Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 9 / Thursday, January 14, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 3679 

■ 6. Amend section 9.406–2 by adding 

paragraph (b)(1)(vii) to read as follows: 

9.406–2 Causes for debarment. 

* * * * * 

(b) * * * 

(1) * * * 

(vii) Determination of a false 

certification under 52.209–13, Violation 

of Arms Control Treaties or AgreementsCertification. 

* * * * * 

■ 7. Amend section 9.406–4 by revising 

paragraph (a)(1)(iii) to read as follows: 

9.406–4 Period of debarment. 

(a) * * * 

(1) * * * 

(iii) Debarments under 9.406– 

2(b)(1)(vii) shall be for a period of not 

less than 2 years, inclusive of any 

suspension period, if suspension 

precedes a debarment (see paragraph 

(a)(2) of this section). 

* * * * * 

■ 8. Amend section 9.407–2 by— 

■ a. Redesignating paragraph (a)(9) as 

(a)(10); and 

■ b. Adding a new paragraph (a)(9) to 

read as follows: 

9.407–2 Causes for suspension. 

(a) * * * 

(9) Determination of a false 

certification under 52.209–13, Violation 

of Arms Control Treaties or AgreementsCertification. 

* * * * * 

PART 52—SOLICITATION PROVISIONS 

AND CONTRACT CLAUSES 

■ 9. Amend section 52.209–13 by— 

■ a. Revising the date of the provision; 

■ b. Removing from paragraph (a) 

‘‘acquisitions below’’ and adding 

‘‘acquisitions at or below’’ in its place; 

■ c. Removing from paragraph (b)(1)(i) 

‘‘available via the internet at’’ and 

adding ‘‘available at’’ in its place; and 

■ d. Removing from paragraph (b)(1)(ii) 

‘‘available via the internet at’’ and 

adding ‘‘available at’’ in its place. 

The revision reads as follows: 

52.209–13 Violation of Arms Control 

Treaties or Agreements-Certification. 

* * * * * 

Violation of Arms Control Treaties or 

Agreements—Certification (Feb 2021) 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2020–29086 Filed 1–13–21; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6820–EP–P 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

GENERAL SERVICES 

ADMINISTRATION 

NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND 

SPACE ADMINISTRATION 

48 CFR Parts 12, 13, 15, 16, and 37 

[FAC 2021–03; FAR Case 2018–016; Item 

II; Docket No. FAR–2018–0016, Sequence 

No. 1] 

RIN 9000–AN75 

Federal Acquisition Regulation: 

Lowest Price Technically Acceptable 

Source Selection Process 

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 amending the 

Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) to 

implement a section of the John S. 

McCain National Defense Authorization 

Act for Fiscal Year 2019 that applies 

criteria for and limitations on the use of 

the lowest price technically acceptable 

source selection criteria in solicitations. 

DATES: Effective: February 16, 2021. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. 

Michael O. Jackson, Procurement 

Analyst, at 202–208–4949 or 

Michaelo.jackson@gsa.gov for 

clarification of content. For information 

pertaining to status or publication 

schedules, contact the Regulatory 

Secretariat Division at (202) 501–4755 

or GSARegSec@gsa.gov. Please cite FAC 

2021–03, FAR Case 2018–016. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

DoD, GSA, and NASA published a 

proposed rule at 84 FR 52425 on 

October 2, 2019, to implement section 

880 of the John S. McCain National 

Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for 

Fiscal Year (FY) 2019 (Pub. L. 115–232, 

41 U.S.C. 3701 Note). Section 880 

specifies the criteria that must be met in 

order to include lowest price technically 

acceptable (LPTA) source selection 

criteria in a solicitation; and requires 

solicitations predominantly for the 

acquisition of certain services and 

supplies to avoid the use of LPTA 

source selection criteria, to the 

maximum extent practicable. Nine 

respondents submitted public 

comments in response to the proposed 

rule. 

II. Discussion and Analysis 

The Civilian Agency Acquisition 

Council and the Defense Acquisition 

Regulations Council (the Councils) 

reviewed the public comments in the 

development of the final rule. 

