Gmoney Posted October 29, 2012 Report Share Posted October 29, 2012 From what I have gathered contractors under a firm-fixed-price contract can be held liable for all costs associated with damages caused by their operations, accidental or by their negligence. So if the contractor did everything under the contract following all mitigation measures to prevent starting a fire and lets say there was an accident and a wildfire starts and burns down the project (negligence not considered, no other entities involved just contractor and gov). Q1:Didn't the government assume some risk to have the contractor working out there when some risk was apparent as well as the contractor? How liable should the contractor really be? How much responsibility should the government assume? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ji20874 Posted October 29, 2012 Report Share Posted October 29, 2012 Service contract or construction? Fixed-price or cost-reimbursement? What does the contract say? What do your attorneys say? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gmoney Posted October 29, 2012 Author Report Share Posted October 29, 2012 Service contract, fixed price (no cost reimbursemet). I this secanario the damages to the government would be the loss of trees, brush, loss of habitat (all costs would be replacement) as well as fire suppression by the government. So, do you think the government should assume any of the risk when doing forestry related contracting work where there would always be a chance to start a fire? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ji20874 Posted October 29, 2012 Report Share Posted October 29, 2012 What was the agreement of the parties when the contract was formed? In some contracts, contractors willingly assume this liability -- for example, some Forest Service contracts contain words in Section H like, The Contractor shall immediately extinguish all fires on or in the vicinity of the project which are caused by the Contractor's operations, employees, or subcontractors, whether or not set directly or indirectly as a result of the Contractor's operations, with or without direction by the Forest Service, and without additional cost to the Government. The Contractor may be held liable for all damages and costs of additional labor, subsistence, equipment, supplies, and transportation deemed necessary by the Government resulting from fires set or caused by the Contractor's employees or subcontractors or resulting from the Contractor's operations. If your contract has similar text, it seems you willingly assumed the liability and the contract price reflects this risk. You can buy insurance to cover this risk and manage your operations to minimize this risk. If you've been hit with a bill for fire damages, and you don't want to pay it, you might want to consult with an attorney with experience in these matters -- he or she can advise you on whether you can beat the rap, so to speak. There may be case law examples that will work in your favor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Vern Edwards Posted October 29, 2012 Report Share Posted October 29, 2012 Service contract, fixed price (no cost reimbursemet). I this secanario the damages to the government would be the loss of trees, brush, loss of habitat (all costs would be replacement) as well as fire suppression by the government. So, do you think the government should assume any of the risk when doing forestry related contracting work where there would always be a chance to start a fire? Does the contract include the clause at FAR 52.237-2. "Protection of Government Buildings, Equipment, and Vegetation"? The clause is mandatory for all service contracts to be performed on government installations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gmoney Posted October 31, 2012 Author Report Share Posted October 31, 2012 I will lay out another secario that recently happened. A heavy piece of equipment was operating in the forest and it caught on fire. The fire spread to the ground and the contractor kept it lined and in control. When the government personnel arrived the fire was contained to the machine itself and the contractor had dispatched his own resources and they were in route. Should the contractor pay for our response personnel when his employees were holding the fire with his own resources in route? All applicable languge was in the contract for supressive efforts as well as 52.237.2 but the "installation" is a little vauge I think when you are in the middle of no where. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Vern Edwards Posted October 31, 2012 Report Share Posted October 31, 2012 Sounds like you're in a national forest or park, in a wildlife refuges, or on other public lands. In any case, I don't know the answers to your questions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gmoney Posted December 5, 2012 Author Report Share Posted December 5, 2012 Too bad, thanks for the responses though. I think I may have a limited liability clause for some future contracts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.gif)
Recommended Posts