Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement: Administering Trafficking in Persons Regulations (DFARS Case 2011-D051), 71830-71831 [2011-29426]
Download as PDF
71830
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 223 / Friday, November 18, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
203.171–4 Solicitation provision and
contract clause.
(a) Use the clause at 252.203–7000,
Requirements Relating to Compensation
of Former DoD Officials, in all
solicitations and contracts.
(b) Use the provision at 252.203–7005,
Representation Relating to
Compensation of Former DoD Officials,
in all solicitations, including
solicitations for task and delivery
orders.
PART 252—SOLICITATION
PROVISIONS AND CONTRACT
CLAUSES
3. Add section 252.203–7005 to read
as follows:
■
252.203–7005 Representation Relating to
Compensation of Former DoD Officials.
As prescribed in 203.171–4(b), insert
the following provision:
REPRESENTATION RELATING TO
COMPENSATION OF FORMER DOD
OFFICIALS (NOV 2011)
(a) Definition. Covered DoD official is
defined in the clause at 252.203–7000,
Requirements Relating to Compensation of
Former DoD Officials.
(b) By submission of this offer, the offeror
represents, to the best of its knowledge and
belief, that all covered DoD officials
employed by or otherwise receiving
compensation from the offeror, and who are
expected to undertake activities on behalf of
the offeror for any resulting contract, are
presently in compliance with all postemployment restrictions covered by 18
U.S.C. 207, 41 U.S.C. 2101–2107, and 5 CFR
parts 2637 and 2641, including Federal
Acquisition Regulation 3.104–2.
(End of provision)
[FR Doc. 2011–29421 Filed 11–17–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001–06–P
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Defense Acquisition Regulations
System
48 CFR Part 242
RIN 0750–AH41
Defense Federal Acquisition
Regulation Supplement: Administering
Trafficking in Persons Regulations
(DFARS Case 2011–D051)
Defense Acquisition
Regulations System, Department of
Defense (DoD).
ACTION: Final rule.
jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES3
AGENCY:
DoD is issuing a final rule
amending the Defense Federal
Acquisition Regulation Supplement
(DFARS) to add to the list of contract
administration functions a requirement
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:02 Nov 17, 2011
Jkt 226001
to maintain surveillance over contractor
compliance with duties and
responsibilities pertaining to trafficking
in persons when they are incorporated
in contracts.
DATES: Effective Date: November 18,
2011.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Meredith Murphy, telephone (703) 602–
1302.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
The current FAR, at section 22.1705,
entitled ‘‘Contract clause,’’ prescribes
use of the clause at FAR 52.222–50,
Combating Trafficking in Persons, in all
solicitations and contracts. When the
contract will be performed outside the
United States, the clause must be used
with its Alternate I, as prescribed in
FAR 22.1705(b). The clause requires
contractors to inform employees of the
Government’s zero-tolerance policy and
the actions that will be taken against
them for violations of the policy. In
addition, contractors are required to
notify the contracting officer
immediately of any information
received about an employee’s conduct
that violates this policy and also of
actions taken against an employee as a
result of the violation.
While the clause at FAR 52.222–50,
Combating Trafficking in Persons, has
been in effect since February 2009, the
listing of Government contract
administration functions was not
modified at that time to add
surveillance of a contractor’s
compliance with the clause
requirements. Because the addition of
this contract administration function is
internal to DoD and will not impact
current contract requirements or
contract clauses, this is not a significant
revision as defined at FAR 1.501–1.
Therefore, under the authority at FAR
1.501–3(a), this rule can be published as
a final rule without first obtaining
public comment.
III. Executive Orders 12866 and 13563
Executive Orders (E.O.s) 12866 and
13563 direct agencies to assess all costs
and benefits of available regulatory
alternatives and, if regulation is
necessary, to select regulatory
approaches that maximize net benefits
(including potential economic,
environmental, public health and safety
effects, distributive impacts, and
equity). E.O. 13563 emphasizes the
importance of quantifying both costs
and benefits, of reducing costs, of
harmonizing rules, and of promoting
flexibility. This is a significant
regulatory action and, therefore, was
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
subject to review under section 6(b) of
E.O. 12866, Regulatory Planning and
Review, dated September 30, 1993. This
rule is not a major rule under 5 U.S.C.
804.
IV. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act does
not apply to this rule because an initial
regulatory flexibility analysis is only
required for proposed or interim rules
that require publication for public
comment (5 U.S.C. 603) and a final
regulatory flexibility analysis is only
required for final rules that were
previously published for public
comment, and for which an initial
regulatory flexibility analysis was
prepared (5 U.S.C. 604).
This final rule does not constitute a
significant DFARS revision as defined at
FAR 1.501–1 because this rule will not
have a significant cost or administrative
impact on contractors or offerors, or a
significant effect beyond the internal
operating procedures of the
Government. Therefore, publication for
public comment under 41 U.S.C. 1707 is
not required.
V. Paperwork Reduction Act
The rule does not contain any
information collection requirements that
require the approval of the Office of
Management and Budget under the
Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C.
chapter 35).
List of Subjects in 48 CFR Part 242
Government procurement.
