Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement: Electronic Copies of Contractual Documents (DFARS Case 2012-D056), 4846-4848 [2015-01435]
Download as PDF
4846
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 19 / Thursday, January 29, 2015 / Proposed Rules
won multiple blocks that are assigned at
least two contiguous blocks; (2)
minimizing for all bidders that won two
or more blocks in the clock phase the
number of blocks that are noncontiguous to any of the bidder’s other
blocks; and (3) maximizing the number
of bidders that are assigned only
contiguous blocks. Under the
Commission’s proposed procedures, the
auction system will first solve or
optimize for the first objective and use
that outcome as a constraint in solving
the second objective, which would then
constrain solving the third objective.
The winning bids in each assignment
round will be bids for which the
assignment satisfies these three
constraints and for which the bidders in
that round are willing to pay the most.
204. As described in Appendix H of
the Auction 1000 Request for Comment,
the Commission proposes that the
additional price a bidder will pay for a
specific frequency (above the
discounted final clock price) will be
calculated consistent with a generalized
‘‘second price’’ approach—that is, the
winner will pay a price that would be
just sufficient to result in the bidder
receiving that same winning frequency
assignment. This price will be less than
or equal to the price the bidder
indicated it was willing to pay for the
assignment. The Commission proposes
to determine prices in this way because
it facilitates bidding strategy for the
bidders, giving them an incentive to bid
their full value for the assignment,
knowing that if the assignment is
selected, they will pay no more than
would have been necessary to ensure
that the assignment won.
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
E. Additional Default Payment
Percentage
205. The Commission’s competitive
bidding rules provide that it shall
establish the percentage of any
defaulted bid that will be assessed as a
payment owed by the defaulter in
addition to the difference between with
defaulted bid and a subsequent winning
bid for the same license. In an auction
without combinatorial bidding, such as
the forward auction the Commission
proposes here, the percentage shall be
between three and 20 percent. The
Commission proposes that the
percentage shall be 20 percent in the
forward auction. The Commission
tentatively concludes that the maximum
amount is in the public interest, given
the importance of deterring defaults in
order to minimize the possibility that
the auction will not generate shortly
after its conclusion the full amount of
the proceeds indicated by winning bids.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:13 Jan 28, 2015
Jkt 235001
VI. Ex Parte
206. This proceeding has been
designated as a ‘‘permit-but-disclose’’
proceeding in accordance with the
Commission’s ex parte rules. Persons
making oral ex parte presentations are
reminded that memoranda summarizing
the presentations must contain
summaries of the substance of the
presentations and not merely a listing of
the subjects discussed. More than a one
or two sentence description of the views
and arguments presented is generally
required. Other provisions pertaining to
oral and written ex parte presentations
in permit-but-disclose proceedings are
set forth in 47 CFR 1.1206(b).
VII. Regulatory Flexibility Act Analysis
207. As required by the Regulatory
Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA), 5 U.S.C.
603, the Commission prepared an Initial
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA)
in connection with the Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking, ‘‘Expanding the
Economic and Innovation Opportunities
of Spectrum Through Incentive
Auction,’’ 77 FR 69933, November 21,
2012 (Incentive Auction NPRM) and a
Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
(FRFA) in connection with the Incentive
Auction R&O. While no commenter
directly responded to the IRFA, the
FRFA addressed concerns about the
impact on small business of various
auction design issues. The Commission
seeks comment on how the proposals in
the Auction 1000 Request for Comment
could affect either the IRFA or the
FRFA. Such comments must be filed in
accordance with the same filing
deadlines for responses to the Auction
1000 Request for Comment and have a
separate and distinct heading
designating them as responses to the
IRFA and FRFA.
208. The IRFA and FRFA set forth the
need for and objectives of the
Commission’s rules for the broadcast
spectrum incentive auction; the legal
basis for those rules, a description and
estimate of the number of small entities
to which the rules apply; a description
of projected reporting, recordkeeping,
and other compliance requirements for
small entities; steps taken to minimize
the significant economic impact on
small entities and significant
alternatives considered; and a statement
that there are no federal rules that may
duplicate, overlap, or conflict with the
rules. The proposals in the Auction
1000 Request for Comment do not
change any of those descriptions.