A. Summary of Significant Changes 

From the Proposed Rule 

No changes were made to the final 

rule as a result of public comments. 

Minor edits were made to the final rule 

to account for baseline updates and to 

add the full name of the applicable 

statute. A discussion of the comments is 

provided as follows: 

B. Analysis of Public Comments 

Comment: Respondents expressed 

support for the rule and advised that the 

rule is beneficial to the small business 

community and provides them with a 

greater opportunity to compete in the 

Federal marketplace. 

Response: The Councils acknowledge 

support for the rule. 

Comment: Respondents expressed 

support for using the LPTA source 

selection process, when its use is 

appropriate and the selection criteria 

can be well-defined. 

Response: The Councils agree that use 

of the LPTA source selection process is 

a valuable part of the best value 

continuum and an acceptable and 

appropriate source selection approach 

for many acquisitions. 

Comment: Respondents expressed 

concern that the rule will be considered 

a complete ban on the use of the LPTA 

source selection process. A respondent 

is specifically concerned that the use of 

the LPTA source selection process is 

prohibited for a significant number of 

information technology (IT) supplies 

and services that can be appropriately 

purchased using the process. As a 

result, the respondent recommends that 

the rule not be implemented, or be 

revised to narrow the scope of IT 

products and services to which the rule 

applies, because the rule, as proposed, 

will result in increased acquisition lead 

times and higher prices without a 

corresponding increase in quality of 

services. 

Response: It is not the intent of the 

rule to prohibit the use of the LPTA 

source selection process. Instead, the 

intent of the rule is to implement the 

statutory language, which aims to 

identify circumstances that must exist 

for an acquisition to use the LPTA 

source selection process and certain 

types of requirements that will regularly 

benefit from the use of tradeoff source 

selection procedures. Specifically, 

section 880 requires use of the LPTA 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES5
3680 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 9 / Thursday, January 14, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 

source selection process to be avoided, 

to the maximum extent practicable, in 

acquisitions for various services and/or 

supplies, including acquisitions for 

‘‘information technology services’’ or 

‘‘telecommunications devices and 

services.’’ The statute does not further 

define or narrow these categories; as 

such, the rule implements the law, as 

written. With the exception of 

telecommunications devices, the rule 

does not preclude buying IT supplies on 

an LPTA basis. 

Comment: Respondents 

recommended that sections 813, 822, 

and 880, to the maximum extent 

practicable, be harmonized in the FAR 

and the DoD-unique requirements be 

addressed in the Defense Federal 

Acquisition Regulation Supplement 

(DFARS). Another respondent 

recommended revising the proposed 

FAR rule text to add cross-references to 

the DFARS, when DoD-unique 

requirements exist, in order to avoid 

confusion for individuals that are 

unaware of the DFARS requirements. 

Response: The intent of this rule is to 

implement section 880 of the NDAA for 

FY 2019 in the FAR. Sections 813 of the 

NDAA for FY 2017 and 822 of the 

NDAA for FY 2018, which prescribe 

limitations on the use of the LPTA 

source selection process for DoD, are 

implemented in the DFARS. These 

statutes, as codified, are similar, but not 

identical, in text. As such, the statutes 

are implemented separately, and in their 

entirety, in the FAR and DFARS, 

respectively, in order to provide 

contracting officers with a single, 

complete, clear, and uniform policy on 

the use of the LPTA source selection 

process, as it applies to their agency. 

Contracting officers are responsible for 

being aware of and complying with 

acquisition policies and procedures, 

including the FAR and other applicable 

agency regulations; therefore, it is not 

necessary to make cross-references to 

agency supplements in the FAR. 

Comment: Respondents asserted that 

section 880(c) applies to DoD because 

the term ‘‘executive agencies’’ does not 

appear in that paragraph of the statute; 

as such, the DoD should also be 

excluded from using the LPTA source 

selection process to acquire health care 

services and records and 

telecommunications devices and 

services, as directed in section 880(c). 

Respondents advised that because 

section 813, as amended by section 822, 

existed at the time section 880 was 

written, it is the intent of section 880 to 

clarify and/or add to the limitations of 

section 813, which apply only to DoD. 

