Partner Vetting in USAID Acquisitions, 8166-8174 [2012-3239]
Download as PDF
8166
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 30 / Tuesday, February 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
17.1. TABLE 17–1—DIAGNOSTIC TESTS REQUIRED AFTER VARIOUS REPAIRS—Continued
Description of event
Optical
alignment
Optical
alignment
indicator
assessment
(Note 1)
Zero calibration
check
Clear
path (offstack)
zero assessment
(Note 3)
Upscale
calibration
check
Calibration error
check
Fault status indicator
check
Averaging
period
calculation and
recording
7-Day
zero and
up-scale
drift
check
(Note 2)
Recertify
per
PS–1
New
MCOC
per
ASTM D
6216–98,
07
(2) Replace or repair primary measurement light..
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
—
—
—
—
(3) Replace or repair components which are
measurement noncritical..
(4) Replace or repair components which are
measurement critical..
(5) Replace or repair components which are
measurement critical but
do not involve optical or
electro-optical components..
(6) Rebuild or substantially
refurbish the analyzer..
(7) Change to, or addition
of, analyzer components
which may affect MCOCspecified performance
parameters..
X
—
X
—
X
................
X
—
—
—
—
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
—
X
—
—
See test description, section 10.5(3).
—
—
X
—
X
X
X
X
—
—
—
Includes changes of components involving data
acquisition and recording.
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
X
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
X
X
See text description, section 10.5(4).
Significant changes which
are not part of the
MCOC-designated configuration.
Comments
Light source uniformity and
position are key source
to many performance
parameters.
See text description, section 10.5(2).
Notes: (1) Optical alignment indicator assessment requires the operator to verify during an off the stack clear path zero assessment that the beam is centered on the reflector/retro reflector
when the alignment indicator indicates on-axis centered alignment. If not, the analyzer optical train must be adjusted until this condition is met.
(2) 7-Day zero and upscale drift assessment. Opacity measurement data recorded prior to completion of the 7-day drift test will be considered as valid provided that the first 7-day drift test is
successful, that it is completed within 14 days of completion of the repair, and that other QA requirements are met during this time period.
(3) Requires verification of the external zero-jig response, or recalibration of the same, after the off-stack clear path zero has been re-established.
4678, Email:
AIDARPartnerVetting@usaid.gov.
[FR Doc. 2012–3379 Filed 2–13–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
A. Background
AGENCY FOR INTERNATIONAL
DEVELOPMENT
48 CFR Parts 704, 713, 714, 715, 716,
744, and 752
RIN 0412–AA63
Partner Vetting in USAID Acquisitions
United States Agency for
International Development.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
The U.S. Agency for
International Development (USAID) is
implementing a pilot for a Partner
Vetting System for USAID assistance
and acquisition awards. The purpose of
the Partner Vetting System is to help
ensure that USAID funds and other
resources do not inadvertently benefit
individuals or entities that are terrorists,
supporters of terrorists or affiliated with
terrorists, while also minimizing the
impact on USAID programs and its
implementing partners. We are
amending the USAID Acquisition
Regulations (AIDAR) regulations in
order to apply the Partner Vetting
System to USAID acquisitions for the
pilot and any subsequent
implementation of PVS that is
determined appropriate.
DATES: This final rule is effective on
March 15, 2012.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Michael Gushue, Telephone: 202–567–
pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:25 Feb 13, 2012
Jkt 226001
USAID’s final rule exempting portions
of the Partner Vetting System (PVS)
from provisions of the Privacy Act of
1974 went into effect on August 4, 2009
after several extensions, the most recent
of which was published on May 6, 2009
(74 FR 20871). Although USAID did not
further extend the effective date, the
agency did not implement PVS at that
time in order to allow additional input
from interested parties and to allow PVS
to be applied to both assistance and
acquisitions. Before the agency
determines whether to implement PVS
on a world-wide basis, USAID is
launching a PVS pilot program to
determine the costs and benefits of
implementing PVS more broadly. At the
conclusion of the pilot program, State
and USAID will determine whether it is
necessary to implement PVS more
broadly, and/or make changes to the
risk-based model it employs. In order to
apply PVS to USAID acquisitions,
USAID is amending 48 CFR Chapter 7,
which is USAID’s procurement
regulation. USAID published a Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) in the
Federal Register on June 26, 2009 (74
FR 30494) with a public comment
period of 60 days, closing on August 25,
2009. During the 60-day comment
period, USAID received comments from
five separate respondents. All
respondents expressed concerns about
PO 00000
Frm 00078
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
USAID’s intent to implement PVS and
reiterated objections raised during and
after the public comment period when
USAID established the PVS as a new
system of records (72 FR 39042) and
exempted portions of PVS from one or
more provisions of the Privacy Act (74
FR 9). However, since comments of this
nature are outside the scope of the
Proposed Rule, we are not addressing
them in this Final Rule. Only those
comments directly addressing the
proposed amendments to the AIDAR
and our responses are discussed below.
B. Summary of the Final Rule
USAID is issuing a final rule
amending 48 CFR Chapter 7, as
described in the proposed rule with
some modifications in response to the
public comments received. This final
rule implements the partner vetting
system for USAID acquisitions by
adding a new subpart 704.70 to (48 CFR)
AIDAR, with an associated solicitation
provision and contract clause in (48
CFR) AIDAR Part 752. Additionally, this
final rule amends (48 CFR) AIDAR Parts
713, 714, and 715, 716, and adds a new
Part 744 to include reference to the
requirements at (48 CFR) AIDAR
Subpart 704.70.
C. Discussion of Comments
USAID received comments and
suggestions from five organizations on
its proposed rule to amend 48 CFR
Chapter 7, which would enable USAID
to apply the Partner Vetting System to
USAID acquisitions. While some of the
comments and suggestions received did
E:\FR\FM\14FER1.SGM
14FER1
pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 30 / Tuesday, February 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
address the proposed amendments,
many of the comments and suggestions
focused instead on the Partner Vetting
System itself. Most, if not all, of those
comments and suggestions previously
were responded to when USAID
published in the Federal Register its
Privacy Act final rule for the Partner
Vetting System. See 74 FR 9 (January 2,
2009). Although that final rule
exempted from release under the
Privacy Act only information from other
government agencies and related to
investigations, USAID’s discussion of all
comments and suggestions received,
beginning at 74 FR 10, addresses these
general comments.
While not required to respond to
comments and suggestions which did
not expressly address the proposed
amendment to 48 CFR Chapter 7,
USAID nevertheless would like to
dispel one major misconception that
was reiterated in many of those
comments and suggestions. Some
organizations that submitted comments
and suggestions erroneously referred to
the Privacy Act final rule as a rule
applicable only to ‘‘non-profit, nongovernmental applicants to USAID.’’
That is not an accurate description of
either the Privacy Act final rule or of
any other Partner Vetting System
notices published by USAID in the
Federal Register. With the exception of
the NPRM for 48 CFR Chapter 7, which
is specific to acquisition, USAID’s
notices pertaining to the Partner Vetting
System were all applicable to all nongovernmental organizations (NGOs),
both for-profit and non-profit, whether
they are applying for assistance awards
or submitting offers/bids for acquisition
instruments. The term ‘‘NGO’’ as used
in the following notices was
comprehensive, covering all
organizations that were nongovernmental organizations. These
notices established a system of records
for the Partner Vetting System (72 FR
39042), proposed to exempt portions of
this system of records from one or more
provisions of the Privacy Act (72 FR
39768), proposed information collection
procedures for the Partner Vetting
System (72 FR 40110), and included a
Partner Information Form for
information collection purposes (72 FR
56041). While USAID initially
determined that it was not necessary to
amend its regulation on assistance (22
CFR 226) to implement the Partner
Vetting System, we did determine, as
reflected in the proposed rule to amend
48 CFR Chapter 7, that it is necessary to
amend the AIDAR. We have
subsequently determined that
rulemaking is appropriate for our
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:25 Feb 13, 2012
Jkt 226001
assistance regulation, 22 CFR Part 226,
and will publish separate Notices for
that purpose.
The following responses address
comments that were specific to the
proposed rule for Partner vetting in
USAID Acquisitions:
Source Selection vs. Vetting
Comment 1: ‘‘USAID declares that
‘regardless of the point at which vetting
begins, source selection proceeds
separately from vetting’ and the
contracting officer only confirms with
the vetting official whether an offeror
has ‘passed’ the vetting process. We
strongly concur and recommend that the
declarative statement that ‘source
selection proceeds separately from
vetting’ be included in both the
prescriptive provisions in Subpart
704.70 as well as in the clauses.’’
Response: USAID concurs with this
recommendation. Although the
proposed rule already stated in sections
704.7004–1(d) and 752.704–70(c) that
the two processes are separate, we agree
that the recommended declarative
statements would strengthen the
requirement. We have added the
recommended statements. USAID also
intends to provide its contracting
officers and negotiators with detailed
implementing procedures in the
Agency’s Automated Directives System
(ADS) that will emphasize the
importance of keeping the two processes
separate.
Timing of Vetting
Comment 2: The Professional Services
Council (PSC) provided extensive
discussion on the timing of vetting. It
recommended that USAID establish an
‘‘open season’’ on submissions of the
Form to the USAID Office of Security
(SEC). It also encouraged potential
offerors to collect their information
early and suggested that USAID should
encourage early submission of the Form
to SEC in order to allow for the
maximum amount of time for vetting to
occur. The PSC also suggested that
untimely vetting could result in a
constructive adverse ’’responsibility’’
determination.
Response: USAID appreciates the
concern expressed in these comments
about the need to carefully time vetting
and would like to reassure all
prospective offerors that we share this
concern. As stated in the NPRM, for
FAR Part 15 competitive negotiations,
we determined that vetting should
typically be done at the competitive
range stage (see 48 CFR 15.306(c)), after
we carefully weighed the need to allow
as much time as possible for vetting
against the burden to offerors and
PO 00000
Frm 00079
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
8167
USAID staff, especially SEC, of
collecting information from offerors
who may have no chance of receiving an
award. Discussions would therefore
occur concurrently with vetting. The
Rule does allow for contracting officers
to still have the discretion to request
offerors to submit the Form at a different
stage. And, for procurements using
other procedures, including IQC task
orders, contracting officers will have
full discretion to decide the most
appropriate time, and the Rule allows
for this flexibility. We considered an
‘‘open season’’ approach of allowing
prospective offerors to decide for
themselves when to submit the vetting
form, but because of the possible impact
on the SEC’s workload and the burden
on offerors, we determined that early
submission may not be practical.
We also recognize that for many
contractors, the key individuals who are
part of the company’s management team
are unlikely to change from one
procurement to another, so most likely
these key individuals’ passing initial
vetting will expedite subsequent vetting.
For this reason, submitting the Vetting
Form for key management individuals is
unlikely to make much difference to the
overall amount of time needed for
vetting. Offerors and contractors may
collect the vetting information at the
time they consider more practical, but
USAID will request submission at the
time the contracting officer considers
most appropriate, as stated in the
solicitation.
Regarding the comment that should
the Office of Security workload affect
timing and potentially lead to a
‘‘constructive adverse ‘responsibility’
determination outside the acquisition
process,’’ we disagree with any
characterization of a vetting
determination as a responsibility
determination, constructively or
otherwise. USAID views vetting as an
eligibility requirement.
Finally, USAID is formalizing plans
for a joint pilot conducted with the
Department of State. This pilot will
implement PVS in 5 countries with
varying levels of risk. The pilot will
help the Agency determine the resource
requirements for both the vetting
officials and the Office of Security, as
well as testing our assumptions about
vetting and its impact on our programs.
If the results of the pilot indicate that
adjustments to improve timing will
improve the vetting process, then we
will certainly make those adjustments,
including through rule-making if
appropriate.
E:\FR\FM\14FER1.SGM
14FER1
8168
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 30 / Tuesday, February 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
Definitions of ‘‘Key Individuals’’ and
‘‘Key Personnel’’
Comment 3: ‘‘USAID differentiates
between ‘key individuals’ and ‘key
personnel,’ noting that ‘the terms are not
synonymous; all key personnel will be
key individuals but not all key
individuals will be key personnel.’ Both
the Background information
accompanying the rule, the definition
section in Part 704.7002 and the
752.204–71 clause define the terms ‘key
individuals’ and ‘key personnel.’ All key
personnel, whether or not they are
employees of the offeror, are considered
key individuals and must be vetted
* * * As a technical matter, we believe
the phrase ‘key individuals, including
all key personnel’ should be modified to
read ‘all key individuals’ since the term
‘key individual’ is specifically defined
in the clause and incorporates all ‘key
personnel.’’’
