Second, the government unreasonably extended the suspensions. Each
contract was suspended for a period of approximately three to four years.
However, the government unnecessarily delayed the suspensions by not
completing survey work in a timely fashion. Other environmental litigation
impacting two of the timber areas did not justify the length of the
suspension, because in that case, there was no court order, which was a
condition to the government's exercise of the contracts' suspension clause.
The government also unreasonably enlarged the scope of one of the
suspensions to cover an entire timber sale area, where it could have allowed
operations to commence over part of the area. Finally, there was no merit to
the government's contention the contractor suffered no damages, which were
to be determined in a separate trial. (Scott Timber, Inc. v. U.S.,
53 CCF ¶79,077)
(The news featured above is a selection from the news covered in the Government Contracts Report Letter, which is published weekly and distributed to subscribers of the Government Contracts Reporter. )