Response: Section 813 (Pub. L. 114– 

328, enacted December 23, 2016) and 

section 822 (Pub. L. 115–91, enacted 

December 12, 2017) apply to DoD and 

are codified at 10 U.S.C. 2305 note. 

Section 880 (Pub. L. 115–132, enacted 

August 13, 2018) applies to executive 

agencies, other than DoD, and is 

codified at 41 U.S.C. 3701 note. The text 

of sections 813 and 822 are 

implemented in the DFARS as they 

currently appear in law. 10 U.S.C. 2305 

note has not been revised, via 

subsequent legislation, to amend the list 

of procurements for which the use of 

LPTA should be avoided to the 

maximum extent practicable. 

Comment: A respondent suggested 

that future Federal acquisition guidance 

emphasize the importance of effectively 

conveying clear technical and 

performance requirements. 

Response: The Councils agree that it 

is important to clearly identify and 

communicate the functional, 

performance, and physical requirements 

of a supply or service being acquired by 

an agency. To facilitate this goal, 

guidance, tools, and training are 

available to acquisition personnel on a 

variety of acquisition topics (e.g., market 

research techniques, describing agency 

needs, and encouraging competition) to 

support the requirements outlined in 

the FAR. Additionally, agencies have 

internal controls and procedures to 

monitor and evaluate contract 

performance and compliance. 

Comment: A respondent advised on 

the importance of robust oversight of 

contract performance when services are 

provided on a contract awarded using 

the LPTA source selection process. 

Response: The Councils agree that it 

is essential to exercise appropriate and 

adequate oversight of contractor 

performance on all contracts. 

Contracting officers are responsible for 

ensuring compliance with the terms of 

the contract, while safeguarding the 

interests of the United States in its 

contractual relationships. In addition, 

agencies are required to establish 

effective management practices to 

monitor and evaluate contract 

performance and compliance, and 

prevent fraud, waste, and abuse in 

service contracting. 

Comment: A respondent 

recommended establishing adequate 

monitoring systems to ensure LPTA is 

applied appropriately and only when 

the requirements of a contract meet the 

rule’s criteria. The respondent also 

suggested that public accountability 

should be established, possibly through 

the System for Award Management 

(SAM) at SAM.gov contract 

opportunities notice, when a contracting 

officer uses the LPTA source selection 

process. 

Response: Contracting officers are 

responsible for ensuring that the 

requirements of this rule are met when 

issuing a solicitation that includes the 

LPTA source selection process. 

Agencies have internal controls and 

procedures to monitor and evaluate 

their compliance with acquisition rules, 

regulations, and policies. To maintain 

public accountability, the respondent 

suggests that agencies publish the LPTA 

determination in the SAM.gov contract 

opportunities notice. However, section 

880 does not require public notice or 

publication of the documented 

determination to use LPTA source 

selection criteria, and the Councils do 

not believe additional oversight 

protocols are required at this time. 

Comment: A respondent expressed 

concern that the rule is not being 

applied to the GSA Federal Supply 

Schedules (FSS) Program and 

recommends aligning the Program with 

the rule to avoid inconsistent 

application and use of LTPA source 

selection criteria across the Federal and 

contractor communities when placing 

orders under FSS contracts. 

Response: GSA will separately 

address, outside of this rule, the 

applicability of section 880 to the GSA 

FSS Program. 

Comment: A respondent advised 

against using LPTA source selection 

criteria in solicitations for multiple 

award IT supply contracts that require 

contractors to bid on a notional supply 

list. The respondent advised that this 

approach leads to unrealistically lowpriced offers for the items on the initial 

supply list, but substantially higherpriced offers for supplies added to the 

contracts or refreshed after contract 

award. As a result, the Government does 

not realize the cost savings that is 

implied during the initial contract 

award. 

Response: Contracting officers are 

responsible for ensuring that the 

requirements of this rule are met when 

issuing a solicitation that includes the 

LPTA source selection process. Section 

880 does not prohibit the use of the 

LPTA source selection process when 

issuing multiple-award indefinitedelivery, indefinite-quantity contracts. 

