 s rich tradition of strictly construing claims statutes.}{\insrsid4028744 }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 Civ. No. CV-90-00076A, WL 336902 *3 (D. Guam App. Div. June 11 1991).}{ \insrsid4028744 }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 The }{\i\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 Ciesiolka}{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 court held fast that such strict compliance is a jurisdictional prerequisite to maintaining suit against the government.}{\insrsid4028744 }{\i\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 Id.}{\insrsid4028744 }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 We do not agree.}{ \insrsid4028744 \par \par }{\b\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 [17]\tab }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 When a contractor has been aggrieved with respect to a bid award, it must lodge a protest with the contracting officer.}{\insrsid4028744 }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 5 GCA }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 5425 (1996).}{\insrsid4028744 }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 If a Procurement Law controversy arises with regard to breach, mistake, misrepresentation, or other cause for contract modification or rescission, recourse is to seek resolution with the Chief Procurement Officer (}{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 CPO}{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{ \insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 ), Title 5 GCA }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 5427, (1996), because it is the government}{ \insrsid14422613\charrsid4028744 '}{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 s policy to attempt settlement of disputes before resorting to litigation.}{\insrsid4028744 }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 GSA Procurement Reg. }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 9.03.01.1, (1984).}{\insrsid4028744 }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 The CPO or her designee has authority to investigate disput es, issue a final and conclusive decision on the matter, and inform the contractor of its right to judicial or administrative review of the action taken.}{\insrsid4028744 }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 5 GCA }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 5427(c), (e).}{\insrsid4028744 }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 If the controversy concerns a disp ute over money owed by or to the government, there is no administrative review available.}{\insrsid4028744 }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 5 GCA }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 5705 (1996).}{\insrsid4028744 }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 The Superior Court has jurisdiction over actions between the government and a contractor, whether at law or in equity.}{ \insrsid4028744 }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 5 GCA }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 5480 (1996).}{\insrsid4028744 \par \par }{\b\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 [18]\tab }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 By comparison, the formal procedure for filing an administrative claim is also prescribed by statute.}{\insrsid4028744 }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 5 GCA }{ \insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 6201 (1993).}{\insrsid4028744 }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 In addition to submitting a claim form under the procedure outlined at section 6201, the Claims Act requires that the claims officer investigate the claim.}{\insrsid4028744 }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 5 GCA }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 6203 (1993).}{\insrsid4028744 }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 The administrat ive claim must be filed with the Attorney General within eighteen months of the claim arising.}{\insrsid4028744 }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 5 GCA }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 6106(a) (1993).}{\insrsid4028744 }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 Upon rejection of the claim or six month}{\insrsid14422613\charrsid4028744 '}{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 s lapse without a decision, a claimant may institute an action at the Superior Court.}{\insrsid4028744 }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 5 GCA }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt \f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 6208 (1994).}{\insrsid4028744 \par \par }{\b\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 [19]\tab }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 Strict compliance with the Claims Act would mean that party must twice seek administrative relief when litigating a cause of action under a procurement contract.}{ \insrsid4028744 }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 First a party would be required to exhaust the administrative remedies prescribed by the Procurement Law, seeking settlement with the CPO and obtaining a final decision, then it would have to follow Claims Act procedures, including undergoin g another investigation, before judicial relief would be available.}{\insrsid4028744 }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 This result produces policy violations which the Procurement Law expressly proscribes:}{\insrsid4028744 \par \par }\pard \qj \li720\ri720\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin720\lin720\itap0\pararsid4028744 {\b\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 (b) Purposes and Policies.}{\insrsid4028744 }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 The underlying purposes and policies of this Chapter are:}{ \insrsid4028744 }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 (1) to simpli fy, clarify, and modernize the law governing procurement by this Territory; (2) to permit the continued development of procurement policies and practices; (3) to provide for increased public confidence in the procedures followed in public procurement; (4) to ensure the fair and equitable treatment of all persons who deal with the procurement system of this Territory; (5) to provide increased economy in territorial activities and to maximize to the fullest extent practicable the purchasing value of public f u nds of the Territory; (6) to foster effective broad-based competition within the free enterprise system; (7) to provide safeguards for the maintenance of a procurement system of quality and integrity; (8) to require public access to all aspects of procure ment consistent with the sealed bid procedure and the integrity of the procurement process.}{\insrsid4028744 \par }\pard \qj \li0\ri720\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin720\lin0\itap0\pararsid4028744 {\insrsid4028744 \par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4028744 {\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 5 GCA }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{ \insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 5001(b) (1996).