Congress amended our jurisdictional statute and expressly granted this court power to hear contract termination disputes irrespective of claims for money damages. See 28 U.S.C. § 1491(a)(2) (1994) (granting jurisdiction over claims “including a dispute concerning termination of a contract ... and other nonmonptary disputes on which a decision of the contracting officer has been issued”). Prior to this amendment, however, the federal circuit had already held that a contracting officers’ decision to terminate the contract for default “falls precisely within the contours” of the Contracts Disputes Act and is immediately appealable even without first submitting a claim to the contracting officer. Malone, 849 F.2d at 1443-44. Later cases concur. See K & S Construction, 35 Fed.Cl. at 276 (<HOLDING>). It follows, then, that if the court has
holding that the finality of a contracting officers determination was suspended during his review of a request by the contractor to reconsider the final decision holding that jurisdiction over an appeal of a contracting officers decision is lacking unless the contractors claim is first presented to the contracting officer and that officer renders a final decision on the claim  holding in a breach of contract action brought by a government contract surety under the tucker act that the tucker act contains an unequivocal expression waiving sovereign immunity as to claims not particular claimants holding that jurisdiction over an appeal of a contracting officers decision is lacking unless the contractors claim is first presented to the contracting officer and that officer renders a final decision on the claim holding language added to tucker act makes clear plaintiff is not entitled to a second administrative goround on a contracting officers final decision