FAR 28.313—Contract clauses for insurance of transportation or transportation-related services.
Plain-English Summary
FAR 28.313 tells contracting officers when to require insurance clauses in solicitations and contracts for transportation or transportation-related services. It covers two specific insurance topics: cargo insurance and vehicular/general public liability insurance. For cargo, the rule generally requires use of the clause at 52.228-9, Cargo Insurance, unless the freight is shipped under rates subject to released or declared value, which is an exception that can make separate cargo insurance unnecessary or inappropriate. For liability coverage, the rule requires a clause substantially the same as 52.228-10, Vehicular and General Public Liability Insurance, when the contracting officer decides that insurance required by law does not provide enough protection. In practice, this section helps the Government allocate and manage risk for loss, damage, injury, and third-party claims arising from transportation performance. It also gives contracting officers discretion to tailor insurance requirements to the actual risk and to avoid duplicative coverage where statutory or tariff-based protections already apply.
Key Rules
Insert cargo insurance clause
The contracting officer must include FAR 52.228-9, Cargo Insurance, in solicitations and contracts for transportation or transportation-related services. This is the default rule whenever the contract involves moving goods or related transport services.
Released or declared value exception
The cargo insurance clause is not required when freight is shipped under rates subject to released or declared value. In those cases, the transportation pricing structure already reflects a limited carrier liability arrangement, so separate cargo insurance may not be needed.
Add liability clause when needed
The contracting officer must include a clause substantially the same as FAR 52.228-10, Vehicular and General Public Liability Insurance, when required by law is not enough. This applies when the Government determines additional insurance is necessary to cover transportation-related liability exposure.
Coverage must match risk
The liability insurance requirement is not automatic in every case; it depends on the contracting officer’s judgment about whether legally required insurance provides sufficient protection. The clause should be used to close gaps in coverage for vehicle accidents, bodily injury, property damage, or similar third-party claims.
Applies to solicitations and contracts
These insurance requirements must be addressed at both the solicitation stage and in the resulting contract. This ensures offerors know the insurance obligations before pricing and performance begin.
Responsibilities
Contracting Officer
Determine whether the acquisition is for transportation or transportation-related services, insert the cargo insurance clause unless the released or declared value exception applies, and decide whether additional vehicular or general public liability insurance is needed beyond what law requires.
Contractor
Review the solicitation and contract for required insurance clauses, obtain and maintain the required cargo or liability coverage if included, and ensure performance complies with the insurance obligations stated in the contract.
Agency
Support the contracting officer’s risk assessment by identifying operational hazards, legal insurance minimums, and any mission-specific exposure that may justify additional insurance requirements.
Practical Implications
Contracting officers should not assume transportation contracts are covered by generic insurance language; this section requires specific clause selection based on the type of service and the risk profile.
The released or declared value exception is important because it can eliminate the need for cargo insurance, but only when the shipment is actually subject to those rates; misapplying the exception can leave the Government underprotected.
For liability coverage, the key question is whether legally required insurance is enough. If not, the contracting officer should add a clause that fills the gap rather than relying on minimum statutory coverage.
Contractors should price insurance costs into their proposals early, because these clauses can materially affect cost and performance planning.
A common pitfall is failing to distinguish cargo loss risk from vehicle/public liability risk; they are separate exposures and may require different insurance solutions.
Official Regulatory Text
(a) The contracting officer shall insert the clause at 52.228-9 , Cargo Insurance, in solicitations and contracts for transportation or for transportation-related services, except when freight is shipped under rates subject to released or declared value. (b) The contracting officer shall insert a clause substantially the same as that at 52.228-10 , Vehicular and General Public Liability Insurance, in solicitations and contracts for transportation or for transportation-related services when the contracting officer determines that vehicular liability or general public liability insurance required by law is not sufficient.