Page 12: of Maritime Reporter Magazine (November 2022)

Legal Beat federal contractor immunity defenses. If the contractor did not from the responsible party. The federal government has what the federal government had contracted it to do, any li- a vital and uniquely federal interest in prompt, thorough, and ability shifted to the federal government. Alternatively, if the environmentally responsible responses to these discharges. federal government knowingly approved of the contractor’s Application of state civil liability law would frustrate that fed- work in advance, any liability again shifted to the federal gov- eral interest. During the federal response, the FOSC provides ernment. The court later added a caveat to the federal contrac- reasonably precise directions regarding details of the response tor immunity defense. In Campbell-Ewald Co. v. Gomez, it effort. Equipment utilized during the response has been pre- ruled that federal contractors do not enjoy derivative absolute approved by the federal government. During the response ef- immunity where the contractor exceeds its authority and vio- fort, the FOSC receives candid advice from the responders lates federal law as to the various response options available; the FOSC then

Responders to discharges of oil or hazardous substances are selects the method to be utilized. This reasoned response to taking their direction from the Federal On-Scene Coordinator discharges appears to meet the standards of both the Boyle (FOSC) in accordance with the National Contingency Plan, and the Yearsley doctrines.

Copyright Björn Wylezich/AdobeStock 12 Maritime Reporter & Engineering News • November 2022

MR #11 (1-17).indd 12 11/3/2022 9:29:45 AM