[Federal Register: January 15, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 10)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 2712-2713]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr15ja09-42]
[[Page 2712]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION
NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION
48 CFR Parts 1, 2, 4, 12, and 52
[FAC 2005-30; FAR Case 2004-038, Item I;Docket 2008-0001; Sequence 6]
RIN 9000-AK94
Federal Acquisition Regulation; FAR Case 2004-038, Federal
Procurement Data System (FPDS)
AGENCIES: Department of Defense (DoD), General Services Administration
(GSA), and National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Civilian Agency Acquisition Council and the Defense
Acquisition Regulations Council (Councils) have adopted as final, with
one minor change, the interim rule amending the Federal Acquisition
Regulation (FAR) to revise the process for reporting contract actions
to the Federal Procurement Data System (FPDS). This final rule revises
the definition of indefinite delivery vehicle at FAR 4.601.
DATES: Effective Date: February 17, 2009.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Ernest Woodson, Procurement
Analyst, at (202) 501-3775 for clarification of content. For
information pertaining to status or publication schedules, contact the
FAR Secretariat at (202) 501-4755. Please cite FAC 2005-30, FAR case
2004-038.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
A. Background
As of October 2003, all agencies were to begin reporting FAR-based
contract actions to the modified system. During Fiscal Year 2004,
members of the interagency Change Control Board, as well as
departmental teams working on the migration of data from the old to new
system, recognized both the opportunity to standardize reporting
processes and the need to revise the FAR to provide current and clear
reporting requirements.
DoD, GSA, and NASA published an interim rule in the Federal
Register at 73 FR 21773, on April 22, 2008. The interim rule
established the Government's commitment for Federal Procurement Data
System (FPDS) data to serve as the single authoritative source of all
procurement data for a host of applications and reports, such as the
Central Contractor Registration (CCR), the Electronic Subcontracting
Reporting System (eSRS), the Small Business Goaling Report (SBGR), and
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) data. The public comment
period closed on June 23, 2008. Four respondents submitted comments on
the interim rule. A discussion of the comments and the changes made to
the rule as a result of those comments are provided below:
1. One respondent commented that FAR 4.602(a) through (c) contains
little value for a reader consulting the FAR for guidance on what to do
and when or how to do it. The respondent recommends deleting 4.602 and
renumbering remaining paragraphs.
Response: The Councils disagree with the comment. FAR section 4.602
was added to provide general information about contract reporting. The
section identifies FPDS as the Government's web-based tool for
reporting contract actions. In addition, it provides a list of the many
uses of the data provided by FPDS and cites the FPDS web site. The
Councils consider this type of information to be very useful for the
acquisition community and indicates the degree of importance placed on
reporting contract actions. Language regarding procedures and reporting
actions (what to do and when or how to do it) may be found at FAR 4.605
and 4.606. Therefore, FAR 4.602 remains unchanged.
2. One respondent commented that FAR 4.603(a) seemed to be needless
and out of place. FPDS preceded Federal Funding and Transparency Act of
2006 (FFATA) by many years and does not meet the public access
requirements articulated in FFATA. The respondent recommends deleting
this section and renumbering remaining subparagraphs.
Response: The Councils disagree with the comment. FAR 4.603(a) is a
Federal contract policy statement indicating that the FFATA requires
that all Federal award data must be publicly accessible. FPDS data is
made accessible to the public, satisfying the certain basic
requirements of FFATA. Therefore, this paragraph remains unchanged.
3. One respondent stated that FAR 4.601 defines indefinite delivery
vehicle (IDV). Since IDV is more encompassing than an indefinite
delivery contract (IDC), the respondent recommends finding another word
for ``vehicle'' or changing the definition to read ``Indefinite
delivery vehicle (IDV) means an indefinite delivery contract or
agreement that has one or more[hellip]''
Response: The Councils agree that the definition should be
clarified. As indicated at FAR 4.606(a)(ii), examples of IDVs, for the
purposes of the FPDS, include task and delivery order contracts
(including Governmentwide acquisition contracts and multi-agency
contracts), GSA Federal supply schedules, Blanket Purchase Agreements,
Basic Ordering Agreements, or any other agreement or contract against
which individual orders or purchases may be placed. Accordingly, the
Councils revised the definition of ``Indefinite delivery vehicle
(IDV)'' at FAR 4.601 to include the words ``or agreement.''