}{\insrsid4028744 }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 Thus we hold that a party who seeks judicial relief from an administrative action taken pursuan t to the Procurement Law should not seek relief under the Government Claims Act.}{\insrsid4028744 \par \par }{\b\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 C. \tab The contract and cause of action arose pursuant to the Procurement Law}{\insrsid4028744 \par \par }{\b\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 [20]\tab }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 The contract between PRC and DOE arose pursuant to the Procurement Law.}{\insrsid4028744 }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 The bid was awarded under the procurement process.}{\insrsid4028744 }{\i\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 See }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 5 GCA }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 5210 (Methods of Source Selection), 5211 (Competitive Sealed Biddi ng), 5235 (Types of Contracts), 5300-5307 (Procurement of Construction).}{\insrsid4028744 }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 Likewise, the contract contained language required by Procurement Law, such as the power of the CPO to settle disputes and the conclusiveness of her decision.}{\insrsid4028744 \par \par }{\b\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 [21]\tab }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 Protest over the specifications was resolved under the Procurement Law.}{\insrsid4028744 }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 Pacific Rock Corporation protested that specifications violated applicable building code provisions.}{\insrsid4028744 }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 The company sent a letter to the director, a person authorized to settle award dispu tes, electing to continue construction, but attempting to shift liability for noncompliance with building codes.}{\insrsid4028744 }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 The CPO stated the government}{\insrsid14422613\charrsid4028744 '}{ \insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 s position and asked PRC to respond, which it never did.}{\insrsid4028744 \par \par }{\b\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 [22]\tab }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 During performance, controversies concerning the contract arose.}{\insrsid4028744 }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 Then, after completion, settlement was attempted within Procurement Law prescripts.}{\insrsid4028744 }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 Pacific Rock Corporation made a demand for final payment and change order monies.}{\insrsid4028744 }{ \insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 Shortly thereafter, the Director made a final decision and informed PRC of its right to seek judicial relief.}{\insrsid4028744 }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 The parties subsequently attempted negotiation of a settlement but reached an impasse with regard to the total final payment.}{\insrsid4028744 \par \par }\pard \qj \fi-720\li720\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin720\itap0\pararsid4028744 {\b\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 D. \tab The Legislature intended that the Procurement Law control when a cause of action arise s under a contract procured through the Procurement Law}{\insrsid4028744 \par \par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4028744 {\b\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 [23]\tab }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 It is clear that in the Procurement Law the Legislature wisely envisioned a comprehensive, detailed scheme for settlement of contract controversies before proceeding to court.}{\insrsid4028744 }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 Moreover, as the statute contains provisions dealing with judicial and administrative relief and language providing for limitations on actions}{\cs15\super\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 \chftn {\footnote \pard\plain \qj \fi720\li0\ri0\sa240\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\cs15\fs20\super\insrsid14504298 \chftn }{\fs20\insrsid14504298 }{\i\fs20\insrsid14504298 See}{\fs20\insrsid14504298 GSA Procurement Reg. }{\fs20\insrsid14504298 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid14504298 9-402 (1984).}}}{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 which differ from the Government Claims Ac t, it is abundantly clear that the Legislature intended that the Procurement Law waive sovereign immunity here }{\i\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 vis a vis}{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 the Claims Act.}{\insrsid4028744 \par \par }{\b\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 [24]\tab }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 In }{\i\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 Turnbull v. Fink}{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 , 668 A.2d 1370 (Del. 1995), Delaware had two statutes which provided for waiver of sovereign immunity in tort actions involving its mass transportation system.}{\insrsid4028744 }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 One statute, Del. Code Ann. Tit. 2, }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 1329 (1989), waived immunity for tort liability to a maximum of $300,000 for each occurrence if the state purchased liability insurance.}{\insrsid4028744 }{ \insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 668 A.2d at 1373.}{\insrsid4028744 }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 The other statute, Del. Code Ann. Tit. 18, }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt \f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 6511 (1970), waived immunity to an amount covered by purchased policy limits.}{\insrsid4028744 }{\i\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 Id.}{\insrsid4028744 }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 The claimant argued that it was potentially entitled to $5,000,000 in relief in accordance with the second statute.}{\insrsid4028744 }{\i\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 Id.}{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 at 1374.}{\insrsid4028744 \par \par }{\b\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 [25]\tab }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 The }{\i\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 Turnbull}{\i\insrsid4028744 }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 court disagreed.}{\insrsid4028744 }{ \insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 The court stated that the two waiver of immunity statutes must be read together and harmonized, if possible.}{\insrsid4028744 }{\i\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 Id.}{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 at 1377 (citations omitted).