209. The Auction 1000 Request for
Comment does, however, detail
proposed procedures implementing
those rules. The Commission seeks
PO 00000
Frm 00039
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
comment on how the proposals in the
Auction 1000 Request for Comment
could affect either the IRFA or the
FRFA. These proposals include
procedures for setting the initial
broadcast spectrum clearing target,
determining whether the final stage rule
is satisfied and the steps triggered by
that determination, determining how
much market variation will be
accommodated, and a process of moving
from one stage of the auction to any
subsequent stage(s), if necessary. The
Auction 1000 Comment PN also
addresses detailed proposals for setting
opening prices, applying to participate
in the reverse or forward auction,
establishing bidding procedures for each
auction, optimizing the final television
assignment channel plan, providing
information to forward auction bidders,
grouping license blocks into categories
for bidding, implementing the marketbased spectrum reserve, repacking
broadcasting stations in conjunction
with the reverse auction, and assigning
licenses with specific frequencies in the
forward auction.
Federal Communications Commission.
Marlene H. Dortch,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015–01607 Filed 1–28–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Defense Acquisition Regulations
System
48 CFR Parts 204 and 237
RIN 0750–AI29
Defense Federal Acquisition
Regulation Supplement: Electronic
Copies of Contractual Documents
(DFARS Case 2012–D056)
Defense Acquisition
Regulations System, Department of
Defense (DoD).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
DoD is proposing to amend
the Defense Federal Acquisition
Regulation Supplement (DFARS) to
state the policy that the Electronic
Document Access (EDA) system is
DoD’s online repository and distribution
tool for contract documents and contract
data, require internal control procedures
for contract document and data
verification in EDA, and remove
outmoded language that is not
consistent with electronic document
processes.
DATES: Comments on the proposed rule
should be submitted in writing to the
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\29JAP1.SGM
29JAP1
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 19 / Thursday, January 29, 2015 / Proposed Rules
address shown below on or before
March 30, 2015 to be considered in the
formation of a final rule.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments
identified by DFARS Case 2012–D056,
using any of the following methods:
Æ Regulations.gov: https://
www.regulations.gov. Submit comments
via the Federal eRulemaking portal by
entering ‘‘DFARS Case 2012–D056’’
under the heading ‘‘Enter keyword or
ID’’ and selecting ‘‘Search.’’ Select the
link ‘‘Submit a Comment’’ that
corresponds with ‘‘DFARS Case 2012–
D056.’’ Follow the instructions provided
at the ‘‘Submit a Comment’’ screen.
Please include your name, company
name (if any), and ‘‘DFARS Case 2012–
D056’’ on your document.
Æ Email: osd.dfars@mail.mil. Include
DFARS Case 2012–D056 in the subject
line of the message.
Æ Fax: 571–372–6094
Æ Mail: Defense Acquisition
Regulations System, Attn: Jennifer
Hawes, OUSD(AT&L)DPAP/DARS,
Room 3B941, 3060 Defense Pentagon,
Washington, DC 20301–3060.
Comments received generally will be
posted without change to https://
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided. To
confirm receipt of your comment(s),
please check www.regulations.gov,
approximately two to three days after
submission to verify posting (except
allow 30 days for posting of comments
submitted by mail).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Jennifer Hawes, telephone 571–372–
6115.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
I. Background
DoD utilizes the Electronic Document
Access (EDA) system for the distribution
and sharing of contracts and contract
data. The Defense Electronic Business
Program Office established business
rules for the EDA system, which became
effective November 5, 2001. In
November 2009, DoD instructed its
contracting officers to register in EDA,
and use of EDA is now the standard
business practice employed by DoD
contracting offices. A review of DFARS
coverage related to contract files and
contract distribution resulted in
recommendations to remove language
that was structured to support processes
for and distribution of paper files and
paper copies. Similarly, DFARS
language is required to reflect current
electronic processes supported by EDA.
II. Discussion and Analysis
This rule proposes to amend DFARS
204.270, Electronic Document Access,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:13 Jan 28, 2015
Jkt 235001
to effect the following clarifications and
changes:
• State as policy that EDA, an online
repository for contractual instruments
and supporting documents, is DoD’s
primary tool for electronic distribution
of contract documents and contract
data.
• Provide that agencies have certain
responsibilities when posting
documents to EDA, to include internal
control procedures that ensure
electronic copies of contract documents
and data in EDA are accurate
representations of original documents.
The rule also proposes revisions to
DFARS 204.802, Contract Files. The
language in this section, which
addresses contract file requirements for
authenticating and conforming paper
documents and copies, is being removed
as it is outdated. A new paragraph is
being added providing that electronic
documents posted to the EDA system
are a part of the contract file.