Ynette R. Shelkin,
Editor, Defense Acquisition Regulations
System.
Therefore, 48 CFR part 242 is
amended as follows:
PART 242—CONTRACT
ADMINISTRATION AND AUDIT
SERVICES
1. The authority citation for 48 CFR
part 242 continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 41 U.S.C. 1303 and 48 CFR
chapter 1.
2. Amend section 242.302 by adding
paragraph (a)(S–73) to read as follows:
■
242.302
Contract administration functions.
(a) * * *
(S–73) Maintain surveillance over
contractor compliance with trafficking
in persons requirements for all DoD
contracts for services incorporating the
clause at FAR 52.222–50, Combating
Trafficking in Persons, and, when
necessary, its Alternate I, as identified
E:\FR\FM\18NOR3.SGM
18NOR3
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 223 / Friday, November 18, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
A. Implements Law as Written
Comment: One respondent stated that
the DFARS interim rule implements the
statute as written.
Response: Noted.
in the clause prescription at FAR
22.1705. (See PGI 222.1703.)
[FR Doc. 2011–29426 Filed 11–17–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001–06–P
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Defense Acquisition Regulations
System
48 CFR Parts 211 and 225
RIN 0750–AH22
Defense Federal Acquisition
Regulation Supplement: Fire-Resistant
Fiber for Production of Military
Uniforms (DFARS Case 2011–D021)
Defense Acquisition
Regulations System, Department of
Defense (DoD).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
DoD is adopting as final, with
changes, an interim rule amending the
Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation
Supplement (DFARS) to implement the
section of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2011
that prohibits specification of the use of
fire-resistant rayon fiber in solicitations
issued before January 1, 2015.
DATES: Effective Date: November 18,
2011.
SUMMARY:
Ms.
Amy G. Williams, telephone 703–602–
0328.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES3
DoD published an interim rule in the
Federal Register at 76 FR 32843 on June
6, 2011, to implement section 821 of the
National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2011. Section 821 prohibits
specification of the use of fire-resistant
rayon fiber in solicitations issued before
January 1, 2015.
Ten respondents submitted public
comments in response to the interim
rule. Nine of the respondents
(manufacturers, suppliers, or
distributors of fire-resistant fibers,
yarns, fabrics, or military uniforms)
submitted comments that were
essentially the same.
II. Discussion and Analysis of the
Public Comments
DoD reviewed the public comments in
the development of the final rule. A
discussion of the comments and the
changes made to the rule as a result of
those comments are provided as
follows:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:02 Nov 17, 2011
Jkt 226001
71831
branded commercial product that
contains fire-resistant rayon fibers, then
it would be in violation of the
prohibition not to specify the use of fireresistant rayon fiber.
B. Selection of Fire-Resistant Rayon
Fiber
Comment: Nine respondents stated
that the law only requires that DoD
solicitations prior to January 1, 2015,
not specify the use of fire-resistant
rayon fiber. The law does not restrict
DoD’s selection and use of fabrics
containing fire-resistant rayon fiber. The
respondents recommended that the
DFARS final rule make clear that the
rule does not prohibit DoD from
selecting fabrics that include fireresistant rayon fibers.
Response: These responses have
correctly stated the requirements of the
law. The DFARS interim rule correctly
reflected the statute. However, DoD has
added clarification to the title and text
of section 225.7016, that it is the
requirement that is prohibited, not the
voluntary offer and use.
E. Domestic Nonavailability
Determinations (DNADs) or Waivers
C. Specification of Other Fire-Resistant
Fibers
Comment: Nine respondents stated
that the law is narrow in its application
only to fire-resistant rayon fibers.
According to the respondents, the law
does not address DoD’s ability to specify
inherently flame-resistant cellulosic
fibers; this broader category includes
any manmade cellulosic fiber that has
fire resistance added to its slurry before
fiber extrusion, such as acetate, rayon,
lyocell, etc. The respondents
recommended that the DFARS final rule
make it clear that the prohibition
applies only to DoD’s ability to specify
the use of fire-resistant rayon fibers, and
not to any other categories of fibers.
Response: The DoD interim rule
clearly reflected the statutory
prohibition on requiring the use of fireresistant rayon fiber in a specification.
However, it would be contrary to the
intent of the statute to state the
requirements of the solicitation in such
a way as to exclude categories of fireresistant fiber (such as polymers) from
consideration.
D. Specification of Branded Products
Comment: Eight respondents stated
that the law does not restrict the
specification of branded products. The
respondents recommended that the
DFARS rule not include any mention of
branded commercial products.
Response: The interim DFARS rule
did not make any mention of branded
commercial products. However, if a
solicitation specifies the use of a
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
Comment: Nine respondents
recommended that the DFARS rule
should make clear that it does not
prohibit DoD’s ability to source foreign
fibers under its DNAD authority or a
legislated waiver to the Berry
Amendment.
Response: There is nothing in the
interim or final rule that would, in any
way, affect DoD’s ability to source
foreign fibers under its DNAD authority
or a legislated waiver to the Berry
Amendment.