}{\insrsid4028744 }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 If the statutes cannot be reconciled, the specific statute must prevail over the general.}{\insrsid4028744 }{\i\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 Id. }{ \insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 (citations omitted).}{\insrsid4028744 }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 The court found that it could not harmoniously read the two statutes together.}{\insrsid4028744 }{\i\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 Id.}{ \i\insrsid4028744 }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 As section 1329 provided a comprehensive, mandatory scheme for relief, the court held that section 1329, being comprehensive and specific, must prevail over section 6511.}{\insrsid4028744 }{ \i\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 Id.}{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 at 1377.}{\insrsid4028744 }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 Thus, in }{\i\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 Turnbull}{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 , De laware waived sovereign immunity under the statute with comprehensiveness and specificity, Del. Code Ann. Tit. 2, }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{ \insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 1329.}{\insrsid4028744 \par \par }{\b\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 [26]\tab }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 Likewise, the Procurement Law at 5 GCA }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{ \insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 5001 }{\i\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 et seq.}{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 is a comprehensive statute providing a mandatory scheme of administrative remedies including judicial relief.}{\insrsid4028744 }{ \insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 Moreover, its provisions clearly apply to actions arising out of contracts entered into under the Procurement Law.}{\insrsid4028744 }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 Since the Legisla ture saw fit to waive immunity from suit for actions in contract where the contract was entered into pursuant to Procurement Law, it is the statute which, upon compliance with procedure, satisfies the jurisdictional prerequisite to commencing an action ag ainst the Government of Guam at the Superior Court.}{\insrsid4028744 \par \par }{\b\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 [27]\tab }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 Thus, we hold that a contractor commencing an action in contract for relief from adverse decisions reached under the Procurement Law}{\insrsid14422613\charrsid4028744 '}{ \insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 s legal and contractual remedy provisions need not proceed under the Claims Act.}{\insrsid4028744 }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 Our holding today overrules prior case law to the extent that such case law made compliance with Claims Act strictures the jurisdictional prerequisite to commencing an action against the Government of Guam when a Procurement L aw contract is the subject matter of the complaint.}{\cs15\super\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 \chftn {\footnote \pard\plain \qj \fi720\li0\ri0\sa240\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 { \cs15\fs20\super\insrsid14504298 \chftn }{\fs20\insrsid14504298 In }{\i\fs20\insrsid14504298 People v. Quenga}{\fs20\insrsid14504298 , 1997 Guam 6, we stated that this court does not recognize the decisions of the Appellate Division as controlling our construction of law. In addition, while we consider Appellate D ivision opinions as precedent that is binding upon the trial courts of Guam, they are only considered as persuasive authority when we consider an issue. Moreover, precedent that was extant when this court became operational continues unless and until we address the issues discussed there, and we will not divert from such precedents unless reason supports such deviation. }{\i\fs20\insrsid14504298 Quenga}{\fs20\insrsid14504298 , 1997 Guam 6 at n.4. Thus, prior case law not overruled by our holding today remains in effect unless and until such time that we chose to review such prior case law.}}}{\insrsid4028744 \par \par }{\b\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 E. \tab The trial court had no jurisdiction over PRC}{\b\insrsid14422613\charrsid4028744 '}{\b\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 s claim}{\insrsid4028744 \par \par }{\b\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 [28]\tab }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 Since PRC was required to bring its action under the Procurement Law, the applicable statute of limitations controls:}{\insrsid4028744 \par \par }\pard \qj \li720\ri720\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin720\lin720\itap0\pararsid4028744 {\b\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 Actions Under Contract or for Breach of Contract.}{\insrsid4028744 }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 Any Action commenced under Section 6978 (c) of this Chapter shall be commenced within (6) six months of the date the claim arose or }{\i\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 within six months of the date the claimant knew or should have known, tha t a claim existed }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 against the parties.}{\insrsid4028744 \par }\pard \qj \li0\ri720\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin720\lin0\itap0\pararsid4028744 {\insrsid4028744 \par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4028744 {\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 GSA Procurement Reg. }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{ \insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 9-402(3) (1984).}{\insrsid4028744 }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 Section 6978(c) is now codified at Title 5 GCA }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 5481, (1996), the statutory provision which confers jurisdiction over actions at law or in equity to the Superior Court when the cause of action arises under a procurement contract.}{ \insrsid4028744 }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 Thus, PRC was required under the Procurement Law to file its claim within six months of the date it knew or should have known that it had a claim.}{\insrsid4028744 \par \par }{\b\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 [29]\tab }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 In }{\i\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 Reflectone, Inc.}{\i\insrsid4028744 }{\i\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 v. Dalton}{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 , 60 F.3d 1572, 1583 (Fed. Cir. 1995), it was held that that a request for equitable adjustment (}{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 REA} {\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 ) to contract sum was a claim within the meaning of the federal procurement statute.