Federal Acquisition Regulation; Definition of “Multiple-Award Contract”, 81887-81888 [2015-32427]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 251 / Thursday, December 31, 2015 / Rules and Regulations A. Summary of Significant Changes There were no changes made to the rule as a result of the comment received. There were no comments on the Regulatory Flexibility Act analysis. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION 48 CFR Part 2 [FAC 2005–86; FAR Case 2015–019; Item I; Docket 2015–0019, Sequence 1] RIN 9000–AM96 Federal Acquisition Regulation; Definition of ‘‘Multiple-Award Contract’’ Department of Defense (DoD), General Services Administration (GSA), and National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). ACTION: Final rule. AGENCY: DoD, GSA, and NASA are issuing a final rule to amend the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) to define ‘‘multiple-award contract.’’ DATES: Effective: February 1, 2016. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Mahruba Uddowla, Procurement Analyst, at 703–605–2868, for clarification of content. For information pertaining to status or publication schedules, contact the Regulatory Secretariat Division at 202–501–4755. Please cite FAC 2005–86, FAR Case 2015–019. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: SUMMARY: I. Background DoD, GSA, and NASA published a proposed rule in the Federal Register at 80 FR 31342 on June 2, 2015, soliciting public comments regarding the definition of the term ‘‘multiple-award contract.’’ The proposed rule was implementing the definition that the U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA) established at 13 CFR 125.1(k) in its final rule which published in the Federal Register at 78 FR 61114 on October 2, 2013. SBA’s final rule implemented several provisions of the Small Business Jobs Act of 2010, Pub. L. 111–240. Section 1311 of Pub. L. 111– 240 (15 U.S.C. 632(v)) added a definition of ‘‘multiple-award contract.’’ One respondent submitted a comment on the proposed rule. tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 II. Discussion and Analysis The Civilian Agency Acquisition Council and the Defense Acquisition Regulations Council (the Councils) reviewed the comment in the development of the final rule. A discussion of the comment is provided as follows: VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Dec 30, 2015 Jkt 238001 B. Analysis of Public Comments Comment: One respondent stated that based on the proposed definition, any award made to multiple sources from one solicitation is a multiple award, even when the requirement is split between offerors and none of the subsequent task orders are competed because each offeror gets part of the overall requirement in the solicitation. The respondent requested that the FAR definition clarify that a multiple-award contract is one that should be subject to fair opportunity. Response: FAR 16.505(b)(1) provides information concerning fair opportunity. Additional clarity is not needed for the definition of ‘‘multipleaward contract’’ concerning fair opportunity since it is already provided at FAR 16.505(b)(1). 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, GSA, and NASA have prepared a Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (FRFA) consistent with the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601, et seq. The FRFA is summarized as follows: The final rule amends the FAR to define ‘‘multiple-award contract.’’ On October 2, 2013, the Small Business Administration (SBA) issued a final rule in the Federal Register at 78 FR 61114 to implement various sections of the Small Business Jobs Act of 2010 (Public L. 111–240) by establishing new policies and procedures for multiple-award contracts and task and delivery orders. SBA’s final rule included a definition of ‘‘multipleaward contract’’. The final rule defines ‘‘multiple-award contract’’ in order to implement that part of SBA’s final rule in the FAR. PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 81887 There were no significant issues raised by the public in response to the Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis provided in the proposed rule. This rule applies to all entities that do business with the Federal Government, but it is not expected to have a significant impact. This rule does not impose any new reporting, recordkeeping or other compliance requirements. The rule does not duplicate, overlap, or conflict with any other Federal rules. Interested parties may obtain a copy of the FRFA from the Regulatory Secretariat. The Regulatory Secretariat has submitted a copy of the FRFA to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration. 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 Subject in 48 CFR Part 2 Government procurement. Dated: December 17, 2015. William F. Clark, Director, Office of Government-wide Acquisition Policy, Office of Acquisition Policy, Office of Government-wide Policy. Therefore, DoD, GSA, and NASA amend 48 CFR part 2 as set forth below: PART 2—DEFINITIONS OF WORDS AND TERMS 1. The authority citation for 48 CFR part 2 continues to read as follows: ■ Authority: 40 U.S.C. 121(c); 10 U.S.C. chapter 137; and 51 U.S.C. 20113. 2. Amend section 2.101 in paragraph (b)(2) by adding, in alphabetical order, the definition ‘‘Multiple-award contract’’ to read as follows: ■ 2.101 Definitions. * * * * * (b) * * * (2) * * * Multiple-award contract means a contract that is— (1) A Multiple Award Schedule contract issued by GSA (e.g., GSA Schedule Contract) or agencies granted Multiple Award Schedule contract authority by GSA (e.g., Department of Veterans Affairs) as described in FAR part 38; (2) A multiple-award task-order or delivery-order contract issued in accordance with FAR subpart 16.5, including Governmentwide acquisition contracts; or (3) Any other indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity contract entered into E:\FR\FM\31DER2.SGM 31DER2 81888 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 251 / Thursday, December 31, 2015 / Rules and Regulations with two or more sources pursuant to the same solicitation. * * * * * [FR Doc. 2015–32427 Filed 12–30–15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6820–EP–P DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION 48 CFR Parts 2, 4, 6, 18, 19, and 52 [FAC 2005–86; FAR Case 2015–032; Item II; Docket No. 2015–0032; Sequence No. 1] RIN 9000–AN13 Federal Acquisition Regulation; Sole Source Contracts for Women-Owned Small Businesses Department of Defense (DoD), General Services Administration (GSA), and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). ACTION: Interim rule. AGENCY: DoD, GSA, and NASA are issuing an interim rule amending the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) to implement regulatory changes made by the Small Business Administration (SBA) that provide for authority to award sole source contracts to economically disadvantaged womenowned small business concerns and to women-owned small business concerns eligible under the Women-Owned Small Business (WOSB) Program. DATES: Effective: December 31, 2015. Comment date: Interested parties should submit written comments to the Regulatory Secretariat Division at one of the addresses shown below on or before February 29, 2016 to be considered in the formation of the final rule. ADDRESSES: Submit comments identified by FAC 2005–86, FAR Case 2015–032, by any of the following methods: • Regulations.gov: https:// www.regulations.gov. Submit comments via the Federal eRulemaking portal by searching for ‘‘FAR Case 2015–032.’’ Select the link ‘‘Comment Now’’ that corresponds with ‘‘FAR Case 2015– 032.’’ Follow the instructions provided on the screen. Please include your name, company name (if any), and ‘‘FAR Case 2015–032’’ on your attached document. • Mail: General Services Administration, Regulatory Secretariat Division (MVCB), ATTN: Ms. Flowers, tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 SUMMARY: VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Dec 30, 2015 Jkt 238001 1800 F Street NW., 2nd Floor, Washington, DC 20405. Instructions: Please submit comments only and cite FAC 2005–86, FAR Case 2015–032, in all correspondence related to this case. All comments received will be posted without change to https:// www.regulations.gov, including any personal and/or business confidential 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. Mahruba Uddowla, Procurement Analyst, at 703–605–2868 for clarification of content. For information pertaining to status or publication schedules, contact the Regulatory Secretariat Division at 202–501–4755. Please cite FAC 2005–86, FAR Case 2015–032. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background This interim rule revises the FAR to implement regulatory changes that the SBA has made in its final rule published in the Federal Register at 80 FR 55019, on September 14, 2015, concerning sole source award authority under the WOSB Program. SBA’s final rule implements the statutory requirements of paragraph (a)(3) of section 825 of the Carl Levin and Howard P. ‘‘Buck’’ McKeon National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year (FY) 2015, Public Law 113–291, granting contracting officers the authority to award sole source contracts to both economically disadvantaged womenowned small business (EDWOSB) concerns and to WOSB concerns eligible under the WOSB Program. The WOSB Program, as set forth in section 8(m) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 637(m)), authorizes contracting officers to restrict competition to EDWOSB concerns and to WOSB concerns eligible under the WOSB Program for Federal contracts, in certain industries that SBA has determined to be underrepresented or substantially underrepresented by small business concerns owned and controlled by women. DoD, GSA, and NASA published an interim rule for FAR Case 2010–015 in the Federal Register at 76 FR 18304, on April 1, 2011, providing guidance to contracting officers for the set-asides and implementing SBA’s final rule, published in the Federal Register at 75 FR 62258, on October 7, 2010. The FAR rule was finalized with changes and PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 published in the Federal Register at 77 FR 12913, on March 2, 2012. The establishment of a set-aside mechanism exclusively for women-owned small businesses was the first step towards leveling the playing field among the socioeconomic programs covered by the Small Business Act, i.e., the HUBZone, service-disabled veteran-owned smallbusiness, 8(a), and WOSB programs. The WOSB Program was subsequently amended in section 825 of the NDAA for FY2015, which granted contracting officers the authority to award sole source contracts to EDWOSB concerns and WOSB concerns eligible under the WOSB Program. SBA established procedures for this new statutory authority in its final rule published in the Federal Register at 80 FR 55019, on September 14, 2015. As in SBA’s earlier WOSB Program set-aside rule, sole source awards under the WOSB program are only permitted in the industries that SBA has determined to be underrepresented or substantially underrepresented by WOSB concerns. Implementation of these sole source procedures in the FAR ensures that contracting officers will have the tools necessary to maximize Federal procurement opportunities for WOSB concerns. II. Discussion and Analysis In keeping with the tenets of the WOSB Program, the sole source authority may only be used in industry sectors that SBA has determined to be underrepresented or substantially underrepresented by WOSB concerns. The same eligibility requirements for participating in set-asides under the WOSB Program, set forth in SBA’s regulations at 13 CFR 127.100 through 127.509, also apply to sole source acquisitions. In general, an award under the WOSB program may be pursued on a sole source basis when the contracting officer does not have a reasonable expectation, through market research, that two or more eligible EDWOSB or WOSB concerns will submit offers at a fair and reasonable price, but identifies one responsible EDWOSB or WOSB that can perform at a fair and reasonable price. The dollar thresholds for sole source awards are equal to or less than $6.5 million for manufacturing requirements and equal to or less than $4 million for all other requirements, including all options. This rule amends FAR subparts 2.1, 4.8, 6.3, 18.1, 19.0, 19.1, 19.3, 19.15, and 52.2. These changes are summarized in the following paragraphs: E:\FR\FM\31DER2.SGM 31DER2

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 251 (Thursday, December 31, 2015)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 81887-81888]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-32427]



[[Page 81887]]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION

NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION

48 CFR Part 2

[FAC 2005-86; FAR Case 2015-019; Item I; Docket 2015-0019, Sequence 1]
RIN 9000-AM96


Federal Acquisition Regulation; Definition of ``Multiple-Award 
Contract''

AGENCY: Department of Defense (DoD), General Services Administration 
(GSA), and National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA).

ACTION: Final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: DoD, GSA, and NASA are issuing a final rule to amend the 
Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) to define ``multiple-award 
contract.''

DATES: Effective: February 1, 2016.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Mahruba Uddowla, Procurement 
Analyst, at 703-605-2868, for clarification of content. For information 
pertaining to status or publication schedules, contact the Regulatory 
Secretariat Division at 202-501-4755. Please cite FAC 2005-86, FAR Case 
2015-019.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    DoD, GSA, and NASA published a proposed rule in the Federal 
Register at 80 FR 31342 on June 2, 2015, soliciting public comments 
regarding the definition of the term ``multiple-award contract.'' The 
proposed rule was implementing the definition that the U.S. Small 
Business Administration (SBA) established at 13 CFR 125.1(k) in its 
final rule which published in the Federal Register at 78 FR 61114 on 
October 2, 2013. SBA's final rule implemented several provisions of the 
Small Business Jobs Act of 2010, Pub. L. 111-240. Section 1311 of Pub. 
L. 111-240 (15 U.S.C. 632(v)) added a definition of ``multiple-award 
contract.'' One respondent submitted a comment on the proposed rule.