III. Executive Orders 12866 and 13563
Executive Orders (E.O.s) 12866 and
13563 direct agencies to assess all costs
and benefits of available regulatory
alternatives and, if regulation is
necessary, to select regulatory
approaches that maximize net benefits
(including potential economic,
environmental, public health and safety
effects, distributive impacts, and
equity). E.O. 13563 emphasizes the
importance of quantifying both costs
and benefits, of reducing costs, of
harmonizing rules, and of promoting
flexibility. This is not a significant
regulatory action and, therefore, was not
subject to review under section 6(b) of
E.O. 12866, Regulatory Planning and
Review, dated September 30, 1993. This
rule is not a major rule under 5 U.S.C.
804.
IV. Regulatory Flexibility Act
DoD does not expect this proposed
rule to have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small
entities within the meaning of the
Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601,
et seq., because the rule is only updating
the regulation to reflect current
electronic distribution practices in lieu
of paper distribution. However, an
initial regulatory flexibility analysis has
been performed and is summarized as
follows:
DoD utilizes the Electronic Document
Access (EDA) system for the distribution
and sharing of contracts and contract
data. The Defense Electronic Business
Program Office established business
rules for the EDA system, which became
effective November 5, 2001. In
November 2009, DoD instructed its
PO 00000
Frm 00040
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
4847
contracting officers to register in EDA,
and use of EDA is now a standard
practice of DoD contracting offices. A
review of the DFARS language related to
contract files and contract distribution
resulted in recommendations to remove
coverage that was structured to support
processes for and distribution of paper
files and paper copies. Additionally, it
was recognized that coverage was
needed to reflect current electronic
processes supported by EDA.
This rule proposes to amend the
Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation
Supplement (DFARS) to add language to
DFARS 204.270, Electronic Document
Access, to effect the following
clarifications and changes:
• State as policy that EDA, an online
repository for contractual instruments
and supporting documents, is DoD’s
primary tool for electronic distribution
of contract documents and contract
data.
• Provide that agencies have certain
responsibilities when posting
documents to EDA, to include internal
control procedures that ensure
electronic copies of contract documents
and data in EDA are accurate
representations of original documents.
• The rule also proposes revisions to
DFARS 204.802, Contract Files. The
language in this section, which
addresses contract file requirements for
authenticating and conforming paper
documents and copies, is being removed
as it is outdated. A new paragraph is
being added providing that electronic
documents posted to the EDA system
are a part of the contract file.
Use of EDA has been a standard
business practice employed by DoD
contracting offices to distribute
electronic copies of contractual
documents for several years. Therefore,
this proposed rule is expected to have
little, if any, impact on small entities.
The rule proposes to update the DFARS
to reflect policy regarding electronic
posting and distribution of contractual
instruments and to remove outdated
coverage applicable to paper copies of
contractual documents. As such, this
rule primarily affects internal
Government distribution procedures.
This rule does not require any
reporting or recording keeping. The rule
does not duplicate, overlap, or conflict
with any other Federal rule. There are
no practical alternatives that will
accomplish the objectives of this
proposed rule.
DoD invites comments from small
business concerns and other interested
parties on the expected impact of this
rule on small entities.
DoD will also consider comments
from small entities concerning the
E:\FR\FM\29JAP1.SGM
29JAP1
4848
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 19 / Thursday, January 29, 2015 / Proposed Rules
existing regulations in subparts affected
by this rule in accordance with 5 U.S.C.
610. Interested parties must submit such
comments separately and should cite 5
U.S.C. 610 (DFARS Case 2012–D056), in
correspondence.
V. Paperwork Reduction Act
The rule does not contain any
information collection requirements that
require the approval of the Office of
Management and Budget under the
Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C.
chapter 35).
List of Subjects in 48 CFR Parts 204 and
237
Government procurement.
204.802
204.805
[Amended]
4. Amend section 204.805 by
removing ‘‘official contract files’’ and
adding ‘‘contract files’’ in its place.
PART 237—SERVICE CONTRACTING
5. Revise section 237.172 to read as
follows:
■
Service contracts surveillance.
2. Add sections 204.270–1 and
204.270–2 to subpart 204.2 to read as
follows:
Ensure that quality assurance
surveillance plans are prepared in
conjunction with the preparation of the
statement of work or statement of
objectives for solicitations and contracts
for services. These plans should be
tailored to address the performance
risks inherent in the specific contract
type and the work effort addressed by
the contract. (See FAR subpart 46.4.)