Response: USAID agrees with this
comment and has revised the final rule
accordingly.
pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Subpart 704.7004–2: Post-award
Requirements—Annual Vetting
Comment 4: ‘‘This subpart imposes
both a new annual vetting submission,
as well as a continuous vetting
submission if there are changes in (1)
any key individual, including all key
personnel, and (2) subcontractors for
which vetting is required. Neither of
these factors has been addressed in the
Agency’s prior paperwork clearance
forms or in the discussion of the PVS
program. Nevertheless, while we can
appreciate the importance of vetting
new key individuals who were not part
of any prior vetting to achieving the
objectives of the PVS program, we see
little value to USAID, and considerable
burden to both USAID and its
implementing partners, in requiring an
annual re-submission of the PVS Form
from those that have already ‘passed’
the vetting process. If USAID
determines that new issues arise that
should trigger another review, or if
USAID determines to randomly sample
recipients, we recommend that the
regulations reserve for USAID, through
the contracting officer, the right to
require key individuals of a specific
contractor and/or its covered
subcontractors to submit the PVS Form
for one-time vetting.’’
Response: USAID agrees with this
comment and we have revised the rule
to remove annual submittal of the Form.
Contractors will still be required to
submit the Form any time key
individuals change and before issuance
of covered subcontractors, but will not
be required to resubmit the form
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:25 Feb 13, 2012
Jkt 226001
annually if no information has changed.
Instead, USAID will conduct post-award
vetting based on the latest submittal.
Ambiguity Regarding Which
Subcontractor Personnel Must Be Vetted
Comment 5: Subpart 704.7004–2
‘‘provides that vetting is required for all
subcontracts for which consent to
subcontract is required under FAR
52.244–2 and the contracting officer
may not consent until the subcontractor
has ‘passed’ vetting. The Background
information accompanying the rule
makes it clear that ‘the contracting
officer will not consent to a subcontract
until the subcontractor’s key individuals
have passed vetting’ (emphasis added),
but the rule itself is silent on the vetting
of subcontractors. We have assumed,
and strongly recommend that the rule
explicitly state, that subcontractors are
required to vet only ‘key individuals’ as
that term is defined in the proposed
rule.’’
Response: USAID agrees with this
comment and revised the final rule
accordingly, in sections 704.7004–2(b),
704.7004–3(a), and 704.7004–3(c).
Classes of Items Requiring Sub-tier
Vetting Should Be Specific
Comment 6: ‘‘However, subsection (c)
of subpart 7004–3 also authorizes
vetting for subcontracts at any tier (for
subcontractors not otherwise subject to
consent) for ‘certain classes of items
(supplies and services)’ that the
contracting officer identifies in the
solicitation. While we recognize the
flexibility the Agency must have to
require vetting of any additional ‘classes
of items’ based on the Agency’s internal
risk-based assessment, it is also
important that any of these selected
classes of items are described with
specificity and, if they remain
appropriate for vetting at the time of
award, that these designated ‘classes of
items’ are also carried over into the
resulting contracts—because only if
these additional classes of items are
included in the resulting contract will
there be a post-award requirement for
vetting.
Response: USAID agrees that a
contract must specifically identify the
classes of items subject to sub-tier
vetting and considers Alternate I to the
clause at 752.204–71 to adequately
address this. Further, we will emphasize
in the separate internal guidance in the
ADS to contracting officers the need to
be specific about the class of
subcontracts that are subject to vetting
at any tier.
PO 00000
Frm 00080
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Coverage of Subcontractors in the
Definition of ‘Key Individuals’
Comment 7: ‘‘In addition, there is no
coverage for subcontractors under the
definition of the term ‘key individual’ in
704.7002 or in the 204–71 clause. The
‘policy’ statement in Subpart 704.7003
notes that USAID will require vetting of
first tier subcontractors only, although
the coverage for subcontractors in
Subpart 704.7004–3(c) provides that
vetting may be required at any tier for
certain classes of items identified in the
solicitation; yet neither of the clauses
address the scope of coverage for
subcontractors except in terms of
submissions to the vetting official and
through the requirement in 204–71(i)
that the prime contractor flow down
certain provisions of the 204–71 clause
to ‘all subcontracts under this contract.’
Furthermore, there is no provision in
the clauses for the contracting officer to
designate any additional ‘classes of
items’ as authorized in 704.7003. The
gaps create considerable confusion
between the policy and the clause and
the actions that prime contractors
should take during the solicitation
process and after source selection.’’
Response: USAID agrees in part and
disagrees in part. We revised the policy
statement in section 704.7003 to apply
vetting to subcontracts for specified
classes of items if these subcontracts are
not subject to contracting officer
consent. We did not revise the
definition of key individual in section
704.7002 since it is not specific to the
prime offeror, contractor or first tier
subcontractor; it uses the term
‘‘organization’’ which applies to the
prime offeror, contractor and any
subcontractors when vetting applies to
such subcontractors through subsection
(h) of the base clause 752.704–71 and its
Alternate I. In fact, regarding the
comments that neither clause addresses
the ‘‘scope of coverage for
subcontractors’’ or that there is no
provision for the contracting officer to
designate any classes of items, we
disagree since subsection (h) in the base
and Alt. I specifically applies vetting to
subcontracts, and Alt. I provides for the
contracting officer to designate classes
of items subject to vetting at any
subcontract tier.
Lack of Coverage for Schedules
Purchases Under FAR Part 8.4
Comment 8: ‘‘While the rule
addresses the PVS treatment for
contracts awarded under AIDAR Parts
713 (Simplified Acquisition
Procedures), 714 (Sealed Bidding), and
715 (Contracting by Negotiation), there
is no coverage in the proposed rule for
E:\FR\FM\14FER1.SGM
14FER1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 30 / Tuesday, February 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
contracts awarded under Schedules
purchases under FAR Part 8.4. While
there is no current coverage in the
AIDAR regarding Schedules purchases,
and while we cannot foresee that any
such awards might be subject to the PVS
requirements, we believe it easier to
address this contract type and not use
it than to need this contract type and
not have the appropriate coverage.’’
Response: USAID does not envision
applying PVS to GSA Schedule Orders
as the basic contract would not include
the vetting clause and the contractors
would not have been made aware of the
requirement to vet prior to award.
Should GSA and USAID determine that
vetting is appropriate for purchases
made under FAR Part 8.4, appropriate
action will be taken at that time.
pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Lack of Coverage for Commercial Items
Awarded Under Part 712
Comment 9: ‘‘While the rule
addresses the PVS treatment for
contracts awarded under AIDAR Parts
713 (Simplified Acquisition
Procedures), 714 (Sealed Bidding), and
715 (Contracting by Negotiation), there
is no coverage in the proposed rule for
contracts awarded for commercial items
under FAR Part 12 (Commercial Items),
even though there is no current coverage
in the AIDAR regarding commercial
items. In our view, given the policy
approach USAID recommends—that
‘key personnel’ of the prime contractor
and for all subcontracts for which
consent to subcontract is required under
FAR 52.244–2 (but see our comments
above), we believe it appropriate and
consistent with USAID’s policy to
exempt from the PVS requirements
solicitations and resulting awards
entered into pursuant to FAR Part 12
and subcontracts for commercial items
regardless of the method of procurement
of the prime contract. Again, while we
cannot foresee that any such awards
might be subject to the PVS
requirements, we believe it easier to
address this contract type and not use
it than to need this contract type and
not have the appropriate coverage.’’
Response: In preparing the Proposed
Rule, USAID considered the need to
address commercial item procurements
but determined that such coverage was
unnecessary since commercial
purchases are made through either FAR
Part 13, Part 14, Part 15, or Part 16.5
(indefinite delivery contracts, see
Comment 10) procedures. There is no
contracting process that is unique to
commercial items, so we do not
consider it necessary to address vetting
in AIDAR Part 712.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:25 Feb 13, 2012
Jkt 226001
Lack of Coverage for IQCs Awarded
Under Part 716
Comment 10: ‘‘While the rule
addresses the PVS treatment for
contracts awarded under AIDAR Parts
713 (Simplified Acquisition
Procedures), 714 (Sealed Bidding), and
715 (Contracting by Negotiation), there
is no coverage for contracts awarded
under Part 716 (relating to IQCs). While
the background information recognizes
that PVS could apply to task orders
under IQCs, there are no special
procedures called out for contracting
officers or IQC holders to follow when
PVS is required after the award of the
underlying IQC but during the
competitive solicitation, evaluation and
subsequent award of a task order under
an IQC. This type of contract still
dominates USAID contracting and
should be specifically addressed.’’
Response: USAID agrees with this
comment and has revised AIDAR
Subpart 716.5 and added a contract
clause at 752.216–70 to address the
procedures for vetting indefinitedelivery contracts and orders placed
against them. This revised subpart may
appear to be a substantial addition to
the rule but since it merely clarifies
procedures we intended under the
proposed rule and is consistent with the
overall approach we are taking with
PVS, we consider the added coverage to
be within the scope of the proposed
rule. As noted in the comment, the
proposed rule was clear about applying
vetting to IQCs, so this added coverage
addresses the concern expressed in the
comment.
Location of the Treatment of Indefinite
Quantity Contracts and Task Orders
Comment 11: ‘‘Task order
competitions under Indefinite Quantity
Contracts (IQC) always come ‘postaward’ of the underlying contracts but
are more likely to trigger a new vetting
requirement. Subpart 7004–1(c) is the
only other place in the proposed rule
where IQCs are addressed, but it covers
only ‘potential awardee(s)’ and does not
address competition for task orders
under awarded contracts or
modifications to existing contracts. We
strongly recommend that the treatment
of task orders under IQCs be addressed
in this post-award requirements section.
Here, too, we strongly support an ‘open
season’ for submission of the Form to
USAID’s Office of Security to minimize
the risk that vetting will not be
completed in a timely manner to meet
the timeliness requirements of the
acquisition process.’’
Response: Regarding the timing of
vetting for IQC task orders, we stand by
PO 00000
Frm 00081
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
8169
our position discussed above (Comment
2) and will allow the task order
contracting officer to determine the
appropriate stage to vet. However,
USAID agrees that the rule must more
clearly address how partner vetting will
apply to IQC task orders. Task orders are
placed after the basic IQC has been
awarded, but the task orders themselves
are ‘‘awards’’ in their own right and for
that reason we included them in the
pre-award section. The process for
vetting task orders is more similar to
pre-award vetting for contracts rather
than to post-award vetting, since the key
individuals for each task order must
pass vetting before the contracting
officer may place the order. However, in
acknowledgement of the ‘‘post-award’’
nature of task orders, we have added a
contract clause at 752.216–70 which
includes the standard post award
vetting requirements and also addresses
the procedures for vetting orders against
Indefinite Delivery contracts.
D. Impact Assessment
Regulatory Planning and Review
Under Executive Orders (E.O.) 13563
and 12866, USAID must determine
whether a regulatory action is
‘‘significant’’ and therefore subject to
the requirements of the E.O. and subject
to review by the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB).
USAID has determined that this Rule
is not an ‘‘economically significant
regulatory action’’ under Section 3(f)(1)
of E.O.12866. The application of the
Partner Vetting System to USAID
acquisitions will not have an economic
impact of $100 million or more. The
regulation will not adversely affect the
economy or any sector thereof,
productivity, competition, jobs, the
environment, nor public health or safety
in a material way. However, as this rule
is a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’
under Section 3(f)(4) of the E.O., USAID
submitted it to OMB for review.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
Pursuant to requirements set forth in
the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5
U.S.C. 601 et seq.), USAID has
considered the economic impact of the
rule and has certified that its provisions
would not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small
entities.
Paperwork Reduction Act
The changes to the (48 CFR) AIDAR
use information collected via USAID
Partner Information Form, USAID Form
500–13, which was approved in
accordance with 44 U.S.C. 3501 by the
Office of Management and Budget on
E:\FR\FM\14FER1.SGM
14FER1
8170
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 30 / Tuesday, February 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
August 19, 2015 (OMB Control Number
0412–0577).
List of Subjects in 48 CFR Parts 704,
713, 714, 715, 744, and 752
Government procurement.
Regulatory Text
For the reasons set forth in the
preamble, the U. S. Agency for
International Development amends 48
CFR chapter 7 as follows:
1. The authority citation for 48 CFR
Parts 704, 713, 714, 715, 744, and 752
continues to read as follows:
Authority: Sec. 621, Pub. L. 87–195, 75
Stat. 445, (22 U.S.C. 2381) as amended; E.O.