Section 880 does require contracting 

officers to avoid, to the maximum extent 

practicable, using the LPTA source 

selection process in the case of a 

procurement that is predominantly for 

the acquisition of telecommunications 

devices and services. The rule reflects 

this statutory requirement. 

In addition, contracting officers 

consider price or cost when issuing or 

modifying multiple-award indefinitedelivery indefinite-quantity supply 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES5
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 9 / Thursday, January 14, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 3681 

contracts, or placing orders under these 

contracts in accordance with FAR 

subpart 16.5. When issuing or 

modifying these contracts, contracting 

officers must evaluate the 

reasonableness of the offered prices, in 

accordance with the procedures of FAR 

part 13 or 15, as applicable. When 

placing orders under these contracts, 

FAR subpart 16.5 requires contracting 

officers to consider price or cost as part 

of their selection decision for each 

order. These procedures help to ensure 

that the contracted price and the price 

paid under each order is fair and 

reasonable to the Government. 

Comment: One respondent 

recommended that the DoD budget be 

reduced by 30%. 

Response: This comment is outside 

the scope of this rule. 

III. Applicability to Contracts at or 

Below the Simplified Acquisition 

Threshold (SAT) and for Commercial 

Items, Including Commercially 

Available Off-the-Shelf (COTS) Items 

This final rule does not create any 

new provisions or clauses, nor does it 

change the applicability or burden of 

any existing provisions or clauses 

included in solicitations and contracts 

valued at or below the SAT, or for 

commercial items, including COTS 

items. 

IV. 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. 

V. Executive Order 13771 

This rule is not subject to E.O. 13771, 

because this rule is not a significant 

regulatory action under E.O. 12866. 

VI. 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: 

This rule is necessary to implement section 

880 of the John S. McCain National Defense 

Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year 

(FY) 2019 (Pub. L. 115–232). The objective of 

this rule is to avoid the use of lowest price 

technically acceptable (LPTA) source 

selection criteria in circumstances that would 

deny the Government the benefits of cost and 

technical tradeoffs in the source selection 

process. No public comments were received 

in response to the initial regulatory flexibility 

analysis. 

DoD, GSA, and NASA do not expect this 

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. The rule primarily 

affects internal Government requirements 

determination decisions, acquisition strategy 

decisions, and contract file documentation 

requirements. The Government does not 

collect data on the total number of 

solicitations issued on an annual basis that 

do or do not specify the use of the LPTA 

source selection process. However, the 

Federal Procurement Data System (FPDS) 

provides the following information for FY 

2018: 

• Federal competitive contracts and orders 

awarded using FAR parts 13, 15, or subpart 

16.5 procedures. In FY 2018, the Federal 

Government, excluding DoD, awarded 

approximately 82,337 new contracts and 

orders using the competitive procedures of 

FAR parts 13, 15, or subpart 16.5. This data 

excludes acquisitions for the supply/service 

categories identified in section 880(c) of the 

NDAA for FY 2019. Of the 82,337 contracts 

and orders, approximately 69 percent (or 

56,622 contracts and orders) were awarded to 

approximately 27,029 unique small 

businesses. It is important to note that FPDS 

does not collect data on solicitations. FPDS 

can identify contracts that are awarded using 

competitive procedures, but did not begin 

collecting data on the source selection 

process used to award those contracts until 

2020. Therefore, the data described above 

represents all competitively awarded 

contracts, including those using other than 

the LPTA source selection process. 

• Federal competitive contracts and orders 

awarded for specific services and supplies. In 

FY 2018, the Federal Government, excluding 

DoD, awarded approximately 22,581 new 

contracts and orders potentially for the 

supplies and services identified in section 

880(c) of the NDAA for FY 2019 using the 

competitive procedures of FAR parts 13, 15, 

and subpart 16.5, of which approximately 63 

percent (or 14,285 contracts and orders) were 

awarded to approximately 10,129 unique 

small businesses. 

This rule does not include any new 

reporting, recordkeeping, or other 

compliance requirements on any small 

entities. 

There are no known significant alternative 

approaches to the rule that would meet the 

stated objectives of the applicable statute. 