II. Discussion and Analysis

    The Civilian Agency Acquisition Council and the Defense Acquisition 
Regulations Council (the Councils) reviewed the comment in the 
development of the final rule. A discussion of the comment is provided 
as follows:

A. Summary of Significant Changes

    There were no changes made to the rule as a result of the comment 
received. There were no comments on the Regulatory Flexibility Act 
analysis.

B. Analysis of Public Comments

    Comment: One respondent stated that based on the proposed 
definition, any award made to multiple sources from one solicitation is 
a multiple award, even when the requirement is split between offerors 
and none of the subsequent task orders are competed because each 
offeror gets part of the overall requirement in the solicitation. The 
respondent requested that the FAR definition clarify that a multiple-
award contract is one that should be subject to fair opportunity.
    Response: FAR 16.505(b)(1) provides information concerning fair 
opportunity. Additional clarity is not needed for the definition of 
``multiple-award contract'' concerning fair opportunity since it is 
already provided at FAR 16.505(b)(1).

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, GSA, and NASA have prepared a Final Regulatory Flexibility 
Analysis (FRFA) consistent with the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 
U.S.C. 601, et seq. The FRFA is summarized as follows:

    The final rule amends the FAR to define ``multiple-award 
contract.'' On October 2, 2013, the Small Business Administration 
(SBA) issued a final rule in the Federal Register at 78 FR 61114 to 
implement various sections of the Small Business Jobs Act of 2010 
(Public L. 111-240) by establishing new policies and procedures for 
multiple-award contracts and task and delivery orders. SBA's final 
rule included a definition of ``multiple-award contract''. The final 
rule defines ``multiple-award contract'' in order to implement that 
part of SBA's final rule in the FAR.
    There were no significant issues raised by the public in 
response to the Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis provided in 
the proposed rule.
    This rule applies to all entities that do business with the 
Federal Government, but it is not expected to have a significant 
impact.
    This rule does not impose any new reporting, recordkeeping or 
other compliance requirements. The rule does not duplicate, overlap, 
or conflict with any other Federal rules.

    Interested parties may obtain a copy of the FRFA from the 
Regulatory Secretariat. The Regulatory Secretariat has submitted a copy 
of the FRFA to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business 
Administration.

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 Subject in 48 CFR Part 2

    Government procurement.

    Dated: December 17, 2015.
William F. Clark,
Director, Office of Government-wide Acquisition Policy, Office of 
Acquisition Policy, Office of Government-wide Policy.

    Therefore, DoD, GSA, and NASA amend 48 CFR part 2 as set forth 
below:

PART 2--DEFINITIONS OF WORDS AND TERMS

0
1. The authority citation for 48 CFR part 2 continues to read as 
follows:

    Authority: 40 U.S.C. 121(c); 10 U.S.C. chapter 137; and 51 
U.S.C. 20113.

0
2. Amend section 2.101 in paragraph (b)(2) by adding, in alphabetical 
order, the definition ``Multiple-award contract'' to read as follows:


2.101  Definitions.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (2) * * *
    Multiple-award contract means a contract that is--
    (1) A Multiple Award Schedule contract issued by GSA (e.g., GSA 
Schedule Contract) or agencies granted Multiple Award Schedule contract 
authority by GSA (e.g., Department of Veterans Affairs) as described in 
FAR part 38;
    (2) A multiple-award task-order or delivery-order contract issued 
in accordance with FAR subpart 16.5, including Governmentwide 
acquisition contracts; or
    (3) Any other indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity contract 
entered into

[[Page 81888]]

with two or more sources pursuant to the same solicitation.
* * * * *

[FR Doc. 2015-32427 Filed 12-30-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6820-EP-P

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.