12163, Sept. 29, 1979, 44 FR 56673; 3 CFR
1979 Comp., p. 435.
PART 704—ADMINISTRATIVE
MATTERS
2. Add Subpart 704.70 to read as
follows:
■
Subpart 704.70—Partner Vetting
Sec.
704.7001 Scope of subpart.
704.7002 Definitions.
704.7003 Policy.
704.7004 Procedures.
704.7004–1 Preaward requirements.
704.7004–2 Post award requirements.
704.7004–3 Subcontracts.
704.7005 Solicitation provision and
contract clause.
Scope of subpart.
pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Definitions.
As used in this subpart—
Key individual means:
(1) Principal officers of the
organization’s governing body (e.g.,
chairman, vice chairman, treasurer and
secretary of the board of directors or
board of trustees);
(2) The principal officer and deputy
principal officer of the organization
(e.g., executive director, deputy director,
president, vice president);
(3) The program manager or chief of
party for the USG-financed program;
and
(4) Any other person with significant
responsibilities for administration of the
USG-financed activities or resources,
such as key personnel as described in
Automated Directives System Chapter
302. Key personnel, whether or not they
are employees of the prime contractor,
must be vetted.
Vetting official means the USAID
employee identified in the solicitation
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:25 Feb 13, 2012
Jkt 226001
Policy.
In the interest of national security,
USAID may determine that a particular
acquisition is subject to vetting. In that
case, USAID will require vetting of all
key individuals of offerors, first tier
subcontractors, and any other class of
subcontracts if identified in the
solicitation and resulting contract.
When USAID conducts partner vetting,
it will not award a contract to any
offeror who does not pass vetting.
Procedures.
704.7004–1
This subpart prescribes the policies
and procedures to apply partner vetting
to USAID acquisitions.
704.7002
704.7003
704.7004
Subpart 704.70—Partner Vetting
704.7001
or contract as having responsibility for
receiving vetting information,
responding to questions about
information to be included on the
Partner Information Form, coordinating
with the USAID Office of Security
(SEC), and conveying the vetting
determination to each offeror, potential
subcontractors subject to vetting, and
the contracting officer. The vetting
official is not part of the contracting
office and has no involvement in the
source selection process.
Preaward requirements.
(a) When USAID determines an
acquisition to be subject to vetting, the
contracting officer determines the
appropriate stage of the acquisition
cycle to require offerors to submit the
completed USAID Partner Information
Form, USAID Form 500–13, to the
vetting official identified in the
solicitation. The contracting officer
must specify in the solicitation the stage
at which the offerors will be required to
submit the USAID Partner Information
Form.
(b) For negotiated procurements using
FAR part 15, this stage will typically be
when the contracting officer establishes
the competitive range (48 CFR
15.306(c)). However, the contracting
officer may determine that vetting is
more appropriate at a different stage of
the source selection process, such as
immediately prior to award, and then
require only the apparently successful
offeror to submit the completed USAID
Partner Information Form.
(c) For Indefinite Delivery contracts
under FAR subpart 16.5, vetting will
occur prior to award of the basic
contract if the contracting officer
anticipates placing orders subject to
vetting under that contract. Vetting will
also occur before USAID places any
orders subject to vetting. The
contracting officer will notify awardees
of the appropriate timing for vetting in
the request for task or delivery order
proposals. See AIDAR subpart 716.5 for
vetting procedures for task and delivery
orders.
PO 00000
Frm 00082
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
(d) For all other acquisitions,
including those under FAR parts 13 and
14, the contracting officer determines
the appropriate time to require potential
awardee(s) to submit the completed
USAID Partner Information Form to the
vetting official.
(e) Source selection proceeds
separately from vetting. The source
selection authority makes the source
selection determination separately from
the vetting process and without
knowledge of vetting-related
information other than that the
apparently successful offeror has passed
or not passed vetting.
(f) The contracting officer may only
award to an offeror who has passed
vetting.
704.7004–2
Post award requirements.
(a) For those contracts and task orders
the agency has determined are subject to
vetting, the contractor must submit the
completed USAID Partner Information
Form any time it changes:
(1) Key individuals, and
(2) Subcontractors for which vetting is
required.
(b) USAID may vet key individuals of
the contractor and any required
subcontractors periodically during
contract performance using the
information already submitted on the
Form.
704.7004–3
Subcontracts.
(a) When the prime contract is subject
to vetting, vetting is required for key
individuals of all subcontracts under
that contract for which consent is
required under FAR clause 52.244–2,
Subcontracts.
(b) The contracting officer must not
consent to a subcontract with any
subcontractor subject to vetting until
that subcontractor has passed vetting.
(c) Vetting may be required for key
individuals of subcontracts at any tier
for certain classes of items (supplies and
services). The contracting officer must
identify these classes of items in the
solicitation.
(d) The contractor may instruct
prospective subcontractors who are
subject to vetting to submit the USAID
Partner Information Form to the vetting
official as soon as the contractor submits
the USAID Partner Information Form for
its key individuals.
704.7005 Solicitation provision and
contract clause.
(a) The contracting officer will insert
the provision at 752.204–70 Partner
Vetting Pre–Award Requirements, in all
solicitations USAID identifies as subject
to vetting.
E:\FR\FM\14FER1.SGM
14FER1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 30 / Tuesday, February 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
(b) Except for awards made under
FAR part 16, the contracting officer
will—
(1) Insert the clause at 752.204–71
Partner Vetting, in all solicitations and
contracts USAID identifies as subject to
vetting, or
(2) Use the clause with its Alternate
I when USAID determines that
subcontracts at any tier for certain
classes of supplies or services are
subject to vetting.
(c) For awards made under FAR part
16, see (48 CFR) subpart 716.5.
PART 713—SIMPLIFIED ACQUISITION
PROCEDURES
3. Add section 713.106–370 to subpart
713.1 to read as follows:
■
713.106–370
Partner vetting.
If an acquisition is identified as
subject to vetting, see (48 CFR) AIDAR
704.70 for the applicable procedures
and requirements.
PART 714—SEALED BIDDING
4. Add section 714.408–170 to subpart
714.4 to read as follows:
■
714.408–170
Partner vetting.
If an acquisition is identified as
subject to vetting, see (48 CFR) AIDAR
704.70 for the applicable procedures
and requirements.
PART 715—CONTRACTING BY
NEGOTIATION
5. Add subpart 715.70 to read as
follows:
■
Subpart 715.70—Partner Vetting
715.70
Partner vetting.
If an acquisition is identified as
subject to vetting, see (48 CFR) AIDAR
704.70 for the applicable procedures
and requirements.
PART 716—TYPES OF CONTRACTS
6. Add subpart 716.5 to read as
follows:
■
pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Sec.
716.501–270 Partner vetting—indefinitedelivery contracts.
716.505–70 Vetting orders under indefinite
delivery contracts.
716.506 Solicitation provision and contract
clause.
716.501–270 Partner vetting—indefinitedelivery contracts.
If a task order or delivery order under
an indefinite-delivery contract has the
14:25 Feb 13, 2012
Jkt 226001
716.505–70 Vetting orders under indefinite
delivery contracts.
(a) The task order contracting officer
will specify in the request for task or
delivery order proposals whether the
order is subject to vetting and when
awardees must submit the USAID
Partner Information Form.
(b) For orders under multiple award
contracts, fair opportunity selection
procedures are conducted separately
from vetting. The contracting officer for
the order must follow the ordering
procedures in the contract to select the
order awardee without knowledge of
vetting-related information, other than
that the contractor has passed or not
passed vetting.
(c) The contracting officer may only
place an order subject to vetting with an
awardee that has passed vetting for that
order.
716.506 Solicitation provision and
contract clause.
(a) As prescribed in 48 CFR
704.7005(a), the contracting officer will
insert the provision at 752.204–70
Partner Vetting Pre–Award
Requirements, in solicitations for
indefinite delivery contracts when
USAID anticipates that any orders
placed under the contract will be
subject to vetting.
(b)(1) The contracting officer will
insert the clause at 752.216–71 Partner
Vetting, in those solicitations and
contracts for indefinite-delivery
contracts that USAID identifies as
subject to vetting.
(2) The contracting officer will use the
clause with its Alternate I when USAID
determines that subcontracts at any tier
for certain classes of supplies or services
are subject to vetting.
■ 7. Add Part 744 to read as follows:
PART 744—SUBCONTRACTING
POLICIES AND PROCEDURES
Subpart 716.5 Indefinite-Delivery
Contracts
VerDate Mar<15>2010
potential to be subject to vetting, then
the contract itself will be subject to the
applicable procedures and requirements
for partner vetting in (48 CFR) AIDAR
704.70.
Subpart 744.2—Consent to
Subcontracts
Sec.
744.202–170
Partner vetting.
Authority: Sec. 621, Pub. L. 87–195, 75
Stat. 445, (22 U.S.C. 2381) as amended; E.O.
12163, Sept. 29, 1979, 44 FR 56673; 3 CFR
1979 Comp., p. 435.
744.202–170
Partner vetting.
If an acquisition is identified as
subject to partner vetting, see (48 CFR)
PO 00000
Frm 00083
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
8171
AIDAR 704.70 for the applicable
procedures and requirements.
PART 752—SOLICITATION
PROVISIONS AND CONTRACT
CLAUSES
8. Amend Part 752 by adding sections
752.204–70 and 752.204–71 to subpart
752.2 to read as follows:
■
752.204–70 Partner vetting pre-award
requirements.
As prescribed in (48 CFR) AIDAR
704.7005(a), insert the following
provision in all solicitations subject to
vetting:
PARTNER VETTING PRE–AWARD
REQUIREMENTS (FEB 2012)
(a) USAID has determined that any
contract resulting from this solicitation is
subject to vetting. Terms used in this
provision are defined in paragraph (b) of the
AIDAR clause at 752.204–71 Partner Vetting,
of this solicitation. An offeror that has not
passed vetting is ineligible for award.
(b) The following are the vetting
procedures for this solicitation:
(1) Prospective offerors review the attached
USAID Partner Information Form, USAID
Form 500–13, and submit any questions
about the USAID Partner Information Form
or these procedures to the contracting officer
by the deadline for questions in the
solicitation.
(2) The contracting officer notifies the
offeror when to submit the USAID Partner
Information Form. For this solicitation,
USAID will vet at [insert in the provision the
applicable stage of the source selection
process at which the Contracting Officer will
notify the offeror(s) who must be vetted].
Within the timeframe set by the contracting
officer in the notification, the offeror must
complete and submit the information on the
USAID Partner Information Form in
accordance with instructions from the vetting
official named in paragraph (d) of the AIDAR
clause at 752.204–71 Partner Vetting, of this
solicitation.
Note: Offerors who submit using nonsecure methods of transmission do so at their
own risk.
(3) The offerors must notify proposed
subcontractors of this requirement when the
subcontractors are subject to vetting.
(c) Source selection proceeds separately
from vetting. Vetting is conducted
independently from any discussions the
contracting officer may have with an offeror.
The offeror and any subcontractor subject to
vetting must not provide vetting information
to other than the vetting official. The offeror
and any subcontractor subject to vetting will
communicate only with the vetting official
regarding their vetting submission(s) and not
with any other USAID or USG personnel,
including the contracting officer or his/her
representatives. Exchanges between the
Government and an offeror about vetting
information submitted by the offeror or any
proposed subcontractor are clarifications in
accordance with FAR 15.306(a) (48 CFR
E:\FR\FM\14FER1.SGM
14FER1
8172
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 30 / Tuesday, February 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
15.306(a)). The contracting officer designates
the vetting official as the only individual
authorized to clarify the offeror’s and
proposed subcontractor’s vetting information.
(d)(1) The vetting official notifies the
offeror that it:
(i) Has passed vetting,
(ii) Has not passed vetting, or
(iii) Must provide additional information,
and resubmit the USAID Partner Information
Form with the additional information within
the number of days the vetting official
specified in the notification.
(2) The vetting official will include in the
notification any information that USAID’s
Office of Security(SEC) determines
releasable. In its determination, SEC will take
into consideration the classification or
sensitivity of the information, the need to
protect sources and methods, or status of
ongoing law enforcement and intelligence
community investigations or operations.
(e) Reconsideration. (1) Within 7 calendar
days after the date of the vetting official’s
notification, an offeror that has not passed
vetting may request in writing to the vetting
official that the Agency reconsider the vetting
determination. The request should include
any written explanation, legal documentation
and any other relevant written material for
reconsideration.
(2) Within 7 calendar days after the vetting
official receives the request for
reconsideration, the Agency will determine
whether the offeror’s additional information
warrants a revised decision.
(3) The Agency’s determination of whether
reconsideration is warranted is final.
(f) Revisions to vetting information. (1)
Offerors who change key individuals,
whether the offeror has previously passed
vetting or not, must submit a revised USAID
Partner Information Form to the vetting
official. This includes changes to key
personnel resulting from revisions to the
technical proposal.
(2) The vetting official will follow the
vetting process in paragraph (d) of this clause
for any revision of the offeror’s Form.
(g) Award. At the time of award, the
contracting officer will confirm with the
vetting official that the apparently successful
offeror has passed vetting. The contracting
officer may award only to an apparently
successful offeror that has passed vetting.
752.204–71
Partner vetting.
As prescribed in (48 CFR) AIDAR
704.7005(b)(1) and 716.506(a), insert the
following clause in all contracts subject
to vetting:
pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES
PARTNER VETTING (FEB 2012)
(a) The contractor must comply with the
vetting requirements for key individuals
under this contract.
(b) Definitions. As used in this provision—
Key individual means:
(i) Principal officers of the organization’s
governing body (e.g., chairman, vice
chairman, treasurer and secretary of the
board of directors or board of trustees);
(ii) The principal officer and deputy
principal officer of the organization (e.g.,
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:25 Feb 13, 2012
Jkt 226001
executive director, deputy director,
president, vice president);
(iii) The program manager or chief of party
for the USG-financed program; and
(iv) Any other person with significant
responsibilities for administration of the
USG-financed activities or resources, such as
key personnel as described in Automated
Directives System Chapter 302. Key
personnel, whether or not they are employees
of the prime contractor, must be vetted.
Vetting official means the USAID employee
identified in paragraph (d) of this clause as
having responsibility for receiving vetting
information, responding to questions about
information to be included on the USAID
Partner Information Form, USAID Form 500–
13, coordinating with the USAID Office of
Security, and conveying the vetting
determination to each offeror, potential
subcontractors subject to vetting, and to the
contracting officer. The vetting official is not
part of the contracting office and has no
involvement in the source selection process.
(c) The Contractor must submit a USAID
Partner Information Form, USAID Form 500–
13, to the vetting official identified below
during the contract when the Contractor
replaces key individuals with individuals
who have not been previously vetting for this
contract. Note: USAID will not approve any
key personnel who have not passed vetting.
(d) The designated vetting official is:
Vetting official:
lllllllllllllllllllll
Address:
lllllllllllllllllllll
lllllllllllllllllllll
Email: llllllllll (for inquiries
only)
(e)(1) The vetting official will notify the
Contractor that it—
(i) Has passed vetting,
(ii) Has not passed vetting, or
(iii) Must provide additional information,
and resubmit the USAID Partner Information
Form with the additional information within
the number of days the vetting official
specifies.
(2) The vetting official will include in the
notification any information that USAID’s
Office of Security (SEC) determines
releasable. In its determination, SEC will take
into consideration the classification or
sensitivity of the information, the need to
protect sources and methods, or status of
ongoing law enforcement and intelligence
community investigations or operations.
(f) Reconsideration. (1) Within 7 calendar
days after the date of the vetting official’s
notification, the contractor or prospective
subcontractor that has not passed vetting may
request in writing to the vetting official that
the Agency reconsider the vetting
determination. The request should include
any written explanation, legal documentation
and any other relevant written material for
reconsideration.
(2) Within 7 calendar days after the vetting
official receives the request for
reconsideration, the Agency will determine
whether the contractor’s additional
information warrants a revised decision.
(3) The Agency’s determination of whether
reconsideration is warranted is final.
PO 00000
Frm 00084
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
(g) A notification that the Contractor has
passed vetting does not constitute any other
approval under this contract.
(h) When the contractor anticipates
awarding a subcontract for which consent is
required under FAR clause 52.244–2,
Subcontracts, the subcontract is subject to
vetting. The prospective subcontractor must
submit a USAID Partner Information Form,
USAID Form 500–13, to the vetting official
identified in paragraph (d) of this clause. The
contracting officer must not consent to award
of a subcontract to any organization that has
not passed vetting when required.
(i) The contractor agrees to incorporate the
substance of paragraphs (a) through (g) of this
clause in all subcontracts under this contract.
(End of clause)
Alternate I (FEB 2012). As prescribed
in 704.7005(b)(2), substitute paragraphs
(h) and (i) below for paragraphs (h) and
(i) of the basic clause:
(h)(1) When the contractor anticipates
awarding a subcontract for which consent is
required under FAR clause 52.244–2,
Subcontracts, the subcontract is subject to
vetting. The prospective subcontractor must
submit a USAID Partner Information Form,
USAID Form 500–13, to the vetting official
identified in paragraph (d) of this clause. The
contracting officer must not consent to award
of a subcontract to any organization that has
not passed vetting when required.
(2) In addition, prospective subcontractors
at any tier providing the following classes of
items (supplies and services):
lllllllllllllllllllll
lllllllllllllllllllll
lllllllllllllllllllll
must pass vetting. Contractors must not place
subcontracts for these classes of items until
they receive confirmation from the vetting
official that the prospective subcontractor has
passed vetting.
(i) The contractor agrees to incorporate the
substance of this clause in all subcontracts
under this contract.
9. Amend Part 752 by adding section
752.216–71 to subpart 752.2 to read as
follows:
■
752.216–71 Partner vetting in indefinite
delivery contracts.
As prescribed in (48 CFR) AIDAR
716.506(b)(1), insert the following
clause in all indefinite-delivery
contracts subject to vetting:
PARTNER VETTING IN INDEFINITE
DELIVERY CONTRACTS (FEB 2012)
(a) The contractor must comply with the
vetting requirements for key individuals
under this contract and in any orders that are
identified as subject to vetting.
(b) Definitions. As used in this provision—
Key individual means:
(i) Principal officers of the organization’s
governing body (e.g., chairman, vice
chairman, treasurer and secretary of the
board of directors or board of trustees);
(ii) The principal officer and deputy
principal officer of the organization (e.g.,
E:\FR\FM\14FER1.SGM
14FER1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 30 / Tuesday, February 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES
executive director, deputy director,
president, vice president);
(iii) The program manager or chief of party
for the USG-financed program; and
(iv) Any other person with significant
responsibilities for administration of the
USG-financed activities or resources, such as
key personnel as described in Automated
Directives System Chapter 302. Key
personnel, whether or not they are employees
of the prime contractor, must be vetted.
Vetting official means the USAID employee
identified in paragraph (d) of this clause as
having responsibility for receiving vetting
information, responding to questions about
information to be included on the USAID
Partner Information Form, USAID Form 500–
13, coordinating with the USAID Office of
Security, and conveying the vetting
determination to each contractor, potential
subcontractors subject to vetting, and to the
cognizant contracting officer. The vetting
official is not part of the contracting office
and has no involvement in the source
selection process.
(c) The contractor must submit a USAID
Partner Information Form, USAID Form 500–
13 to the designated vetting official:
(1) when the contractor replaces key
individuals under the basic contract with
individuals who have not been previously
vetted.
(2) when the contractor replaces key
individuals under an order subject to vetting
with individuals who have not been
previously vetted. For changes to any key
individuals associated with both the basic
contract and any orders subject to vetting, the
contractor must submit updated vetting
forms to each designated vetting official.
Note: USAID will not approve any key
personnel who have not passed vetting.
(d)(1) The designated vetting official for the
basic contract is:
Vetting official:
lllllllllllllllllllll
Address:
lllllllllllllllllllll
lllllllllllllllllllll
Email: llllllllll (for inquiries
only)
(2) Each order subject to vetting will
identify the vetting official for that order. The
contractor must submit vetting information
specific to an order to the vetting official
identified in that order.
(e)(1) The vetting official will notify the
contractor that it—
(i) Has passed vetting,
(ii) Has not passed vetting, or
(iii) Must provide additional information,
and resubmit the USAID Partner Information
Form with the additional information within
the number of days the vetting official
specifies.
(2) The vetting official will include in the
notification any information that USAID’s
Office of Security (SEC) determines
releasable. In its determination, SEC will take
into consideration the classification or
sensitivity of the information, the need to
protect sources and methods, or status of
ongoing law enforcement and intelligence
community investigations or operations.
(f) Reconsideration. (1) Within 7 calendar
days after the date of the vetting official’s
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:25 Feb 13, 2012
Jkt 226001
notification, the contractor or prospective
subcontractor that has not passed vetting may
request in writing to the vetting official that
the Agency reconsider the vetting
determination. The request should include
any written explanation, legal documentation
and any other relevant written material for
reconsideration.
(2) Within 7 calendar days after the vetting
official receives the request for
reconsideration, the Agency will determine
whether the contractor’s additional
information warrants a revised decision.
(3) The Agency’s determination of whether
reconsideration is warranted is final.
(g) A notification that the contractor has
passed vetting does not constitute any other
approval under this contract.
(h) The request for task or delivery order
proposals will identify whether the order is
subject to vetting. The following are the
procedures for vetting orders under this
contract. Note that the term ‘‘awardee’’ as
used below refers to a contractor under
multiple-award indefinite-delivery contracts,
consistent with the use of the term in (48
CFR) FAR 16.505(b):
(1) The contracting officer will notify the
awardees when to complete and submit the
USAID Partner Information Form to the
vetting official named in the request for order
proposals. Note: Awardees who submit using
non-secure methods of transmission do so at
their own risk.
(2) The awardee must notify proposed
subcontractors of this requirement when the
subcontractors are subject to vetting.
(3) The fair opportunity process proceeds
separately from vetting. Vetting is conducted
independently from any discussions the
contracting officer may have with an
awardee. The awardee and any subcontractor
subject to vetting must not provide vetting
information to other than the vetting official
identified in the request for order proposal.
The awardee and any subcontractor subject
to vetting will communicate only with the
vetting official regarding their vetting
submission(s) and not with any other USAID
or USG personnel, including the contracting
officer or his/her representatives.
(4)(i) The vetting official notifies the
awardee that it:
(A) Has passed vetting,
(B) Has not passed vetting, or
(C) Must provide additional information,
and resubmit the USAID Partner Information
Form with the additional information within
the number of days the vetting official
specified in the notification.
(ii) The vetting official will include in the
notification any information that USAID’s
Office of Security (SEC) determines
releasable. In its determination, SEC will take
into consideration the classification or
sensitivity of the information, the need to
protect sources and methods, or status of
ongoing law enforcement and intelligence
community investigations or operations.
(5) Reconsideration. (i) Within 7 calendar
days after the date of the vetting official’s
notification, an awardee that has not passed
vetting may request in writing to the vetting
official that the Agency reconsider the vetting
determination. The request should include
any written explanation, legal documentation
PO 00000
Frm 00085
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
8173
and any other relevant written material for
reconsideration.
(ii) Within 7 calendar days after the vetting
official receives the request for
reconsideration, the Agency will determine
whether the contractor’s additional
information warrants a revised decision.
(iii) The Agency’s determination of
whether reconsideration is warranted is final.
(6) Revisions to vetting information. (i)
Before the order is awarded, any awardee
who changes key individuals, whether it has
previously passed vetting or not, must submit
a revised USAID Partner Information Form to
the vetting official. This includes changes to
key personnel resulting from revisions to the
technical proposal.
(ii) The order vetting official will follow
the vetting process in paragraph (e) of this
clause for any revision of the awardee’s
Form.
(7) Award of order. The contracting officer
may award an order subject to vetting only
to an apparently successful awardee that has
passed vetting for that order.
(i) When the contractor anticipates
awarding a subcontract for which consent is
required under FAR clause 52.244–2,
Subcontracts, the subcontract is subject to
vetting. The prospective subcontractor must
submit a USAID Partner Information Form,
USAID Form 500–13, to the designated
vetting official. The contracting officer must
not consent to award of a subcontract to any
organization that has not passed vetting
when required.
(j) The contractor agrees to incorporate the
substance of paragraphs (a) through (g) of this
clause in all subcontracts under this contract.
(End of clause)
Alternate I (FEB 2012). As prescribed
in 716.506(b), substitute paragraphs (i)
and (j) below for paragraphs (i) and (j)
of the basic clause:
(i)(1) When the contractor anticipates
awarding a subcontract for which consent is
required under FAR clause 52.244–2,
Subcontracts, the subcontract is subject to
vetting. The prospective subcontractor must
submit a USAID Partner Information Form,
USAID Form 500–13, to the designated
vetting official. The contracting officer must
not consent to award of a subcontract to any
organization that has not passed vetting
when required.
(2) In addition, prospective subcontractors
at any tier providing the following classes of
items (supplies and services):
lllllllllllllllllllll
lllllllllllllllllllll
lllllllllllllllllllll
must pass vetting. Contractors must not place
subcontracts for these classes of items until
they receive confirmation from the vetting
official that the prospective subcontractor has
passed vetting.
E:\FR\FM\14FER1.SGM
14FER1
8174
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 30 / Tuesday, February 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
(j) The contractor agrees to incorporate the
substance of this clause in all subcontracts
under this contract.
Aman S. Djahanbani,
Senior Procurement Executive, US Agency
For International Development.
I. General Information
A. Does this action apply to me?
[FR Doc. 2012–3239 Filed 2–13–12; 8:45 am]
Entities potentially affected by this
action include firms that are performing
or will perform under contract for the
EPA. This includes firms in all industry
groups.
BILLING CODE 6116–01–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
II. Background
48 CFR Part 1511
[EPA–HQ–OARM–2010–0273; FRL–9630–4]
EPAAR Prescription for Work
Assignments
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
EPA will amend the EPA
Acquisition Regulation (EPAAR)
prescription for the work assignment
clause. This final rule provides revised
language to the prescription for the
work assignment clause, incorporating
prescriptive language that provides
further instructions on the use of the
related clause.
DATES: This final rule is effective
February 29, 2012.
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a
docket for this action under Docket ID
No. EPA–HQ–OARM–2010–0273. All
documents in the docket are listed on
the www.regulations.gov Web site.
Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available,
e.g., CBI or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute.
Certain other material, such as
copyrighted material, is not placed on
the Internet and will be publicly
available only in hard copy form.
Publicly available docket materials are
available either electronically through
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at
the Office of Environmental (OEI)
Information Docket, EPA/DC, EPA West,
Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave.
NW., Washington, DC. The Public
Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to
4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday,
excluding legal holidays. The telephone
number for the Public Reading Room is
(202) 566–1744, and the telephone
number for the OEI Docket is (202) 566–
1752.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Donna S. Blanding, Policy, Training,
and Oversight Division, Office of
Acquisition Management (3802R),
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington,
pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:25 Feb 13, 2012
DC 20460; telephone number: 202–564–
1130; fax number: 202–565–2475; email
address: blanding.donna@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Jkt 226001
meaning of the clause. The revised
language communicates to contract
personnel and program staff that
government cost-related estimates
should not be provided to contractors
prior to receiving the contractor’s work
plan (proposal); and how to address
exceptions. The exceptions addressed in
the policy involve circumstances where
a contracting officer may need to be able
to provide some of the expected level of
service needed to the contractor prior to
receipt of the work plan (proposal) due
to the nature of the work.
Recent contract file review activities
revealed better guidance is needed for
EPA Contracting Officers (COs) on the
work plan and work assignment
processes with regard to when a CO
should provide the expected level of
service needed to the contractor.
As a result, clarifying policy is being
added to the prescription for 1511.011–
74. Accordingly, the revised language
incorporated into EPAAR prescription
1511.011–74 provides the EPA
contracting officer with further
instructions on the use of EPAAR clause
1552.211–74, when administering work
assignments under Cost Reimbursable
type term form contracts.
V. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
III. General Comments
This action does not impose an
information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction
Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. No
information is collected under this
action.
One comment was received on June 6,
2011. The comment appears to be
misplaced; it appears the commenter
may have been attempting to address a
different notice. The comment in
reference to physician owned physical
therapy practices is not relevant to this
requirement. This rule focuses on the
administration of work assignments
under Cost Reimbursable contracts and
not physical therapy practices. As a
result, after in-depth review of this
public comment, no changes will be
made to this final rule.
IV. Final Rule
This rule amends the EPAAR to add
policy to prescription 1511.011–74 for
work assignments under clause
1552.211–74. The original prescription
language generally states that the work
assignment clause, 1552.211–74, shall
be used when a Cost Reimbursable type
term form contract with work
assignments will be issued. This policy
revision only adds additional
instructive language. The new policy
language contained under 1511.011–74,
Work Assignments (Deviation), will
serve to provide contracting officers
with better guidance on issuing a work
assignment. Therefore a revision will
not be required to the related EPAAR
clause, 1552.211–74 Work Assignments;
as this change does not affect the
PO 00000
Frm 00086
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory
Planning and Review and Executive
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and
Regulatory Review
This action is not a ‘‘significant
regulatory action’’ under the terms of
Executive Order (EO) 12866 (58 FR
51735, October 4, 1993) and EO 13563
(76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011).
Therefore, no review is required by the
Office of Information and Regulatory
Affairs within the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB).
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), as
amended by the Small Business
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of
1996 (SBREFA), 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.
The Regulatory Flexibility Act
generally requires an agency to prepare
a regulatory flexibility analysis of any
rule subject to notice and comment
rulemaking requirements under the
Administrative Procedure Act or any
other statute; unless the agency certifies
that the rule will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. Small entities
include small businesses, small
organizations, and small governmental
jurisdictions.
For purposes of assessing the impact
of today’s final rule on small entities,
‘‘small entity’’ is defined as: (1) A small
business that meets the definition of a
small business found in the Small
Business Act and codified at 13 CFR
121.201; (2) a small governmental
jurisdiction that is a government of a
city, county, town, school district or
special district with a population of less
than 50,000; and (3) a small
organization that is any not-for-profit
E:\FR\FM\14FER1.SGM
14FER1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 30 (Tuesday, February 14, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 8166-8174]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-3239]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
AGENCY FOR INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT
48 CFR Parts 704, 713, 714, 715, 716, 744, and 752
RIN 0412-AA63
Partner Vetting in USAID Acquisitions
AGENCY: United States Agency for International Development.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) is
implementing a pilot for a Partner Vetting System for USAID assistance
and acquisition awards. The purpose of the Partner Vetting System is to
help ensure that USAID funds and other resources do not inadvertently
benefit individuals or entities that are terrorists, supporters of
terrorists or affiliated with terrorists, while also minimizing the
impact on USAID programs and its implementing partners. We are amending
the USAID Acquisition Regulations (AIDAR) regulations in order to apply
the Partner Vetting System to USAID acquisitions for the pilot and any
subsequent implementation of PVS that is determined appropriate.
DATES: This final rule is effective on March 15, 2012.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael Gushue, Telephone: 202-567-
4678, Email: AIDARPartnerVetting@usaid.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
A. Background
USAID's final rule exempting portions of the Partner Vetting System
(PVS) from provisions of the Privacy Act of 1974 went into effect on
August 4, 2009 after several extensions, the most recent of which was
published on May 6, 2009 (74 FR 20871). Although USAID did not further
extend the effective date, the agency did not implement PVS at that
time in order to allow additional input from interested parties and to
allow PVS to be applied to both assistance and acquisitions. Before the
agency determines whether to implement PVS on a world-wide basis, USAID
is launching a PVS pilot program to determine the costs and benefits of
implementing PVS more broadly. At the conclusion of the pilot program,
State and USAID will determine whether it is necessary to implement PVS
more broadly, and/or make changes to the risk-based model it employs.
In order to apply PVS to USAID acquisitions, USAID is amending 48 CFR
Chapter 7, which is USAID's procurement regulation. USAID published a
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) in the Federal Register on June
26, 2009 (74 FR 30494) with a public comment period of 60 days, closing
on August 25, 2009. During the 60-day comment period, USAID received
comments from five separate respondents. All respondents expressed
concerns about USAID's intent to implement PVS and reiterated
objections raised during and after the public comment period when USAID
established the PVS as a new system of records (72 FR 39042) and
exempted portions of PVS from one or more provisions of the Privacy Act
(74 FR 9). However, since comments of this nature are outside the scope
of the Proposed Rule, we are not addressing them in this Final Rule.
Only those comments directly addressing the proposed amendments to the
AIDAR and our responses are discussed below.
B. Summary of the Final Rule
USAID is issuing a final rule amending 48 CFR Chapter 7, as
described in the proposed rule with some modifications in response to
the public comments received. This final rule implements the partner
vetting system for USAID acquisitions by adding a new subpart 704.70 to
(48 CFR) AIDAR, with an associated solicitation provision and contract
clause in (48 CFR) AIDAR Part 752. Additionally, this final rule amends
(48 CFR) AIDAR Parts 713, 714, and 715, 716, and adds a new Part 744 to
include reference to the requirements at (48 CFR) AIDAR Subpart 704.70.
C. Discussion of Comments
USAID received comments and suggestions from five organizations on
its proposed rule to amend 48 CFR Chapter 7, which would enable USAID
to apply the Partner Vetting System to USAID acquisitions. While some
of the comments and suggestions received did
[[Page 8167]]
address the proposed amendments, many of the comments and suggestions
focused instead on the Partner Vetting System itself. Most, if not all,
of those comments and suggestions previously were responded to when
USAID published in the Federal Register its Privacy Act final rule for
the Partner Vetting System. See 74 FR 9 (January 2, 2009). Although
that final rule exempted from release under the Privacy Act only
information from other government agencies and related to
investigations, USAID's discussion of all comments and suggestions
received, beginning at 74 FR 10, addresses these general comments.
While not required to respond to comments and suggestions which did
not expressly address the proposed amendment to 48 CFR Chapter 7, USAID
nevertheless would like to dispel one major misconception that was
reiterated in many of those comments and suggestions. Some
organizations that submitted comments and suggestions erroneously
referred to the Privacy Act final rule as a rule applicable only to
``non-profit, non-governmental applicants to USAID.'' That is not an
accurate description of either the Privacy Act final rule or of any
other Partner Vetting System notices published by USAID in the Federal
Register. With the exception of the NPRM for 48 CFR Chapter 7, which is
specific to acquisition, USAID's notices pertaining to the Partner
Vetting System were all applicable to all non-governmental
organizations (NGOs), both for-profit and non-profit, whether they are
applying for assistance awards or submitting offers/bids for
acquisition instruments. The term ``NGO'' as used in the following
notices was comprehensive, covering all organizations that were non-
governmental organizations. These notices established a system of
records for the Partner Vetting System (72 FR 39042), proposed to
exempt portions of this system of records from one or more provisions
of the Privacy Act (72 FR 39768), proposed information collection
procedures for the Partner Vetting System (72 FR 40110), and included a
Partner Information Form for information collection purposes (72 FR
56041). While USAID initially determined that it was not necessary to
amend its regulation on assistance (22 CFR 226) to implement the
Partner Vetting System, we did determine, as reflected in the proposed
rule to amend 48 CFR Chapter 7, that it is necessary to amend the
AIDAR. We have subsequently determined that rulemaking is appropriate
for our assistance regulation, 22 CFR Part 226, and will publish
separate Notices for that purpose.
The following responses address comments that were specific to the
proposed rule for Partner vetting in USAID Acquisitions:
Source Selection vs. Vetting
Comment 1: ``USAID declares that `regardless of the point at which
vetting begins, source selection proceeds separately from vetting' and
the contracting officer only confirms with the vetting official whether
an offeror has `passed' the vetting process. We strongly concur and
recommend that the declarative statement that `source selection
proceeds separately from vetting' be included in both the prescriptive
provisions in Subpart 704.70 as well as in the clauses.''
Response: USAID concurs with this recommendation. Although the
proposed rule already stated in sections 704.7004-1(d) and 752.704-
70(c) that the two processes are separate, we agree that the
recommended declarative statements would strengthen the requirement. We
have added the recommended statements. USAID also intends to provide
its contracting officers and negotiators with detailed implementing
procedures in the Agency's Automated Directives System (ADS) that will
emphasize the importance of keeping the two processes separate.
Timing of Vetting
Comment 2: The Professional Services Council (PSC) provided
extensive discussion on the timing of vetting. It recommended that
USAID establish an ``open season'' on submissions of the Form to the
USAID Office of Security (SEC). It also encouraged potential offerors
to collect their information early and suggested that USAID should
encourage early submission of the Form to SEC in order to allow for the
maximum amount of time for vetting to occur. The PSC also suggested
that untimely vetting could result in a constructive adverse
''responsibility'' determination.
Response: USAID appreciates the concern expressed in these comments
about the need to carefully time vetting and would like to reassure all
prospective offerors that we share this concern. As stated in the NPRM,
for FAR Part 15 competitive negotiations, we determined that vetting
should typically be done at the competitive range stage (see 48 CFR
15.306(c)), after we carefully weighed the need to allow as much time
as possible for vetting against the burden to offerors and USAID staff,
especially SEC, of collecting information from offerors who may have no
chance of receiving an award. Discussions would therefore occur
concurrently with vetting. The Rule does allow for contracting officers
to still have the discretion to request offerors to submit the Form at
a different stage. And, for procurements using other procedures,
including IQC task orders, contracting officers will have full
discretion to decide the most appropriate time, and the Rule allows for
this flexibility. We considered an ``open season'' approach of allowing
prospective offerors to decide for themselves when to submit the
vetting form, but because of the possible impact on the SEC's workload
and the burden on offerors, we determined that early submission may not
be practical.
We also recognize that for many contractors, the key individuals
who are part of the company's management team are unlikely to change
from one procurement to another, so most likely these key individuals'
passing initial vetting will expedite subsequent vetting. For this
reason, submitting the Vetting Form for key management individuals is
unlikely to make much difference to the overall amount of time needed
for vetting. Offerors and contractors may collect the vetting
information at the time they consider more practical, but USAID will
request submission at the time the contracting officer considers most
appropriate, as stated in the solicitation.
Regarding the comment that should the Office of Security workload
affect timing and potentially lead to a ``constructive adverse
`responsibility' determination outside the acquisition process,'' we
disagree with any characterization of a vetting determination as a
responsibility determination, constructively or otherwise. USAID views
vetting as an eligibility requirement.
Finally, USAID is formalizing plans for a joint pilot conducted
with the Department of State. This pilot will implement PVS in 5
countries with varying levels of risk. The pilot will help the Agency
determine the resource requirements for both the vetting officials and
the Office of Security, as well as testing our assumptions about
vetting and its impact on our programs. If the results of the pilot
indicate that adjustments to improve timing will improve the vetting
process, then we will certainly make those adjustments, including
through rule-making if appropriate.
[[Page 8168]]
Definitions of ``Key Individuals'' and ``Key Personnel''
Comment 3: ``USAID differentiates between `key individuals' and
`key personnel,' noting that `the terms are not synonymous; all key
personnel will be key individuals but not all key individuals will be
key personnel.' Both the Background information accompanying the rule,
the definition section in Part 704.7002 and the 752.204-71 clause
define the terms `key individuals' and `key personnel.' All key
personnel, whether or not they are employees of the offeror, are
considered key individuals and must be vetted * * * As a technical
matter, we believe the phrase `key individuals, including all key
personnel' should be modified to read `all key individuals' since the
term `key individual' is specifically defined in the clause and
incorporates all `key personnel.'''
Response: USAID agrees with this comment and has revised the final
rule accordingly.
Subpart 704.7004-2: Post-award Requirements--Annual Vetting
Comment 4: ``This subpart imposes both a new annual vetting
submission, as well as a continuous vetting submission if there are
changes in (1) any key individual, including all key personnel, and (2)
subcontractors for which vetting is required. Neither of these factors
has been addressed in the Agency's prior paperwork clearance forms or
in the discussion of the PVS program. Nevertheless, while we can
appreciate the importance of vetting new key individuals who were not
part of any prior vetting to achieving the objectives of the PVS
program, we see little value to USAID, and considerable burden to both
USAID and its implementing partners, in requiring an annual re-
submission of the PVS Form from those that have already `passed' the
vetting process. If USAID determines that new issues arise that should
trigger another review, or if USAID determines to randomly sample
recipients, we recommend that the regulations reserve for USAID,
through the contracting officer, the right to require key individuals
of a specific contractor and/or its covered subcontractors to submit
the PVS Form for one-time vetting.''
Response: USAID agrees with this comment and we have revised the
rule to remove annual submittal of the Form. Contractors will still be
required to submit the Form any time key individuals change and before
issuance of covered subcontractors, but will not be required to
resubmit the form annually if no information has changed. Instead,
USAID will conduct post-award vetting based on the latest submittal.
Ambiguity Regarding Which Subcontractor Personnel Must Be Vetted
Comment 5: Subpart 704.7004-2 ``provides that vetting is required
for all subcontracts for which consent to subcontract is required under
FAR 52.244-2 and the contracting officer may not consent until the
subcontractor has `passed' vetting. The Background information
accompanying the rule makes it clear that `the contracting officer will
not consent to a subcontract until the subcontractor's key individuals
have passed vetting' (emphasis added), but the rule itself is silent on
the vetting of subcontractors. We have assumed, and strongly recommend
that the rule explicitly state, that subcontractors are required to vet
only `key individuals' as that term is defined in the proposed rule.''
Response: USAID agrees with this comment and revised the final rule
accordingly, in sections 704.7004-2(b), 704.7004-3(a), and 704.7004-
3(c).
Classes of Items Requiring Sub-tier Vetting Should Be Specific
Comment 6: ``However, subsection (c) of subpart 7004-3 also
authorizes vetting for subcontracts at any tier (for subcontractors not
otherwise subject to consent) for `certain classes of items (supplies
and services)' that the contracting officer identifies in the
solicitation. While we recognize the flexibility the Agency must have
to require vetting of any additional `classes of items' based on the
Agency's internal risk-based assessment, it is also important that any
of these selected classes of items are described with specificity and,
if they remain appropriate for vetting at the time of award, that these
designated `classes of items' are also carried over into the resulting
contracts--because only if these additional classes of items are
included in the resulting contract will there be a post-award
requirement for vetting.
Response: USAID agrees that a contract must specifically identify
the classes of items subject to sub-tier vetting and considers
Alternate I to the clause at 752.204-71 to adequately address this.
Further, we will emphasize in the separate internal guidance in the ADS
to contracting officers the need to be specific about the class of
subcontracts that are subject to vetting at any tier.
Coverage of Subcontractors in the Definition of `Key Individuals'
Comment 7: ``In addition, there is no coverage for subcontractors
under the definition of the term `key individual' in 704.7002 or in the
204-71 clause. The `policy' statement in Subpart 704.7003 notes that
USAID will require vetting of first tier subcontractors only, although
the coverage for subcontractors in Subpart 704.7004-3(c) provides that
vetting may be required at any tier for certain classes of items
identified in the solicitation; yet neither of the clauses address the
scope of coverage for subcontractors except in terms of submissions to
the vetting official and through the requirement in 204-71(i) that the
prime contractor flow down certain provisions of the 204-71 clause to
`all subcontracts under this contract.' Furthermore, there is no
provision in the clauses for the contracting officer to designate any
additional `classes of items' as authorized in 704.7003. The gaps
create considerable confusion between the policy and the clause and the
actions that prime contractors should take during the solicitation
process and after source selection.''
Response: USAID agrees in part and disagrees in part. We revised
the policy statement in section 704.7003 to apply vetting to
subcontracts for specified classes of items if these subcontracts are
not subject to contracting officer consent. We did not revise the
definition of key individual in section 704.7002 since it is not
specific to the prime offeror, contractor or first tier subcontractor;
it uses the term ``organization'' which applies to the prime offeror,
contractor and any subcontractors when vetting applies to such
subcontractors through subsection (h) of the base clause 752.704-71 and
its Alternate I. In fact, regarding the comments that neither clause
addresses the ``scope of coverage for subcontractors'' or that there is
no provision for the contracting officer to designate any classes of
items, we disagree since subsection (h) in the base and Alt. I
specifically applies vetting to subcontracts, and Alt. I provides for
the contracting officer to designate classes of items subject to
vetting at any subcontract tier.
Lack of Coverage for Schedules Purchases Under FAR Part 8.4
Comment 8: ``While the rule addresses the PVS treatment for
contracts awarded under AIDAR Parts 713 (Simplified Acquisition
Procedures), 714 (Sealed Bidding), and 715 (Contracting by
Negotiation), there is no coverage in the proposed rule for
[[Page 8169]]
contracts awarded under Schedules purchases under FAR Part 8.4. While
there is no current coverage in the AIDAR regarding Schedules
purchases, and while we cannot foresee that any such awards might be
subject to the PVS requirements, we believe it easier to address this
contract type and not use it than to need this contract type and not
have the appropriate coverage.''
Response: USAID does not envision applying PVS to GSA Schedule
Orders as the basic contract would not include the vetting clause and
the contractors would not have been made aware of the requirement to
vet prior to award. Should GSA and USAID determine that vetting is
appropriate for purchases made under FAR Part 8.4, appropriate action
will be taken at that time.
Lack of Coverage for Commercial Items Awarded Under Part 712
Comment 9: ``While the rule addresses the PVS treatment for
contracts awarded under AIDAR Parts 713 (Simplified Acquisition
Procedures), 714 (Sealed Bidding), and 715 (Contracting by
Negotiation), there is no coverage in the proposed rule for contracts
awarded for commercial items under FAR Part 12 (Commercial Items), even
though there is no current coverage in the AIDAR regarding commercial
items. In our view, given the policy approach USAID recommends--that
`key personnel' of the prime contractor and for all subcontracts for
which consent to subcontract is required under FAR 52.244-2 (but see
our comments above), we believe it appropriate and consistent with
USAID's policy to exempt from the PVS requirements solicitations and
resulting awards entered into pursuant to FAR Part 12 and subcontracts
for commercial items regardless of the method of procurement of the
prime contract. Again, while we cannot foresee that any such awards
might be subject to the PVS requirements, we believe it easier to
address this contract type and not use it than to need this contract
type and not have the appropriate coverage.''
Response: In preparing the Proposed Rule, USAID considered the need
to address commercial item procurements but determined that such
coverage was unnecessary since commercial purchases are made through
either FAR Part 13, Part 14, Part 15, or Part 16.5 (indefinite delivery
contracts, see Comment 10) procedures. There is no contracting process
that is unique to commercial items, so we do not consider it necessary
to address vetting in AIDAR Part 712.
Lack of Coverage for IQCs Awarded Under Part 716
Comment 10: ``While the rule addresses the PVS treatment for
contracts awarded under AIDAR Parts 713 (Simplified Acquisition
Procedures), 714 (Sealed Bidding), and 715 (Contracting by
Negotiation), there is no coverage for contracts awarded under Part 716
(relating to IQCs). While the background information recognizes that
PVS could apply to task orders under IQCs, there are no special
procedures called out for contracting officers or IQC holders to follow
when PVS is required after the award of the underlying IQC but during
the competitive solicitation, evaluation and subsequent award of a task
order under an IQC. This type of contract still dominates USAID
contracting and should be specifically addressed.''
Response: USAID agrees with this comment and has revised AIDAR
Subpart 716.5 and added a contract clause at 752.216-70 to address the
procedures for vetting indefinite-delivery contracts and orders placed
against them. This revised subpart may appear to be a substantial
addition to the rule but since it merely clarifies procedures we
intended under the proposed rule and is consistent with the overall
approach we are taking with PVS, we consider the added coverage to be
within the scope of the proposed rule. As noted in the comment, the
proposed rule was clear about applying vetting to IQCs, so this added
coverage addresses the concern expressed in the comment.
Location of the Treatment of Indefinite Quantity Contracts and Task
Orders
Comment 11: ``Task order competitions under Indefinite Quantity
Contracts (IQC) always come `post-award' of the underlying contracts
but are more likely to trigger a new vetting requirement. Subpart 7004-
1(c) is the only other place in the proposed rule where IQCs are
addressed, but it covers only `potential awardee(s)' and does not
address competition for task orders under awarded contracts or
modifications to existing contracts. We strongly recommend that the
treatment of task orders under IQCs be addressed in this post-award
requirements section. Here, too, we strongly support an `open season'
for submission of the Form to USAID's Office of Security to minimize
the risk that vetting will not be completed in a timely manner to meet
the timeliness requirements of the acquisition process.''
Response: Regarding the timing of vetting for IQC task orders, we
stand by our position discussed above (Comment 2) and will allow the
task order contracting officer to determine the appropriate stage to
vet. However, USAID agrees that the rule must more clearly address how
partner vetting will apply to IQC task orders. Task orders are placed
after the basic IQC has been awarded, but the task orders themselves
are ``awards'' in their own right and for that reason we included them
in the pre-award section. The process for vetting task orders is more
similar to pre-award vetting for contracts rather than to post-award
vetting, since the key individuals for each task order must pass
vetting before the contracting officer may place the order. However, in
acknowledgement of the ``post-award'' nature of task orders, we have
added a contract clause at 752.216-70 which includes the standard post
award vetting requirements and also addresses the procedures for
vetting orders against Indefinite Delivery contracts.
D. Impact Assessment
Regulatory Planning and Review
Under Executive Orders (E.O.) 13563 and 12866, USAID must determine
whether a regulatory action is ``significant'' and therefore subject to
the requirements of the E.O. and subject to review by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB).
USAID has determined that this Rule is not an ``economically
significant regulatory action'' under Section 3(f)(1) of E.O.12866. The
application of the Partner Vetting System to USAID acquisitions will
not have an economic impact of $100 million or more. The regulation
will not adversely affect the economy or any sector thereof,
productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, nor public health or
safety in a material way. However, as this rule is a ``significant
regulatory action'' under Section 3(f)(4) of the E.O., USAID submitted
it to OMB for review.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
Pursuant to requirements set forth in the Regulatory Flexibility
Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), USAID has considered the economic
impact of the rule and has certified that its provisions would not have
a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities.
Paperwork Reduction Act
The changes to the (48 CFR) AIDAR use information collected via
USAID Partner Information Form, USAID Form 500-13, which was approved
in accordance with 44 U.S.C. 3501 by the Office of Management and
Budget on
[[Page 8170]]
August 19, 2015 (OMB Control Number 0412-0577).
List of Subjects in 48 CFR Parts 704, 713, 714, 715, 744, and 752
Government procurement.
Regulatory Text
For the reasons set forth in the preamble, the U. S. Agency for
International Development amends 48 CFR chapter 7 as follows:
1. The authority citation for 48 CFR Parts 704, 713, 714, 715, 744,
and 752 continues to read as follows:
Authority: Sec. 621, Pub. L. 87-195, 75 Stat. 445, (22 U.S.C.
2381) as amended; E.O. 12163, Sept. 29, 1979, 44 FR 56673; 3 CFR
1979 Comp., p. 435.
PART 704--ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS
0
2. Add Subpart 704.70 to read as follows:
Subpart 704.70--Partner Vetting
Sec.
704.7001 Scope of subpart.
704.7002 Definitions.
704.7003 Policy.
704.7004 Procedures.
704.7004-1 Preaward requirements.
704.7004-2 Post award requirements.
704.7004-3 Subcontracts.
704.7005 Solicitation provision and contract clause.
Subpart 704.70--Partner Vetting
704.7001 Scope of subpart.
This subpart prescribes the policies and procedures to apply
partner vetting to USAID acquisitions.
704.7002 Definitions.
As used in this subpart--
Key individual means:
(1) Principal officers of the organization's governing body (e.g.,
chairman, vice chairman, treasurer and secretary of the board of
directors or board of trustees);
(2) The principal officer and deputy principal officer of the
organization (e.g., executive director, deputy director, president,
vice president);
(3) The program manager or chief of party for the USG-financed
program; and
(4) Any other person with significant responsibilities for
administration of the USG-financed activities or resources, such as key
personnel as described in Automated Directives System Chapter 302. Key
personnel, whether or not they are employees of the prime contractor,
must be vetted.
Vetting official means the USAID employee identified in the
solicitation or contract as having responsibility for receiving vetting
information, responding to questions about information to be included
on the Partner Information Form, coordinating with the USAID Office of
Security (SEC), and conveying the vetting determination to each
offeror, potential subcontractors subject to vetting, and the
contracting officer. The vetting official is not part of the
contracting office and has no involvement in the source selection
process.
704.7003 Policy.
In the interest of national security, USAID may determine that a
particular acquisition is subject to vetting. In that case, USAID will
require vetting of all key individuals of offerors, first tier
subcontractors, and any other class of subcontracts if identified in
the solicitation and resulting contract. When USAID conducts partner
vetting, it will not award a contract to any offeror who does not pass
vetting.
704.7004 Procedures.
704.7004-1 Preaward requirements.
(a) When USAID determines an acquisition to be subject to vetting,
the contracting officer determines the appropriate stage of the
acquisition cycle to require offerors to submit the completed USAID
Partner Information Form, USAID Form 500-13, to the vetting official
identified in the solicitation. The contracting officer must specify in
the solicitation the stage at which the offerors will be required to
submit the USAID Partner Information Form.
(b) For negotiated procurements using FAR part 15, this stage will
typically be when the contracting officer establishes the competitive
range (48 CFR 15.306(c)). However, the contracting officer may
determine that vetting is more appropriate at a different stage of the
source selection process, such as immediately prior to award, and then
require only the apparently successful offeror to submit the completed
USAID Partner Information Form.
(c) For Indefinite Delivery contracts under FAR subpart 16.5,
vetting will occur prior to award of the basic contract if the
contracting officer anticipates placing orders subject to vetting under
that contract. Vetting will also occur before USAID places any orders
subject to vetting. The contracting officer will notify awardees of the
appropriate timing for vetting in the request for task or delivery
order proposals. See AIDAR subpart 716.5 for vetting procedures for
task and delivery orders.
(d) For all other acquisitions, including those under FAR parts 13
and 14, the contracting officer determines the appropriate time to
require potential awardee(s) to submit the completed USAID Partner
Information Form to the vetting official.
(e) Source selection proceeds separately from vetting. The source
selection authority makes the source selection determination separately
from the vetting process and without knowledge of vetting-related
information other than that the apparently successful offeror has
passed or not passed vetting.
(f) The contracting officer may only award to an offeror who has
passed vetting.
704.7004-2 Post award requirements.
(a) For those contracts and task orders the agency has determined
are subject to vetting, the contractor must submit the completed USAID
Partner Information Form any time it changes:
(1) Key individuals, and
(2) Subcontractors for which vetting is required.
(b) USAID may vet key individuals of the contractor and any
required subcontractors periodically during contract performance using
the information already submitted on the Form.
704.7004-3 Subcontracts.
(a) When the prime contract is subject to vetting, vetting is
required for key individuals of all subcontracts under that contract
for which consent is required under FAR clause 52.244-2, Subcontracts.
(b) The contracting officer must not consent to a subcontract with
any subcontractor subject to vetting until that subcontractor has
passed vetting.
(c) Vetting may be required for key individuals of subcontracts at
any tier for certain classes of items (supplies and services). The
contracting officer must identify these classes of items in the
solicitation.
(d) The contractor may instruct prospective subcontractors who are
subject to vetting to submit the USAID Partner Information Form to the
vetting official as soon as the contractor submits the USAID Partner
Information Form for its key individuals.
704.7005 Solicitation provision and contract clause.
(a) The contracting officer will insert the provision at 752.204-70
Partner Vetting Pre-Award Requirements, in all solicitations USAID
identifies as subject to vetting.
[[Page 8171]]
(b) Except for awards made under FAR part 16, the contracting
officer will--
(1) Insert the clause at 752.204-71 Partner Vetting, in all
solicitations and contracts USAID identifies as subject to vetting, or
(2) Use the clause with its Alternate I when USAID determines that
subcontracts at any tier for certain classes of supplies or services
are subject to vetting.
(c) For awards made under FAR part 16, see (48 CFR) subpart 716.5.
PART 713--SIMPLIFIED ACQUISITION PROCEDURES
0
3. Add section 713.106-370 to subpart 713.1 to read as follows:
713.106-370 Partner vetting.
If an acquisition is identified as subject to vetting, see (48 CFR)
AIDAR 704.70 for the applicable procedures and requirements.
PART 714--SEALED BIDDING
0
4. Add section 714.408-170 to subpart 714.4 to read as follows:
714.408-170 Partner vetting.
If an acquisition is identified as subject to vetting, see (48 CFR)
AIDAR 704.70 for the applicable procedures and requirements.
PART 715--CONTRACTING BY NEGOTIATION
0
5. Add subpart 715.70 to read as follows:
Subpart 715.70--Partner Vetting
715.70 Partner vetting.
If an acquisition is identified as subject to vetting, see (48 CFR)
AIDAR 704.70 for the applicable procedures and requirements.
PART 716--TYPES OF CONTRACTS
0
6. Add subpart 716.5 to read as follows:
Subpart 716.5 Indefinite-Delivery Contracts
Sec.
716.501-270 Partner vetting--indefinite-delivery contracts.
716.505-70 Vetting orders under indefinite delivery contracts.
716.506 Solicitation provision and contract clause.
716.501-270 Partner vetting--indefinite-delivery contracts.
If a task order or delivery order under an indefinite-delivery
contract has the potential to be subject to vetting, then the contract
itself will be subject to the applicable procedures and requirements
for partner vetting in (48 CFR) AIDAR 704.70.
716.505-70 Vetting orders under indefinite delivery contracts.
(a) The task order contracting officer will specify in the request
for task or delivery order proposals whether the order is subject to
vetting and when awardees must submit the USAID Partner Information
Form.
(b) For orders under multiple award contracts, fair opportunity
selection procedures are conducted separately from vetting. The
contracting officer for the order must follow the ordering procedures
in the contract to select the order awardee without knowledge of
vetting-related information, other than that the contractor has passed
or not passed vetting.
(c) The contracting officer may only place an order subject to
vetting with an awardee that has passed vetting for that order.
716.506 Solicitation provision and contract clause.
(a) As prescribed in 48 CFR 704.7005(a), the contracting officer
will insert the provision at 752.204-70 Partner Vetting Pre-Award
Requirements, in solicitations for indefinite delivery contracts when
USAID anticipates that any orders placed under the contract will be
subject to vetting.
(b)(1) The contracting officer will insert the clause at 752.216-71
Partner Vetting, in those solicitations and contracts for indefinite-
delivery contracts that USAID identifies as subject to vetting.
(2) The contracting officer will use the clause with its Alternate
I when USAID determines that subcontracts at any tier for certain
classes of supplies or services are subject to vetting.
0
7. Add Part 744 to read as follows:
PART 744--SUBCONTRACTING POLICIES AND PROCEDURES
Subpart 744.2--Consent to Subcontracts
Sec.
744.202-170 Partner vetting.
Authority: Sec. 621, Pub. L. 87-195, 75 Stat. 445, (22 U.S.C.
2381) as amended; E.O. 12163, Sept. 29, 1979, 44 FR 56673; 3 CFR
1979 Comp., p. 435.
744.202-170 Partner vetting.
If an acquisition is identified as subject to partner vetting, see
(48 CFR) AIDAR 704.70 for the applicable procedures and requirements.
PART 752--SOLICITATION PROVISIONS AND CONTRACT CLAUSES
0
8. Amend Part 752 by adding sections 752.204-70 and 752.204-71 to
subpart 752.2 to read as follows:
752.204-70 Partner vetting pre-award requirements.
As prescribed in (48 CFR) AIDAR 704.7005(a), insert the following
provision in all solicitations subject to vetting:
PARTNER VETTING PRE-AWARD REQUIREMENTS (FEB 2012)
(a) USAID has determined that any contract resulting from this
solicitation is subject to vetting. Terms used in this provision are
defined in paragraph (b) of the AIDAR clause at 752.204-71 Partner
Vetting, of this solicitation. An offeror that has not passed
vetting is ineligible for award.
(b) The following are the vetting procedures for this
solicitation:
(1) Prospective offerors review the attached USAID Partner
Information Form, USAID Form 500-13, and submit any questions about
the USAID Partner Information Form or these procedures to the
contracting officer by the deadline for questions in the
solicitation.
(2) The contracting officer notifies the offeror when to submit
the USAID Partner Information Form. For this solicitation, USAID
will vet at [insert in the provision the applicable stage of the
source selection process at which the Contracting Officer will
notify the offeror(s) who must be vetted]. Within the timeframe set
by the contracting officer in the notification, the offeror must
complete and submit the information on the USAID Partner Information
Form in accordance with instructions from the vetting official named
in paragraph (d) of the AIDAR clause at 752.204-71 Partner Vetting,
of this solicitation.
Note: Offerors who submit using non-secure methods of
transmission do so at their own risk.
(3) The offerors must notify proposed subcontractors of this
requirement when the subcontractors are subject to vetting.
(c) Source selection proceeds separately from vetting. Vetting
is conducted independently from any discussions the contracting
officer may have with an offeror. The offeror and any subcontractor
subject to vetting must not provide vetting information to other
than the vetting official. The offeror and any subcontractor subject
to vetting will communicate only with the vetting official regarding
their vetting submission(s) and not with any other USAID or USG
personnel, including the contracting officer or his/her
representatives. Exchanges between the Government and an offeror
about vetting information submitted by the offeror or any proposed
subcontractor are clarifications in accordance with FAR 15.306(a)
(48 CFR
[[Page 8172]]
15.306(a)). The contracting officer designates the vetting official
as the only individual authorized to clarify the offeror's and
proposed subcontractor's vetting information.
(d)(1) The vetting official notifies the offeror that it:
(i) Has passed vetting,
(ii) Has not passed vetting, or
(iii) Must provide additional information, and resubmit the
USAID Partner Information Form with the additional information
within the number of days the vetting official specified in the
notification.
(2) The vetting official will include in the notification any
information that USAID's Office of Security(SEC) determines
releasable. In its determination, SEC will take into consideration
the classification or sensitivity of the information, the need to
protect sources and methods, or status of ongoing law enforcement
and intelligence community investigations or operations.
(e) Reconsideration. (1) Within 7 calendar days after the date
of the vetting official's notification, an offeror that has not
passed vetting may request in writing to the vetting official that
the Agency reconsider the vetting determination. The request should
include any written explanation, legal documentation and any other
relevant written material for reconsideration.
(2) Within 7 calendar days after the vetting official receives
the request for reconsideration, the Agency will determine whether
the offeror's additional information warrants a revised decision.
(3) The Agency's determination of whether reconsideration is
warranted is final.
(f) Revisions to vetting information. (1) Offerors who change
key individuals, whether the offeror has previously passed vetting
or not, must submit a revised USAID Partner Information Form to the
vetting official. This includes changes to key personnel resulting
from revisions to the technical proposal.
(2) The vetting official will follow the vetting process in
paragraph (d) of this clause for any revision of the offeror's Form.
(g) Award. At the time of award, the contracting officer will
confirm with the vetting official that the apparently successful
offeror has passed vetting. The contracting officer may award only
to an apparently successful offeror that has passed vetting.
752.204-71 Partner vetting.
As prescribed in (48 CFR) AIDAR 704.7005(b)(1) and 716.506(a),
insert the following clause in all contracts subject to vetting:
PARTNER VETTING (FEB 2012)
(a) The contractor must comply with the vetting requirements for
key individuals under this contract.
(b) Definitions. As used in this provision--
Key individual means:
(i) Principal officers of the organization's governing body
(e.g., chairman, vice chairman, treasurer and secretary of the board
of directors or board of trustees);
(ii) The principal officer and deputy principal officer of the
organization (e.g., executive director, deputy director, president,
vice president);
(iii) The program manager or chief of party for the USG-financed
program; and
(iv) Any other person with significant responsibilities for
administration of the USG-financed activities or resources, such as
key personnel as described in Automated Directives System Chapter
302. Key personnel, whether or not they are employees of the prime
contractor, must be vetted.
Vetting official means the USAID employee identified in
paragraph (d) of this clause as having responsibility for receiving
vetting information, responding to questions about information to be
included on the USAID Partner Information Form, USAID Form 500-13,
coordinating with the USAID Office of Security, and conveying the
vetting determination to each offeror, potential subcontractors
subject to vetting, and to the contracting officer. The vetting
official is not part of the contracting office and has no
involvement in the source selection process.
(c) The Contractor must submit a USAID Partner Information Form,
USAID Form 500-13, to the vetting official identified below during
the contract when the Contractor replaces key individuals with
individuals who have not been previously vetting for this contract.
Note: USAID will not approve any key personnel who have not passed
vetting.
(d) The designated vetting official is:
Vetting official:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Address:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Email: -------------------- (for inquiries only)
(e)(1) The vetting official will notify the Contractor that it--
(i) Has passed vetting,
(ii) Has not passed vetting, or
(iii) Must provide additional information, and resubmit the
USAID Partner Information Form with the additional information
within the number of days the vetting official specifies.
(2) The vetting official will include in the notification any
information that USAID's Office of Security (SEC) determines
releasable. In its determination, SEC will take into consideration
the classification or sensitivity of the information, the need to
protect sources and methods, or status of ongoing law enforcement
and intelligence community investigations or operations.
(f) Reconsideration. (1) Within 7 calendar days after the date
of the vetting official's notification, the contractor or
prospective subcontractor that has not passed vetting may request in
writing to the vetting official that the Agency reconsider the
vetting determination. The request should include any written
explanation, legal documentation and any other relevant written
material for reconsideration.
(2) Within 7 calendar days after the vetting official receives
the request for reconsideration, the Agency will determine whether
the contractor's additional information warrants a revised decision.
(3) The Agency's determination of whether reconsideration is
warranted is final.
(g) A notification that the Contractor has passed vetting does
not constitute any other approval under this contract.
(h) When the contractor anticipates awarding a subcontract for
which consent is required under FAR clause 52.244-2, Subcontracts,
the subcontract is subject to vetting. The prospective subcontractor
must submit a USAID Partner Information Form, USAID Form 500-13, to
the vetting official identified in paragraph (d) of this clause. The
contracting officer must not consent to award of a subcontract to
any organization that has not passed vetting when required.
(i) The contractor agrees to incorporate the substance of
paragraphs (a) through (g) of this clause in all subcontracts under
this contract.
(End of clause)
Alternate I (FEB 2012). As prescribed in 704.7005(b)(2), substitute
paragraphs (h) and (i) below for paragraphs (h) and (i) of the basic
clause:
(h)(1) When the contractor anticipates awarding a subcontract
for which consent is required under FAR clause 52.244-2,
Subcontracts, the subcontract is subject to vetting. The prospective
subcontractor must submit a USAID Partner Information Form, USAID
Form 500-13, to the vetting official identified in paragraph (d) of
this clause. The contracting officer must not consent to award of a
subcontract to any organization that has not passed vetting when
required.
(2) In addition, prospective subcontractors at any tier
providing the following classes of items (supplies and services):
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
must pass vetting. Contractors must not place subcontracts for these
classes of items until they receive confirmation from the vetting
official that the prospective subcontractor has passed vetting.
(i) The contractor agrees to incorporate the substance of this
clause in all subcontracts under this contract.
0
9. Amend Part 752 by adding section 752.216-71 to subpart 752.2 to read
as follows:
752.216-71 Partner vetting in indefinite delivery contracts.
As prescribed in (48 CFR) AIDAR 716.506(b)(1), insert the following
clause in all indefinite-delivery contracts subject to vetting:
PARTNER VETTING IN INDEFINITE DELIVERY CONTRACTS (FEB 2012)
(a) The contractor must comply with the vetting requirements for
key individuals under this contract and in any orders that are
identified as subject to vetting.
(b) Definitions. As used in this provision--
Key individual means:
(i) Principal officers of the organization's governing body
(e.g., chairman, vice chairman, treasurer and secretary of the board
of directors or board of trustees);
(ii) The principal officer and deputy principal officer of the
organization (e.g.,
[[Page 8173]]
executive director, deputy director, president, vice president);
(iii) The program manager or chief of party for the USG-financed
program; and
(iv) Any other person with significant responsibilities for
administration of the USG-financed activities or resources, such as
key personnel as described in Automated Directives System Chapter
302. Key personnel, whether or not they are employees of the prime
contractor, must be vetted.
Vetting official means the USAID employee identified in
paragraph (d) of this clause as having responsibility for receiving
vetting information, responding to questions about information to be
included on the USAID Partner Information Form, USAID Form 500-13,
coordinating with the USAID Office of Security, and conveying the
vetting determination to each contractor, potential subcontractors
subject to vetting, and to the cognizant contracting officer. The
vetting official is not part of the contracting office and has no
involvement in the source selection process.
(c) The contractor must submit a USAID Partner Information Form,
USAID Form 500-13 to the designated vetting official:
(1) when the contractor replaces key individuals under the basic
contract with individuals who have not been previously vetted.
(2) when the contractor replaces key individuals under an order
subject to vetting with individuals who have not been previously
vetted. For changes to any key individuals associated with both the
basic contract and any orders subject to vetting, the contractor
must submit updated vetting forms to each designated vetting
official. Note: USAID will not approve any key personnel who have
not passed vetting.
(d)(1) The designated vetting official for the basic contract
is:
Vetting official:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Address:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Email: -------------------- (for inquiries only)
(2) Each order subject to vetting will identify the vetting
official for that order. The contractor must submit vetting
information specific to an order to the vetting official identified
in that order.
(e)(1) The vetting official will notify the contractor that it--
(i) Has passed vetting,
(ii) Has not passed vetting, or
(iii) Must provide additional information, and resubmit the
USAID Partner Information Form with the additional information
within the number of days the vetting official specifies.
(2) The vetting official will include in the notification any
information that USAID's Office of Security (SEC) determines
releasable. In its determination, SEC will take into consideration
the classification or sensitivity of the information, the need to
protect sources and methods, or status of ongoing law enforcement
and intelligence community investigations or operations.
(f) Reconsideration. (1) Within 7 calendar days after the date
of the vetting official's notification, the contractor or
prospective subcontractor that has not passed vetting may request in
writing to the vetting official that the Agency reconsider the
vetting determination. The request should include any written
explanation, legal documentation and any other relevant written
material for reconsideration.
(2) Within 7 calendar days after the vetting official receives
the request for reconsideration, the Agency will determine whether
the contractor's additional information warrants a revised decision.
(3) The Agency's determination of whether reconsideration is
warranted is final.
(g) A notification that the contractor has passed vetting does
not constitute any other approval under this contract.
(h) The request for task or delivery order proposals will
identify whether the order is subject to vetting. The following are
the procedures for vetting orders under this contract. Note that the
term ``awardee'' as used below refers to a contractor under
multiple-award indefinite-delivery contracts, consistent with the
use of the term in (48 CFR) FAR 16.505(b):
(1) The contracting officer will notify the awardees when to
complete and submit the USAID Partner Information Form to the
vetting official named in the request for order proposals. Note:
Awardees who submit using non-secure methods of transmission do so
at their own risk.
(2) The awardee must notify proposed subcontractors of this
requirement when the subcontractors are subject to vetting.
(3) The fair opportunity process proceeds separately from
vetting. Vetting is conducted independently from any discussions the
contracting officer may have with an awardee. The awardee and any
subcontractor subject to vetting must not provide vetting
information to other than the vetting official identified in the
request for order proposal. The awardee and any subcontractor
subject to vetting will communicate only with the vetting official
regarding their vetting submission(s) and not with any other USAID
or USG personnel, including the contracting officer or his/her
representatives.
(4)(i) The vetting official notifies the awardee that it:
(A) Has passed vetting,
(B) Has not passed vetting, or
(C) Must provide additional information, and resubmit the USAID
Partner Information Form with the additional information within the
number of days the vetting official specified in the notification.
(ii) The vetting official will include in the notification any
information that USAID's Office of Security (SEC) determines
releasable. In its determination, SEC will take into consideration
the classification or sensitivity of the information, the need to
protect sources and methods, or status of ongoing law enforcement
and intelligence community investigations or operations.
(5) Reconsideration. (i) Within 7 calendar days after the date
of the vetting official's notification, an awardee that has not
passed vetting may request in writing to the vetting official that
the Agency reconsider the vetting determination. The request should
include any written explanation, legal documentation and any other
relevant written material for reconsideration.
(ii) Within 7 calendar days after the vetting official receives
the request for reconsideration, the Agency will determine whether
the contractor's additional information warrants a revised decision.
(iii) The Agency's determination of whether reconsideration is
warranted is final.
(6) Revisions to vetting information. (i) Before the order is
awarded, any awardee who changes key individuals, whether it has
previously passed vetting or not, must submit a revised USAID
Partner Information Form to the vetting official. This includes
changes to key personnel resulting from revisions to the technical
proposal.
(ii) The order vetting official will follow the vetting process
in paragraph (e) of this clause for any revision of the awardee's
Form.
(7) Award of order. The contracting officer may award an order
subject to vetting only to an apparently successful awardee that has
passed vetting for that order.
(i) When the contractor anticipates awarding a subcontract for
which consent is required under FAR clause 52.244-2, Subcontracts,
the subcontract is subject to vetting. The prospective subcontractor
must submit a USAID Partner Information Form, USAID Form 500-13, to
the designated vetting official. The contracting officer must not
consent to award of a subcontract to any organization that has not
passed vetting when required.
(j) The contractor agrees to incorporate the substance of
paragraphs (a) through (g) of this clause in all subcontracts under
this contract.
(End of clause)
Alternate I (FEB 2012). As prescribed in 716.506(b), substitute
paragraphs (i) and (j) below for paragraphs (i) and (j) of the basic
clause:
(i)(1) When the contractor anticipates awarding a subcontract
for which consent is required under FAR clause 52.244-2,
Subcontracts, the subcontract is subject to vetting. The prospective
subcontractor must submit a USAID Partner Information Form, USAID
Form 500-13, to the designated vetting official. The contracting
officer must not consent to award of a subcontract to any
organization that has not passed vetting when required.
(2) In addition, prospective subcontractors at any tier
providing the following classes of items (supplies and services):
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
must pass vetting. Contractors must not place subcontracts for these
classes of items until they receive confirmation from the vetting
official that the prospective subcontractor has passed vetting.
[[Page 8174]]
(j) The contractor agrees to incorporate the substance of this
clause in all subcontracts under this contract.
Aman S. Djahanbani,
Senior Procurement Executive, US Agency For International Development.
[FR Doc. 2012-3239 Filed 2-13-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6116-01-P