F. Inequity in the Treatment of Foreign
Fibers
Comment: Nine respondents stated
that the law produces inequity in the
treatment of foreign fibers that are
specified by DoD and are purchased
under DoD’s authority to waive the
Berry Amendment. The respondents
cited various foreign fibers, none of
which are ‘‘restricted for specification.’’
Response: Noted. However, the
DFARS rule must implement the statute
as enacted.
G. Impact on Small Business
Comment: Nine respondents
disagreed with the statement in the
initial regulatory flexibility analysis that
the impact on small businesses will be
minimal. The respondents cited two
points on which they disagree with the
analysis:
1. According to the respondents,
Nomex is not a substitute for fireresistant rayon fiber for the manufacture
of all types of military uniforms. The
respondents stated that Nomex is
widely used in flight suits, but not in
ground troop uniforms, unless used
with cotton. Cotton requires topical fire
resistant treatment, which is not
permanent for the life of the fiber.
According to the respondents, the
alternatives to the use of fire-resistant
rayon are ‘‘next best’’ as a permanent
fire-resistant solution in hot and humid
environments and are also more
expensive.
2. Dozens of small businesses
currently supply DoD with uniforms
made using fire-resistant rayon fibers.
The impact on small business can be
significant if designing new products
and producing existing programs
becomes restrained by availability of
raw materials.
E:\FR\FM\18NOR3.SGM
18NOR3
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 223 (Friday, November 18, 2011)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 71830-71831]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-29426]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Defense Acquisition Regulations System
48 CFR Part 242
RIN 0750-AH41
Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement: Administering
Trafficking in Persons Regulations (DFARS Case 2011-D051)
AGENCY: Defense Acquisition Regulations System, Department of Defense
(DoD).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: DoD is issuing a final rule amending the Defense Federal
Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS) to add to the list of
contract administration functions a requirement to maintain
surveillance over contractor compliance with duties and
responsibilities pertaining to trafficking in persons when they are
incorporated in contracts.
DATES: Effective Date: November 18, 2011.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Meredith Murphy, telephone (703) 602-
1302.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
The current FAR, at section 22.1705, entitled ``Contract clause,''
prescribes use of the clause at FAR 52.222-50, Combating Trafficking in
Persons, in all solicitations and contracts. When the contract will be
performed outside the United States, the clause must be used with its
Alternate I, as prescribed in FAR 22.1705(b). The clause requires
contractors to inform employees of the Government's zero-tolerance
policy and the actions that will be taken against them for violations
of the policy. In addition, contractors are required to notify the
contracting officer immediately of any information received about an
employee's conduct that violates this policy and also of actions taken
against an employee as a result of the violation.
While the clause at FAR 52.222-50, Combating Trafficking in
Persons, has been in effect since February 2009, the listing of
Government contract administration functions was not modified at that
time to add surveillance of a contractor's compliance with the clause
requirements. Because the addition of this contract administration
function is internal to DoD and will not impact current contract
requirements or contract clauses, this is not a significant revision as
defined at FAR 1.501-1. Therefore, under the authority at FAR 1.501-
3(a), this rule can be published as a final rule without first
obtaining public comment.
III. Executive Orders 12866 and 13563
Executive Orders (E.O.s) 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess
all costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public
health and safety effects, distributive impacts, and equity). E.O.
13563 emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and benefits,
of reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, and of promoting flexibility.
This is a significant regulatory action and, therefore, was subject to
review under section 6(b) of E.O. 12866, Regulatory Planning and
Review, dated September 30, 1993. This rule is not a major rule under 5
U.S.C. 804.
IV. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act does not apply to this rule because
an initial regulatory flexibility analysis is only required for
proposed or interim rules that require publication for public comment
(5 U.S.C. 603) and a final regulatory flexibility analysis is only
required for final rules that were previously published for public
comment, and for which an initial regulatory flexibility analysis was
prepared (5 U.S.C. 604).
This final rule does not constitute a significant DFARS revision as
defined at FAR 1.501-1 because this rule will not have a significant
cost or administrative impact on contractors or offerors, or a
significant effect beyond the internal operating procedures of the
Government. Therefore, publication for public comment under 41 U.S.C.
1707 is not required.
V. Paperwork Reduction Act
The rule does not contain any information collection requirements
that require the approval of the Office of Management and Budget under
the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. chapter 35).
List of Subjects in 48 CFR Part 242
Government procurement.
Ynette R. Shelkin,
Editor, Defense Acquisition Regulations System.
Therefore, 48 CFR part 242 is amended as follows:
PART 242--CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION AND AUDIT SERVICES
0
1. The authority citation for 48 CFR part 242 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 41 U.S.C. 1303 and 48 CFR chapter 1.
0
2. Amend section 242.302 by adding paragraph (a)(S-73) to read as
follows:
242.302 Contract administration functions.
(a) * * *
(S-73) Maintain surveillance over contractor compliance with
trafficking in persons requirements for all DoD contracts for services
incorporating the clause at FAR 52.222-50, Combating Trafficking in
Persons, and, when necessary, its Alternate I, as identified
[[Page 71831]]
in the clause prescription at FAR 22.1705. (See PGI 222.1703.)
[FR Doc. 2011-29426 Filed 11-17-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001-06-P