Interested parties may obtain a copy 

of the FRFA from the Regulatory 

Secretariat Division. The Regulatory 

Secretariat Division has submitted a 

copy of the FRFA to the Chief Counsel 

for Advocacy of the Small Business 

Administration. 

VII. 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 12, 13, 

15, 16, and 37 

Government procurement. 

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 parts 12, 13, 15, 16 and 

37 as set forth below: 

■ 1. The authority citation for 48 CFR 

parts 12, 13, 15, 16 and 37 continues to 

read as follows: 

Authority: 40 U.S.C. 121(c); 10 U.S.C. 

chapter 137; and 51 U.S.C. 20113. 

PART 12—ACQUISITION OF 

COMMERCIAL ITEMS 

■ 2. Revise section 12.203 by 

redesignating the text as paragraph (a) 

and adding paragraph (b) to read as 

follows: 

12.203 Procedures for solicitation, 

evaluation, and award. 

* * * * * 

(b) Contracting officers shall ensure 

the criteria at 15.101–2(c) are met when 

using the lowest price technically 

acceptable source selection process. 

PART 13—SIMPLIFIED ACQUISITION 

PROCEDURES 

■ 3. Amend section 13.106–1 by adding 

paragraphs (a)(2)(v) and (a)(2)(vi) to read 

as follows: 

13.106–1 Soliciting competition. 

(a) * * * 

(2) * * * 

(v) Except for DoD, contracting 

officers shall ensure the criteria at 

15.101–2(c)(1)–(5) are met when using 

the lowest price technically acceptable 

source selection process. 

(vi) Except for DoD, avoid using the 

lowest price technically acceptable 

source selection process to acquire 

certain supplies and services in 

accordance with 15.101–2(d). 

* * * * * 

■ 4. Amend section 13.106–3 by— 

■ a. In paragraph (b)(3) introductory 

text, removing ‘‘statements—’’ and 

adding ‘‘statements, when applicable— 

’’ in its place; 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES5
3682 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 9 / Thursday, January 14, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 

■ b. In paragraph (b)(3)(i), removing ‘‘; 

or’’ and adding ‘‘;’’ in its place; 

■ c. In paragraph (b)(3)(ii), removing 

‘‘supplier.’’ and adding ‘‘supplier; and’’ 

■ d. Adding paragraph (b)(3)(iii). 

The addition reads as follows: 

13.106–3 Award and documentation. 

* * * * * 

(b) * * * 

(3) * * * 

(iii) Except for DoD, when using 

lowest price technically acceptable 

source selection process, justifying the 

use of such process. 

* * * * * 

PART 15—CONTRACTING BY 

NEGOTIATION 

■ 5. Amend section 15.101–2 by adding 

paragraphs (c) and (d) to read as follows: 

15.101–2 Lowest price technically 

acceptable source selection process. 

* * * * * 

(c) Except for DoD, in accordance 

with section 880 of the John S. McCain 

National Defense Authorization Act for 

Fiscal Year 2019 (Pub. L. 115–232, 41 

U.S.C. 3701 Note), the lowest price 

technically acceptable source selection 

process shall only be used when— 

(1) The agency can comprehensively 

and clearly describe the minimum 

requirements in terms of performance 

objectives, measures, and standards that 

will be used to determine the 

acceptability of offers; 

(2) The agency would realize no, or 

minimal, value from a proposal that 

exceeds the minimum technical or 

performance requirements; 

(3) The agency believes the technical 

proposals will require no, or minimal, 

subjective judgment by the source 

selection authority as to the desirability 

of one offeror’s proposal versus a 

competing proposal; 

(4) The agency has a high degree of 

confidence that reviewing the technical 

proposals of all offerors would not 

result in the identification of 

characteristics that could provide value 

or benefit to the agency; 

(5) The agency determined that the 

lowest price reflects the total cost, 

including operation and support, of the 

product(s) or service(s) being acquired; 

and 

(6) The contracting officer documents 

the contract file describing the 

circumstances that justify the use of the 

lowest price technically acceptable 

source selection process. 