4. One respondent recommends that references to generic DUNS be
removed from FAR 4.605(b)(1) and (2). To prevent generic DUNS abuse,
the FPDS Change Control Board voted to not post generic DUNS on the
FPDS website. Each Agency would be responsible for communicating what
generic DUNS, if any, should be used.
Response: The Councils disagree with the comment. The Councils
understand agencies responsibilities associated with deciding which
generic DUNS number to use, however, a DUNS number is required to
complete a contract action report in FPDS. FAR procedures at 4.605(b)
permit the use of generic DUNS numbers and do not interfere with agency
responsibilities, as agreed to by the FPDS Change Control Board. A
generic DUNS number may be used under the circumstances referenced at
FAR 4.605(b)(1). FAR procedures at 4.605(b) remain unchanged.
5. One respondent submitted a comment in reference to FAR Case
2005-040, Electronic Subcontracting Reporting System (eSRS).
Response: This comment is not relevant to FAR Case 2004-038 and was
referred to the FAR Small Business Team for disposition.
6. One respondent submitted a comment in reference to the Federal
Register notice, Background, paragraph 5, stating that reporting only
the appropriated portions of contract actions would be extremely
impractical and result in data mismatches between automated contracting
writing systems and FPDS. The respondent indicated that they have many
actions that have mixed funding and it would be difficult for
contracting staff to identify whether funding was appropriated or non-
appropriated. In order to comply with the rule, data would have to be
manually entered into FPDS.
Response: The Councils disagree with the comment. FAR 4.606(b)(2)
states that agencies may submit actions for any non-appropriated fund
(NAF) or NAF portion of a contract action using a mix of appropriated
and non-appropriated funding, after contacting the FPDS
[[Page 2713]]
Program Office. It should be noted that reporting non-appropriated
funds may impact certain reports generated using FPDS data regarding
appropriated funds. FAR language remains unchanged.
This is not a significant regulatory action and, therefore, was not
subject to review under Section 6(b) of Executive Order 12866,
Regulatory Planning and Review, dated September 30, 1993. This rule is
not a major rule under 5 U.S.C. 804.
B. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Department of Defense, the General Services Administration, and
the National Aeronautics and Space Administration certify that this
final rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities within the meaning of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601, et seq., because contract reporting is
not accomplished by the vendor community, only by Government
contracting entities.
C. Paperwork Reduction Act
The Paperwork Reduction Act does not apply because the changes to
the FAR do not impose information collection requirements that require
the approval of the Office of Management and Budget under 44 U.S.C.
3501, et seq.
List of Subjects in 48 CFR Parts 1, 2, 4, 12, and 52
Government procurement.
Dated: December 24, 2008
Edward Loeb,
Acting Director, Office of Acquisition Policy.
0
Accordingly, DoD, GSA, and NASA adopt the interim rule amending 48 CFR
parts 1, 2, 4, 12, and 52, which was published in the Federal Register
at 73 FR 21773, April 22, 2008, as a final rule with the following
change:
PART 4--ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS
0
1. The authority citation for 48 CFR part 4 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 40 U.S.C. 121(c); 10 U.S.C. chapter 137; and 42
U.S.C. 2473(c).
4.601 [Amended]
0
2. Amend section 4.601 by removing from the introductory paragraph of
the definition ``Indefinite delivery vehicle (IDV)'' the word
``contract'' and adding ``contract or agreement'' in its place.
[FR Doc. E9-556 Filed 1-14-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6820-EP-S