Retain quality assurance surveillance
plans in the contract file. See https://
sam.dau.mil, Step Four—Requirements
Definition, for examples of quality
assurance surveillance plans.
204.270–1
[FR Doc. 2015–01435 Filed 1–28–15; 8:45 am]
Therefore, 48 CFR parts 204 and 237
are proposed to be amended as follows:
■ 1. The authority citation for parts 204
and 237 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 41 U.S.C. 1303 and 48 CFR
chapter 1.
PART 204—ADMINISTRATIVE
MATTERS
■
Policy.
BILLING CODE 5001–06–P
204.270–2
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
(a) The Electronic Document Access
(EDA) system, an online repository for
contractual instruments and supporting
documents, is DoD’s primary tool for
electronic distribution of contract
documents and contract data.
(b) Agencies are responsible for
ensuring the following when posting
documents, including contractual
instruments, to EDA—
(1) The timely distribution of
documents; and
(2) That internal controls are in place
to ensure that—
(i) The electronic version of a contract
document in EDA is an accurate
representation of the original contract
document; and
(ii) The contract data in EDA is an
accurate representation of the
underlying contract.
SUMMARY:
Procedures.
The procedures at PGI 204.270–2
provide details on how to record the
results of data verification in EDA.
When these procedures are followed,
contract documents in EDA are an
accurate representation of the original
contract document and therefore may be
used for audit purposes.
■ 3. Revise section 204.802 to read as
follows:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:13 Jan 28, 2015
Jkt 235001
Comments on the proposed rule
should be submitted in writing to the
address shown below on or before
March 30, 2015, to be considered in the
formation of the final rule.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments
identified by DFARS Case 2014–D015,
using any of the following methods:
Æ Regulations.gov: https://
www.regulations.gov. Submit comments
via the Federal eRulemaking portal by
entering ‘‘DFARS Case 2014–D015’’
under the heading ‘‘Enter keyword or
ID’’ and selecting ‘‘Search.’’ Select the
link ‘‘Submit a Comment’’ that
corresponds with ‘‘DFARS Case 2014–
D015.’’ Follow the instructions provided
at the ‘‘Submit a Comment’’ screen.
Please include your name, company
name (if any), and ‘‘DFARS Case 2014–
D015’’ on your attached document.
Æ Email: osd.dfars@mail.mil. Include
DFARS Case 2014–D015 in the subject
line of the message.
Æ Fax: 571–372–6094.
Æ Mail: Defense Acquisition
Regulations System,
OUSD(AT&L)DPAP/DARS, Attn: Ms.
Jennifer Hawes, Room 3B941, 3060
Defense Pentagon, Washington, DC
20301–3060.
Comments received generally will be
posted without change to https://
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided. To
confirm receipt of your comment(s),
please check www.regulations.gov,
approximately two to three days after
submission to verify posting (except
allow 30 days for posting of comments
submitted by mail).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms.
Jennifer Hawes, telephone 571–372–
6115.
DATES:
■
237.172
Manuel Quinones,
Editor, Defense Acquisition Regulations
System.
Contract files.
(a) Any document posted to the
Electronic Document Access (EDA)
system is part of the contract file and is
accessible by multiple parties, including
the contractor. Inclusion of any
document in EDA other than contracts,
modifications, and orders is optional.
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Defense Acquisition Regulations
System
48 CFR Parts 212, 213, and 252
RIN 0750–AI40
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Defense Federal Acquisition
Regulation Supplement: Past
Performance Information Retrieval
System—Statistical Reporting (PPIRS–
SR) (DFARS Case 2014–D015)
I. Background
Defense Acquisition
Regulations System, Department of
Defense (DoD).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
DoD is proposing to amend
the Defense Federal Acquisition
Regulation Supplement (DFARS) to
require contracting officers to consider
information in the Statistical Reporting
module of the Past Performance
Information Retrieval System when
evaluating past performance of offerors
under competitive solicitations for
supplies using simplified acquisition
procedures.
PO 00000
Frm 00041
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
To fill the need for past performance
data on lower dollar value contracts,
DoD developed and deployed the Past
Performance Information Retrieval
System—Statistical Reporting (PPIRS–
SR) module. This module of PPIRS
collects quantifiable delivery and
quality data from existing systems and
uses that data to classify each supplier’s
performance by Federal supply class
and product or service code. This
objective data on past performance will
assist contracting officers in making
better-informed best value award
decisions on small dollar value
acquisitions for supplies, while also
eliminating the burden of collecting
subjective past performance information
on contractors for smaller dollar value
contracts.
