6 CFR § 25.8 - Government contractor Defense.
(a) Criteria for Certification. The Under Secretary may issue a Certification for a Qualified Anti-Terrorism Technology as an Approved Product for Homeland Security for purposes of establishing a rebuttable presumption of the applicability of the government contractor defense. In determining whether to issue such Certification, the Under Secretary or his designee shall conduct a comprehensive review of the design of such Technology and determine whether it will perform as intended, conforms to the Seller's specifications, and is safe for use as intended. The Seller shall provide safety and hazard analyses and other relevant data and information regarding such Qualified Anti-Terrorism Technology to the Department in connection with an application. The Under Secretary or his designee may require that the Seller submit any information that the Under Secretary or his designee considers relevant to the application for approval. The Under Secretary or his designee may consult with, and rely upon the expertise of, any other governmental or non-governmental person, firm, or entity, and may consider test results produced by an independent laboratory or other person, firm, or other entity engaged by the Seller.
(b) Extent of liability. Should a product liability or other lawsuit be filed for claims arising out of, relating to, or resulting from an Act of Terrorism when Qualified Anti-Terrorism Technologies Certified by the Under Secretary as provided in §§ 25.8 and 25.9 of this part have been deployed in defense against or response or recovery from such act and such claims result or may result in loss to the Seller, there shall be a rebuttable presumption that the government contractor defense applies in such lawsuit. This presumption shall only be overcome by clear and convincing evidence showing that the Seller acted fraudulently or with willful misconduct in submitting information to the Department during the course of the consideration of such Technology under this section and § 25.9 of this part. A claimant's burden to show fraud or willful misconduct in connection with a Seller's SAFETY Act application cannot be satisfied unless the claimant establishes there was a knowing and deliberate intent to deceive the Department. This presumption of the government contractor defense shall apply regardless of whether the claim against the Seller arises from a sale of the product to Federal Government or non-Federal Government customers. Such presumption shall apply in perpetuity to all deployments of a Qualified Anti-Terrorism Technology (for which a Certification has been issued by the Under Secretary as provided in this section and § 25.9 of this part) in defense against, response to, or recovery from any Act of Terrorism that occurs on or after the effective date of the Certification applicable to such Technology, provided that the sale of such Technology was consummated by the Seller on or after the earliest date of sale of such Technology specified in such Certification (which shall be determined by the Under Secretary in his discretion, and may be prior to, but shall not be later than, such effective date) and prior to the expiration or termination of such Certification.
(c) Establishing applicability of the government contractor defense. The Under Secretary will be exclusively responsible for the review and approval of anti-terrorism Technology for purposes of establishing the government contractor defense in any product liability lawsuit for claims arising out of, relating to, or resulting from an Act of Terrorism when Qualified Anti-Terrorism Technologies approved by the Under Secretary, as provided in this final rule, have been deployed in defense against or response or recovery from such act and such claims result or may result in loss to the Seller. The Certification of a Technology as an Approved Product for Homeland Security shall be the only evidence necessary to establish that the Seller of the Qualified Anti-Terrorism Technology that has been issue a Certification is entitled to a presumption of dismissal from a cause of action brought against a Seller arising out of, relating to, or resulting from an Act of Terrorism when the Qualified Anti-Terrorism Technology was deployed in defense against or response to or recovery from such Act of Terrorism. This presumption of dismissal is based upon the statutory government contractor defense conferred by the SAFETY Act.