Changing the Requirements

Some situations may require changes to existing contract requirements or crew instructions. If you determine that a contract's requirements will not provide for adequate tree survival and growth, coordinate with your silviculturist or other specialists and the CO and proceed to change the requirements. It is better to negotiate contract adjustments or modifications than to plant trees under a contract with unsuitable clauses that result in a plantation failure. It is generally wise to negotiate with the contractor and make appropriate cost adjustments. In some cases, the changes will be unilateral. Involve the CO in these negotiations and contract changes.

The following examples show some good and bad decisions for modifying a contract's requirements. These are merely examples. Many exceptions exist.

Smart Decisions

• Since the time of the contract's award, grass has invaded the planting unit. Scalping is needed, although it was not required originally. Adding scalping to the unit requirements is a good decision. Expect an increased cost.
  
  
• Fewer trees are available than expected for a planting unit because of a nursery underrun. Rather than plant only a portion of the unit, the objectives could be met by planting at a slightly wider spacing. Widening the spacing would be a good decision, and usually would reduce the unit price.
  
  
• The contractor is delayed 1 week and he requests an extension of the contract. If there is good soil moisture, if trees are still dormant and in good shape, and if weather and other conditions will hold, it is probably okay to extend the length of the contract, because doing so won’t affect survival. A contract cost reduction may be appropriate to compensate for the delay. (top)

Poor Decisions

• The contractor’s time is running out. Even though the weather is hot and windy, the contractor has the whole crew at the district, trees are ready to be planted, and the contractor wants to plant through the day. The contract states that the contractor is not to plant during unfavorable weather conditions. It would probably be a bad decision to allow the contractor to plant, unless the effects of the hot and windy weather on the seedlings' survival can be mitigated. Determine whether conditions are more favorable at another unit, and whether the crew could be moved instead of shut down. Also, consider the effects of windy conditions on contractor safety. If the area has snags, allowing the contractor to plant may be a poor decision.
  
  
• The contract requires a 24-inch scalp because of heavy grass competition. The 24-inch scalp was determined to be the minimum necessary to achieve survival. The contractor is having problems getting a 24-inch scalp with the hoedad, so he asks to have the scalp reduced to 12 inches. It would probably be a poor decision to change the scalp size, because 24 inches is the minimum needed for survival. The contractor should have considered the difficulty of scalping when making the bid and selected an appropriate tool to meet the requirements. If the contract misrepresented the difficulty of scalping, a cost adjustment may be in order. Do not reduce scalp size just because it is difficult to make a scalp that meets the requirements.