E:\FR\FM\29JAP1.SGM
29JAP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 19 (Thursday, January 29, 2015)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 4846-4848]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-01435]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Defense Acquisition Regulations System
48 CFR Parts 204 and 237
RIN 0750-AI29
Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement: Electronic
Copies of Contractual Documents (DFARS Case 2012-D056)
AGENCY: Defense Acquisition Regulations System, Department of Defense
(DoD).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: DoD is proposing to amend the Defense Federal Acquisition
Regulation Supplement (DFARS) to state the policy that the Electronic
Document Access (EDA) system is DoD's online repository and
distribution tool for contract documents and contract data, require
internal control procedures for contract document and data verification
in EDA, and remove outmoded language that is not consistent with
electronic document processes.
DATES: Comments on the proposed rule should be submitted in writing to
the
[[Page 4847]]
address shown below on or before March 30, 2015 to be considered in the
formation of a final rule.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments identified by DFARS Case 2012-D056, using
any of the following methods:
[cir] Regulations.gov: https://www.regulations.gov. Submit comments
via the Federal eRulemaking portal by entering ``DFARS Case 2012-D056''
under the heading ``Enter keyword or ID'' and selecting ``Search.''
Select the link ``Submit a Comment'' that corresponds with ``DFARS Case
2012-D056.'' Follow the instructions provided at the ``Submit a
Comment'' screen. Please include your name, company name (if any), and
``DFARS Case 2012-D056'' on your document.
[cir] Email: osd.dfars@mail.mil. Include DFARS Case 2012-D056 in
the subject line of the message.
[cir] Fax: 571-372-6094
[cir] Mail: Defense Acquisition Regulations System, Attn: Jennifer
Hawes, OUSD(AT&L)DPAP/DARS, Room 3B941, 3060 Defense Pentagon,
Washington, DC 20301-3060.
Comments received generally will be posted without change to https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided. To
confirm receipt of your comment(s), please check www.regulations.gov,
approximately two to three days after submission to verify posting
(except allow 30 days for posting of comments submitted by mail).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jennifer Hawes, telephone 571-372-
6115.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
DoD utilizes the Electronic Document Access (EDA) system for the
distribution and sharing of contracts and contract data. The Defense
Electronic Business Program Office established business rules for the
EDA system, which became effective November 5, 2001. In November 2009,
DoD instructed its contracting officers to register in EDA, and use of
EDA is now the standard business practice employed by DoD contracting
offices. A review of DFARS coverage related to contract files and
contract distribution resulted in recommendations to remove language
that was structured to support processes for and distribution of paper
files and paper copies. Similarly, DFARS language is required to
reflect current electronic processes supported by EDA.
II. Discussion and Analysis
This rule proposes to amend DFARS 204.270, Electronic Document
Access, to effect the following clarifications and changes:
State as policy that EDA, an online repository for
contractual instruments and supporting documents, is DoD's primary tool
for electronic distribution of contract documents and contract data.
Provide that agencies have certain responsibilities when
posting documents to EDA, to include internal control procedures that
ensure electronic copies of contract documents and data in EDA are
accurate representations of original documents.
The rule also proposes revisions to DFARS 204.802, Contract Files.
The language in this section, which addresses contract file
requirements for authenticating and conforming paper documents and
copies, is being removed as it is outdated. A new paragraph is being
added providing that electronic documents posted to the EDA system are
a part of the contract file.
III. Executive Orders 12866 and 13563
Executive Orders (E.O.s) 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess
all costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public
health and safety effects, distributive impacts, and equity). E.O.
13563 emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and benefits,
of reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, and of promoting flexibility.
This is not a significant regulatory action and, therefore, was not
subject to review under section 6(b) of E.O. 12866, Regulatory Planning
and Review, dated September 30, 1993. This rule is not a major rule
under 5 U.S.C. 804.
IV. Regulatory Flexibility Act
DoD does not expect this proposed rule to have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities within the
meaning of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601, et seq.,
because the rule is only updating the regulation to reflect current
electronic distribution practices in lieu of paper distribution.
However, an initial regulatory flexibility analysis has been performed
and is summarized as follows:
DoD utilizes the Electronic Document Access (EDA) system for the
distribution and sharing of contracts and contract data. The Defense
Electronic Business Program Office established business rules for the
EDA system, which became effective November 5, 2001. In November 2009,
DoD instructed its contracting officers to register in EDA, and use of
EDA is now a standard practice of DoD contracting offices. A review of
the DFARS language related to contract files and contract distribution
resulted in recommendations to remove coverage that was structured to
support processes for and distribution of paper files and paper copies.
Additionally, it was recognized that coverage was needed to reflect
current electronic processes supported by EDA.
This rule proposes to amend the Defense Federal Acquisition
Regulation Supplement (DFARS) to add language to DFARS 204.270,
Electronic Document Access, to effect the following clarifications and
changes:
State as policy that EDA, an online repository for
contractual instruments and supporting documents, is DoD's primary tool
for electronic distribution of contract documents and contract data.
Provide that agencies have certain responsibilities when
posting documents to EDA, to include internal control procedures that
ensure electronic copies of contract documents and data in EDA are
accurate representations of original documents.
The rule also proposes revisions to DFARS 204.802,
Contract Files. The language in this section, which addresses contract
file requirements for authenticating and conforming paper documents and
copies, is being removed as it is outdated. A new paragraph is being
added providing that electronic documents posted to the EDA system are
a part of the contract file.
Use of EDA has been a standard business practice employed by DoD
contracting offices to distribute electronic copies of contractual
documents for several years. Therefore, this proposed rule is expected
to have little, if any, impact on small entities. The rule proposes to
update the DFARS to reflect policy regarding electronic posting and
distribution of contractual instruments and to remove outdated coverage
applicable to paper copies of contractual documents. As such, this rule
primarily affects internal Government distribution procedures.
This rule does not require any reporting or recording keeping. The
rule does not duplicate, overlap, or conflict with any other Federal
rule. There are no practical alternatives that will accomplish the
objectives of this proposed rule.
DoD invites comments from small business concerns and other
interested parties on the expected impact of this rule on small
entities.
DoD will also consider comments from small entities concerning the
[[Page 4848]]
existing regulations in subparts affected by this rule in accordance
with 5 U.S.C. 610. Interested parties must submit such comments
separately and should cite 5 U.S.C. 610 (DFARS Case 2012-D056), in
correspondence.
V. Paperwork Reduction Act
The rule does not contain any information collection requirements
that require the approval of the Office of Management and Budget under
the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. chapter 35).
List of Subjects in 48 CFR Parts 204 and 237
Government procurement.
Manuel Quinones,
Editor, Defense Acquisition Regulations System.
Therefore, 48 CFR parts 204 and 237 are proposed to be amended as
follows:
0
1. The authority citation for parts 204 and 237 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 41 U.S.C. 1303 and 48 CFR chapter 1.
PART 204--ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS
0
2. Add sections 204.270-1 and 204.270-2 to subpart 204.2 to read as
follows:
204.270-1 Policy.
(a) The Electronic Document Access (EDA) system, an online
repository for contractual instruments and supporting documents, is
DoD's primary tool for electronic distribution of contract documents
and contract data.
(b) Agencies are responsible for ensuring the following when
posting documents, including contractual instruments, to EDA--
(1) The timely distribution of documents; and
(2) That internal controls are in place to ensure that--
(i) The electronic version of a contract document in EDA is an
accurate representation of the original contract document; and
(ii) The contract data in EDA is an accurate representation of the
underlying contract.
204.270-2 Procedures.
The procedures at PGI 204.270-2 provide details on how to record
the results of data verification in EDA. When these procedures are
followed, contract documents in EDA are an accurate representation of
the original contract document and therefore may be used for audit
purposes.
0
3. Revise section 204.802 to read as follows:
204.802 Contract files.
(a) Any document posted to the Electronic Document Access (EDA)
system is part of the contract file and is accessible by multiple
parties, including the contractor. Inclusion of any document in EDA
other than contracts, modifications, and orders is optional.
204.805 [Amended]
0
4. Amend section 204.805 by removing ``official contract files'' and
adding ``contract files'' in its place.
PART 237--SERVICE CONTRACTING
0
5. Revise section 237.172 to read as follows:
237.172 Service contracts surveillance.
Ensure that quality assurance surveillance plans are prepared in
conjunction with the preparation of the statement of work or statement
of objectives for solicitations and contracts for services. These plans
should be tailored to address the performance risks inherent in the
specific contract type and the work effort addressed by the contract.
(See FAR subpart 46.4.) Retain quality assurance surveillance plans in
the contract file. See https://sam.dau.mil, Step Four--Requirements
Definition, for examples of quality assurance surveillance plans.
[FR Doc. 2015-01435 Filed 1-28-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001-06-P