}{\insrsid4028744 }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 An REA is a remedy payable only when unforeseen or unintended circumstances, such as government modification of the contract, differing site condition s, defective or late-delivered government property or issuance of a stop work order, cause an increase in contract performance costs.}{\insrsid4028744 }{\i\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 Id. }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 at 1577 (citations omitted).}{\insrsid4028744 }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 The definition of claim arrived at in }{\i\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 Reflectone}{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 was derived from its dictionary meanin g, which is a demand as a matter of right for something due or believed due, and was found to constitute the essential characteristic of a }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt \f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 claim.}{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid4028744 }{\i\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 Id.}{ \insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 at 1576.}{\insrsid4028744 }{\i\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 See also}{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 }{\i\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 Essex Electro Eng}{\i\insrsid14422613\charrsid4028744 '}{ \i\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 rs, Inc. v. United States}{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 , 960 F.2d 1576, 1580-81 (Fed. Cir. 1992), }{\i\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 cert. denied}{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 ,}{ \i\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 506 U.S. 953, 113 S.Ct. 408 (1992).}{\insrsid4028744 }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 We believe that a request for change order or other, similar demand as a matter of right for payment due or believed due likewise captures the essential characteristic of a Procurement Law claim.}{\insrsid4028744 \par \par }{\b\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 [30]\tab }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 It appears that PRC has never submitted a change order request }{\i\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 per se}{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 for the work it performed so that building code discrepancies could be corrected.}{\insrsid4028744 }{\i\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 See}{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 Appellee}{\insrsid14422613\charrsid4028744 '}{ \insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 s S.E.R. Trial Exhibit D-55.}{\insrsid4028744 }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 However, at some time during the period of December 26, 1991, when the Director transmitted a form change order to Mr. Swegler, to December 1992, when PRC submitted a fairly detailed cost breakdown of change order work, PRC s hould have been aware that it had a claim for change order monies.}{\insrsid4028744 }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 At the very latest, PRC knew it had a claim when its attorney on December 28, 1992 sent a letter demanding final, undisputed payment and payment for change order work.}{\insrsid4028744 }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 However, no suit wa s filed until November 4, 1994, approximately twenty-three months later.}{\insrsid4028744 }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 By then its action was some seventeen months stale.}{\insrsid4028744 \par \par }{\b\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 [31]\tab }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 Since PRC did not timely file its action at the Superior Court, its claim was time-barred.}{\insrsid4028744 }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 Thus, PRC failed to satisfy the jurisdictional prerequisite to maintaining its procurement contract suit against DOE.}{\insrsid4028744 }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 Consequently, the trial court was without jurisdiction over PRC}{ \insrsid14422613\charrsid4028744 '}{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 s claim.}{\insrsid4028744 }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 The trial court erred by not dismissing PRC}{\insrsid14422613\charrsid4028744 '}{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 s suit.}{ \insrsid4028744 \par \par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4028744 {\b\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 III. CONCLUSION}{\insrsid4028744 \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4028744 {\insrsid4028744 \par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4028744 {\b\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 [32]\tab }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 For cl aimants, unaware of the brevity of the period within which to bring actions arising from procurement contracts, and for agencies, facing the possibility of profuse litigation, our holding today may entail grave consequences.}{\insrsid4028744 }{ \insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 However, through this opinion, we clarify and interpret the policies intended by the Legislature in promulgating the Procurement Laws.}{\insrsid4028744 }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 Further, while the result today brings about an unfortunate consequence to PRC, the company waited an inordinate length of time to bring its action.}{\insrsid4028744 }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 The laws assist those who are vigilant, not those who sleep over their rights.}{\insrsid4028744 \par \par }{\b\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 [33]\tab }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 Because Pacific Rock Corporation failed to timely bring its action in this case, the trial court was without jurisdiction to pass on the merits.}{\insrsid4028744 }{ \insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 Accordingly, the judgment of the trial court is }{\b\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 VACATED }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 and the matter is }{\b\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 REMANDED}{ \insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 to the trial court for proceedings consistent with this opinion. \par }{\ul\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 \par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx-1440\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4028744 {\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 BENJAMIN J.F. CRUZ \tab \tab \tab EDWARD S. TERLAJE \par Chief Justice\tab \tab \tab \tab }{\insrsid14222409 \tab }{\insrsid14504298\charrsid4028744 Justice Pro Tempore \par }}