(d) Except for DoD, in accordance 

with section 880 of the John S. McCain 

National Defense Authorization Act for 

Fiscal Year 2019 (Pub. L. 115–232, 41 

U.S.C. 3701 Note), contracting officers 

shall avoid, to the maximum extent 

practicable, using the lowest price 

technically acceptable source selection 

process in the case of a procurement 

that is predominantly for the acquisition 

of— 

(1) Information technology services, 

cybersecurity services, systems 

engineering and technical assistance 

services, advanced electronic testing, 

audit or audit readiness services, health 

care services and records, 

telecommunications devices and 

services, or other knowledge-based 

professional services; 

(2) Personal protective equipment; or 

(3) Knowledge-based training or 

logistics services in contingency 

operations or other operations outside 

the United States, including in 

Afghanistan or Iraq. 

PART 16—TYPES OF CONTRACTS 

■ 6. Amend section 16.505 by— 

■ a. Removing from the end of 

paragraph (b)(1)(ii) ‘‘must—’’ adding 

‘‘shall—’’ in its place; 

■ b. Removing from paragraph 

(b)(1)(ii)(D) ‘‘contract; and’’ and adding 

‘‘contract;’’ in its place; 

■ c. Removing from paragraph 

(b)(1)(ii)(E) ‘‘decision.’’ and adding 

‘‘decision;’’ in its place; 

■ d. Adding paragraphs (b)(1)(ii)(F) and 

(b)(1)(ii)(G); and 

■ e. Adding paragraph (b)(7)(iii). 

The additions read as follows: 

16.505 Ordering. 

* * * * * 

(b) * * * 

(1) * * * 

(ii) * * * 

(F) Except for DoD, ensure the criteria 

at 15.101–2(c)(1)–(5) are met when 

using the lowest price technically 

acceptable source selection process; and 

(G) Except for DoD, avoid using the 

lowest price technically acceptable 

source selection process to acquire 

certain supplies and services in 

accordance with 15.101–2(d). 

* * * * * 

(7) * * * 

(iii) Except for DoD, the contracting 

officer shall document in the contract 

file a justification for use of the lowest 

price technically acceptable source 

selection process, when applicable. 

* * * * * 

PART 37—SERVICE CONTRACTING 

■ 7. Amend section 37.102 by adding 

paragraph (j) to read as follows: 

37.102 Policy. 

* * * * * 

(j) Except for DoD, see 15.101–2(d) for 

limitations on the use of the lowest 

price technically acceptable source 

selection process to acquire certain 

services. 

[FR Doc. 2020–29087 Filed 1–13–21; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6820–EP–P 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

GENERAL SERVICES 

ADMINISTRATION 

NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND 

SPACE ADMINISTRATION 

48 CFR Parts 19, 28, 32, 52, and 53 

[FAC 2021–03; FAR Case 2017–003; Item 

III; Docket FAR–2017–0003, Sequence No. 

1] 

RIN 9000–AN39 

Federal Acquisition Regulation: 

Individual Sureties 

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 amending the 

Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) to 

implement a section of the National 

Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 

Year 2016 to change the kinds of assets 

that individual sureties must pledge as 

security for their bonds. 

DATES: Effective: February 16, 2021. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. 

Zenaida Delgado, Procurement Analyst, 

at 202–969–7207 or zenaida.delgado@

gsa.gov for clarification of content. For 

information pertaining to status or 

publication schedules, contact the 

Regulatory Secretariat Division at 202– 

501–4755 or GSARegSec@gsa.gov. 

Please cite FAC 2021–03, FAR Case 

2017–003. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

DoD, GSA, and NASA published a 

proposed rule at 85 FR 7910 on 

February 12, 2020, to implement section 

874 of the National Defense 

Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016 

(Pub. L. 114–92), codified at 31 U.S.C. 

9310, Individual Sureties. 

FAR subpart 28.2 requires agencies to 

obtain adequate security for bonds when 

bonds are used with a contract. A 

corporate or individual surety is an 

acceptable form of security for a bond. 

Corporate sureties are vetted by the 

Department of the Treasury to ensure 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES5