Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 188 / Thursday, September 28, 2006 / Rules and Regulations 57357 

$3,000, because the simplified 

acquisition threshold will not be raised 

at this time. Other frequently used 

thresholds that are adjusted include—

• The FPDS reporting threshold (FAR 

4.602(c)) will be raised from $2,500 to 

$3,000. 

• Commercial Items test program 

ceiling (FAR 13.500) will be raised from 

$5,000,000 to $5,500,000. 

• The cost and pricing data threshold 

(FAR 15.403-4) will be raised from 

$550,000 to $650,000. 

The prime contractor subcontracting 

plan (FAR 19.702) floor will be raised 

from $500,000 to $550,000, but for 

construction ($1,000,000) is unchanged. 

Item V—Trade Agreements–Thresholds 

(FAR Case 2005-030) 

This final rule converts the interim 

rule published at 71 FR 864, January 5, 

2006, to a final rule without change. 

This rule changes the thresholds for 

application of the World Trade 

Organization Government Procurement 

Agreement and the other Free Trade 

Agreements with Canada, Mexico, 

Chile, Singapore, and Australia. These 

threshold increases occur every two 

years in order to keep pace with 

inflation. 

Item VI—Reporting of Purchases from 

Overseas Sources (Interim) (FAR Case 

2005-034) 

This interim rule amends FAR Part 25 

and adds a provision in FAR 52.225 to 

implement Section 837 of Division A of 

the Transportation, Treasury, Housing 

and Urban Development, the Judiciary, 

the District of Columbia, and 

Independent Agencies Appropriations 

Act, 2006 (Pub. L. 109-115). Section 837 

requires the head of each Federal agency 

to submit a report to Congress relating 

to acquisitions of articles, materials, or 

supplies that are manufactured outside 

the United States. The new provision 

requests from offerors necessary data 

regarding place of manufacture. The 

new provisions will require an offeror to 

indicate whether the place of 

manufacture of the end products it 

expects to provide in response to the 

solicitation is predominantly inside or 

outside the United States. Whenever the 

place of manufacture for a contract is 

coded outside the United States, the 

contracting officer will be required to 

enter into Federal Procurement Data 

System (FPDS) the reason for buying 

items manufactured outside the United 

States. 

Item VII—Exception to the Buy 

American Act for Commercial 

Information Technology (FAR Case 

2005-022) 

This final rule converts the interim 

rule published at 71 FR 223, January 3, 

2006, to a final rule without change. 

This final rule amends FAR 25.103 and 

Subpart 25.11 to implement Section 

535(a) of Division F of the Consolidated 

Appropriations Act, 2004, and similar 

sections in subsequent appropriations 

acts. Section 535(a) authorizes an 

exception to the Buy American Act for 

acquisitions of information technology 

that are commercial items. The final 

rule applies to all offerors responding to 

solicitations for commercial information 

technology where the Buy American Act 

previously applied (generally, 

acquisitions between the micropurchase threshold and $193,000). The 

effect of this exemption is that the 

following clauses are no longer 

applicable in acquisition of commercial 

information technology: 

• FAR 52.225-1, Buy American Act–

Supplies, 

• FAR 52.225-2, Buy American Act 

Certificate, 

• FAR 52.225-3, Buy American Act–

Free Trade Agreements–Israeli Trade 

Act, 

• FAR 52.225-4, Buy American Act–

Free Trade Agreements–Israeli Trade 

Act Certificate. 

This is because the Buy American Act 

no longer applies. The Free Trade 

Agreement non-discriminatory 

provisions are no longer necessary since 

all products now are treated without the 

restrictions of the Buy American Act. 

The Trade Agreements provision and 

clause at FAR 52.225–5 and FAR 

52.225–6 are still necessary when the 

Trade Agreements Act applies 

(acquisitions above $193,000). The 

Trade Agreements provision and clause 

already waive applicability of the Buy 

American Act for eligible products and 

are needed to implement the restrictions 

on procurement of noneligible end 

products. Section 535 and subsequent 

similar sections waived only the Buy 

American Act, not all restrictions on the 

purchase of foreign information 

technology. 

Item VIII—Technical Amendments 

Editorial changes are made at FAR 1, 

3, 4, 5, 7, 13, 26, 33, 49, 50, 52, and 53 

in order to update references. 

Dated: September 19, 2006. 

Ralph De Stefano, 

Director, Contract Policy Division. 

Federal Acquisition Circular 

Federal Acquisition Circular (FAC) 

2005-13 is issued under the authority of 

the Secretary of Defense, the 

Administrator of General Services, and 

the Administrator for the National 

Aeronautics and Space Administration. 

Unless otherwise specified, all 

Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 

and other directive material contained 

in FAC 2005-13 is effective September 

28, 2006. 

Dated: September 19, 2006. 

Roger D. Waldron, 

Acting Senior Procurement Executive, 

General Services Administration. 

Dated: September 8, 2006. 

Shay D. Assad, 

Director, Defense Procurement and 

Acquisition Policy. 

Dated: September 12, 2006. 

Thomas Luedtke, 

Assistant Administrator for Procurement, 

National Aeronautics and Space 

Administration. 

[FR Doc. 06–8199 Filed 9–27–06; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6820–EP–S 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

GENERAL SERVICES 

ADMINISTRATION 

NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND 

SPACE ADMINISTRATION 

48 CFR Parts 5, 6, 8, 11, and 13 

[FAC 2005–13; FAR Case 2005–037; Item 

I; Docket 2006–0020, Sequence 10] 

RIN 9000–AK55 

Federal Acquisition Regulation; FAR 

Case 2005–037, Implement OMB Policy 

on the Use of Brand Name 

Specifications 

AGENCIES: Department of Defense (DoD), 

General Services Administration (GSA), 

and National Aeronautics and Space 

Administration (NASA). 

ACTION: Interim rule with request for 

comments. 

SUMMARY: The Civilian Agency 

Acquisition Council and the Defense 

Acquisition Regulations Council 

(Councils) have agreed to amend the 

Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) to 

require agencies to publish on the 

Governmentwide point of entry (GPE) or 

e-Buy the documentation required by 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with RULES2
57358 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 188 / Thursday, September 28, 2006 / Rules and Regulations 

the FAR to support the use of brand 

name specifications. 

DATES: Effective Date: September 28, 

2006. 

Comment Date: Interested parties 

should submit written comments to the 

FAR Secretariat on or before November 

27, 2006 to be considered in the 

formulation of a final rule. 

ADDRESSES: Submit comments 

identified by FAC 2005–13, FAR case 

2005–037, by any of the following 

methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: 

http://www.regulations.gov. Search 

for this document at the ‘‘Federal 

Acquisition Regulation’’ agency and 

review the ‘‘Document Title’’ column; 

click on the Document ID number. Click 

on ‘‘Add Comments’’. 

You may also search for any 

document using the ‘‘Advanced search/ 

document search’’ tab, selecting from 

the agency field ‘‘Federal Acquisition 

Regulation’’, and typing the FAR case 

number in the keyword field. 

• Fax: 202–501–4067. 

• Mail: General Services 

Administration, Regulatory Secretariat 

(VIR), 1800 F Street, NW, Room 4035, 

ATTN: Laurieann Duarte, Washington, 

DC 20405. 

Instructions: Please submit comments 

only and cite FAC 2005–13, FAR case 

2005–037, in all correspondence related 

to this case. All comments received will 

be posted without change to http:// 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal and/or business confidential 

information provided. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT For 

clarification of content, contact Ms. 

Cecelia L. Davis, Procurement Analyst, 

at (202) 219–0202. Please cite FAC 

2005–13, FAR case 2005–037. For 

information pertaining to status or 

publication schedules, contact the FAR 

Secretariat at (202) 501–4755. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

A. Background 

On April 11, 2005, the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) issued 

a memorandum on the use of brand 

name specifications to reinforce the 

need to maintain vendor and technology 

neutral contract specifications. To 

provide for maximum competition, 

solicitations should limit the use of 

brand name specifications. As a general 

rule, contract specifications should 

emphasize the necessary physical, 

functional, and performance 

characteristics of a product - ;not brand 

names. OMB encouraged agencies to 

take steps to mitigate brand name usage 

and requested agencies to publicize the 

justification for use of brand name with 

the contract solicitation. While the 

justifications are generally available 

upon request, posting the brand name 

justifications will improve the overall 

transparency of the acquisition process. 

Contracting officers must be sensitive 

when dealing with proprietary 

information when posting justifications. 

FAR 6.305 requires contracting officers 

to carefully screen all justifications for 

contractor proprietary information and 

remove such information before making 

available to the public. Contracting 

officers are to adhere to the exemptions 

on disclosure of information contained 

in the Freedom of Information Act (5 

U.S.C. 552) and the prohibitions against 

disclosure in FAR 24.202 in 

determining the information that should 

be removed. 

The OMB memorandum applies to all 

acquisitions exceeding $25,000 that use 

brand name specifications, including 

open market purchases, purchases from 

the Federal Supply Schedules (FSS) 

program, and sole source procurements. 

Contracting officers should not use 

other contract vehicles instead of the 

FSS program when it is not in the best 

interest of the Government to do so, just 

to circumvent the brand name posting 

requirement. 

To implement the OMB 

memorandum, the Councils are 

amending the FAR to add a requirement 

to publish on the GPE or e-Buy the 

documentation required by the FAR to 

support the use of brand name 

specifications. The proposed changes 

require—

• For brand name orders against the 

FSS program, posting to e-Buy the 

documentation or justification required 

by FAR 8.405–6. The rule also restricts 

the use of oral orders over $25,000 

against the FSS that contain brand 

specifications. 

• For non-FSS acquisitions, including 

simplified acquisitions, posting to the 

Federal Business Opportunities website 

(www.fedbizopps.gov) the justification 

or documentation required by FAR 

11.105. 

OMB issued a second memorandum 

on April 17, 2006 to provide additional 

implementation guidance to agencies 

when publicizing the brand name 

justification which reflects the approach 

above. In response to OMB’s 

memoranda, agencies submitted several 

comments and questions on the posting 

requirement and the requirement for the 

brand name justifications. The questions 

and comments are summarized below 

and the Councils invite interested 

parties to comment on these questions. 

1. The OMB memorandum requires 

agencies to post the brand name 

justification to e-Buy with the request 

for quotation (RFQ) when using the FSS. 

However, some agencies use 

commercial companies such as FedBid 

to post the RFQs for FSS purchases and 

FedBid posts the RFQ to FedBizOpps 

instead of e-Buy. Should agencies be 

allowed to post the brand name 

justification to FedBizOpps instead of eBuy when they use FedBid or another 

commercial company to post an RFQ for 

FSS purchases? If an alternative posting 

solution is used, will OMB be able to 

obtain a report on the use of these brand 

name justifications, if necessary? 

2. The OMB memorandum requires 

agencies to post brand name 

justifications for orders against the FSS 

but not for orders against indefinitedelivery contracts including GWACS. 

Agencies can avoid the posting 

requirement simply by purchasing on an 

indefinite-delivery contract instead of 

the FSS. Should agencies be required to 

post brand name justifications for orders 

against indefinite-delivery contracts? If 

yes, where is the best place to post the 

justification? 

3. Should agencies be required to post 

brand name justifications for orders 

issued on the SmartBuy program and 

other strategic sourcing vehicles? 

4. Should agencies be required to post 

brand name justifications to renew 

software license agreements that are 

required to receive software updates? 

This is not a significant regulatory 

action and, therefore, was not subject to 

review under Section 6(b) of Executive 

Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and 

Review, dated September 30, 1993. This 

rule is not a major rule under 5 U.S.C. 

804. 

B. Regulatory Flexibility Act 

The interim rule is not expected 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 adds no new 

requirements for contractors. The rule 

requires agencies to post documentation 

required by the FAR to the GPE or eBuy. An Initial Regulatory Flexibility 

Analysis (IRFA) has therefore not been 

prepared. The Councils will consider 

comments from small entities 

concerning the affected FAR Parts 5, 6, 

8, 11, and 13 in accordance with 5 

U.S.C. 610. Interested parties must 

submit such comments separately and 

should cite 5 U.S.C 601, et seq. (FAC 

2005–13, FAR case 2005–037), in 

correspondence. 

C. Paperwork Reduction Act 

The Paperwork Reduction Act does 

not apply because the changes to the 

FAR do not impose information 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 188 / Thursday, September 28, 2006 / Rules and Regulations 57359 

collection requirements that require the 

approval of the Office of Management 

and Budget under 44 U.S.C. 3501, et 

seq. 

D. Determination to Issue an Interim 

Rule 

A determination has been made under 

the authority of the Secretary of Defense 

(DoD), the Administrator of General 

Services (GSA), and the Administrator 

of the National Aeronautics and Space 

Administration (NASA) that urgent and 

compelling reasons exist to promulgate 

this interim rule without prior 

opportunity for public comment. This 

action is necessary to limit the use of 

brand name specifications and provide 

for maximum competition. However, 

pursuant to Public Law 98–577 and FAR 

1.501, the Councils will consider public 

comments received in response to this 

interim rule in the formation of the final 

rule. 

List of Subjects in 48 CFR Parts 5, 6, 8, 

11, and 13. 

Government procurement. 

Dated: September 19, 2006. 

Ralph De Stefano, 

Director, Contract Policy Division. 

■ Therefore, DoD, GSA, and NASA 

amend 48 CFR parts 5, 6, 8, 11, and 13 

as set forth below: 

■ 1. The authority citation for 48 CFR 

parts 5, 6, 8, 11, and 13 continues to 

read as follows: 

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

chapter 137; and 42 U.S.C. 2473(c). 

PART 5—PUBLICIZING CONTRACT 

ACTIONS 

■ 2. Amend section 5.102 by adding 

paragraph (a)(6) to read as follows: 

5.102 Availability of solicitations. 

(a)(1) * * * 

* * * * * 

(6) When an acquisition contains 

brand name specifications, the 

contracting officer shall include with 

the solicitation the justification or 

documentation required by 6.302–1(c), 

13.106–1(b), or 13.501, redacted as 

necessary (see 6.305). 

* * * * * 

PART 6—COMPETITION 

REQUIREMENTS 

■ 3. Amend section 6.302–1 in 

paragraph (c) by adding a new sentence 

before the last sentence to read as 

follows: 

6.302–1 Only one responsible source and 

no other supplies or services will satisfy 

agency requirements. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * See 5.102(a)(6) for the 

requirement to post the brand name 

justification. * * * 

* * * * * 

PART 8—REQUIRED SOURCES OF 

SUPPLIES AND SERVICES 

■ 4. Amend section 8.402 by—

■ a. Adding to paragraph (c)(2) ‘‘(except 

see 8.405–6)’’ after ‘‘contractors’’; and 

■ b. Adding to paragraph (d) a new 

sentence after the second sentence to 

read as follows: 

8.402 General. 

* * * * * 

(d)* * * Ordering activities shall post 

an RFQ to e-Buy when an order contains 

brand name specifications (see 8.405–6). 

* * * 

* * * * * 

■ 5. Amend section 8.405–1 by revising 

paragraphs (c) and (d)(1) to read as 

follows: 

8.405–1 Ordering procedures for supplies, 

and services not requiring a statement of 

work. 

* * * * * 

(c) Orders exceeding the micropurchase threshold but not exceeding 

the maximum order threshold. (1) 

Ordering activities shall place orders 

with the schedule contractor that can 

provide the supply or service that 

represents the best value. Before placing 

an order, an ordering activity shall 

consider reasonably available 

information about the supply or service 

offered under MAS contracts by 

surveying at least three schedule 

contractors through the GSA Advantage! 

on-line shopping service, or by 

reviewing the catalogs or pricelists of at 

least three schedule contractors (see 

8.405–5). 

(2) When an order contains brand 

name specifications, the contracting 

officer shall post the Request for Quote 

(RFQ) along with the justification or 

documentation as required by 8.405–6. 

(3) In addition to price, when 

determining best value, the ordering 

activity may consider, among other 

factors, the following: 

(i) Past performance. 

(ii) Special features of the supply or 

service required for effective program 

performance. 

(iii) Trade-in considerations. 

(iv) Probable life of the item selected 

as compared with that of a comparable 

item. 

(v) Warranty considerations. 

(vi) Maintenance availability. 

(vii) Environmental and energy 

efficiency considerations. 

(viii) Delivery terms. 

(d)* * *; 

(1) Review (except see (c)(2) of this 

subsection) the pricelists of additional 

schedule contractors (the GSA 

Advantage! on-line shopping service 

can be used to facilitate this review); 

* * * * * 

■ 6. Amend section 8.405–6 by—

■ a. Revising paragraph (a) and the 

introductory text of paragraph (b); 

■ b. Removing paragraph (b)(3); 

■ c. Redesignating paragraph (b)(4) as 

(b)(3); 

■ d. Revising paragraph (c); 

■ e. Redesignating paragraphs (d), (e), 

and (f) as (f), (g) and (h) respectively; 

■ f. Adding new paragraphs (d) and (e); 

■ g. Removing from the newly 

designated paragraph (f) ‘‘of schedule 

contractors to fewer than required in 

8.405–1 or 8.405–2’’; 

■ h. Removing from newly designated 

paragraph (g)(2)(iv) ‘‘8.405–6(b)’’ and 

adding ‘‘8.405–6(a) and (b)’’ in its place; 

■ i. Revising newly designated 

paragraph (g)(2)(viii); 

■ j. Removing from newly designated 

paragraph (h)(2) ‘‘(f)(3) or (f)(4)’’ and 

adding ‘‘(h)(3) or (h)(4)’’ in its place; and 

■ k. Removing from newly designated 

paragraph (h)(3)(iii) ‘‘(f)(4)’’ and adding 

‘‘(h)(4)’’ in its place. 

The revised and added text reads as 

follows: 

8.405–6 Limited sources justification and 

approval. 

(a) Orders placed under Federal 

Supply Schedules are exempt from the 

requirements in Part 6. However, an 

ordering activity must justify its action 

when restricting consideration—

(1) Of schedule contractors to fewer 

than required in 8.405–1 or 8.405–2; or 

(2) To an item peculiar to one 

manufacturer (e.g., a particular brand 

name, product, or a feature of a product, 

peculiar to one manufacturer). A brand 

name item, whether available on one or 

more schedule contracts, is an item 

peculiar to one manufacturer. Brand 

name specifications shall not be used 

unless the particular brand name, 

product, or feature is essential to the 

Government’s requirements, and market 

research indicates other companies’

similar products, or products lacking 

the particular feature, do not meet, or 

cannot be modified to meet, the 

agency’s needs. 

(b) Circumstances that may justify 

restriction cited in paragraph (a)(1) of 

this subsection include—

* * * * * 

(c) Ordering activities shall procure 

such requirements only if the need to do 

so is justified in writing and approved 

at the levels specified in paragraphs (f) 

and (h) of this subsection. 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with RULES2
57360 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 188 / Thursday, September 28, 2006 / Rules and Regulations 

(d) Except as provided in paragraph 

(e) of this subsection, when an order 

contains brand name specifications, the 

ordering activity shall post the 

following information along with the 

Request for Quotation (RFQ) to e-Buy 

(http://www.ebuy.gsa.gov): 

(1) For proposed orders exceeding 

$25,000, but not exceeding the 

simplified acquisition threshold, the 

documentation required by paragraph (f) 

of this subsection. 

(2) For proposed orders exceeding the 

simplified acquisition threshold, the 

justification required by paragraph (g) of 

this subsection. 

(e) The posting requirement of 

paragraph (d) of this subsection does not 

apply when—

(1) Disclosure would compromise the 

national security (e.g., would result in 

disclosure of classified information) or 

create other security risks. The fact that 

access to classified matter may be 

necessary to submit a proposal or 

perform the contract does not, in itself, 

justify use of this exception; 

(2) The nature of the file (e.g., size, 

format) does not make it cost-effective 

or practicable for contracting officers to 

provide access through e-Buy; or 

(3) The agency’s senior procurement 

executive makes a written 

determination that access through e-Buy 

is not in the Government’s interest. 

* * * * * 

(g) * * * 

(2) * * * 

(viii) A statement of the actions, if 

any, the agency may take to remove or 

overcome any barriers that led to the 

restricted consideration before any 

subsequent acquisition for the supplies 

or services is made. 

* * * * * 

■ 7. Amend section 8.406–1 by revising 

the first sentence of the introductory 

text to read as follows: 

8.406–1 Order placement. 

Ordering activities may place orders 

orally (except for services requiring a 

statement of work (SOW) or orders 

containing brand name specifications 

that exceed $25,000) or use Optional 

Form 347, an agency-prescribed form, or 

an established electronic 

communications format to order 

supplies or services from schedule 

contracts. * * * 

* * * * * 

PART 11—DESCRIBING AGENCY 

NEEDS 

■ 8. Amend section 11.105 by—

■ a. Redesignating paragraphs (a), (b), 

and (c) as (a)(1), (a)(2)(i), and (a)(2)(ii) 

respectively; and adding new 

paragraphs (a)(3) and (b); 

■ b. Amending newly redesignated 

paragraph (a)(2)(i) by removing ‘‘and’’

from the end of the paragraph and 

adding ‘‘or’’ in its place; and 

■ c. Revising newly redesignated 

paragraph (a)(2)(ii). 

The revised and added text reads as 

follows: 

11.105 Items peculiar to one manufacturer. 

* * * * * 

(a)(1) * * * 

(2)(i) * * * 

(ii) The basis for not providing for 

maximum practicable competition is 

documented in the file (see 13.106–1(b)) 

or justified (see 13.501) when the 

acquisition is awarded using simplified 

acquisition procedures. 

(3) The documentation or justification 

is posted for acquisitions over $25,000. 

(See 5.102(a)(6).) 

(b) For multiple award schedule 

orders, see 8.405–6. 

PART 13—SIMPLIFIED ACQUISITION 

PROCEDURES 

■ 9. Amend section 13.105 by adding 

paragraph (c) to read as follows: 

13.105 Synopsis and posting 

requirements. 

* * * * * 

(c) See 5.102(a)(6) for the requirement 

to post a brand name justification or 

documentation required by 13.106–1(b) 

or 13.501. 

■ 10. Amend section 13.106–1 by—

■ a. Amending paragraph (b)(1) by 

adding ‘‘brand name’’ after 

‘‘agreements,’’; 

■ b. Amending paragraph (b)(2) by 

adding ‘‘(including brand name)’’ after 

‘‘For sole source’’; and 

■ c. Adding a new paragraph (b)(3) to 

read as follows—

13.106–1 Soliciting competition. 

* * * * * 

(b) * * * 

(3) See 5.102(a)(6) for the requirement 

to post the brand name justification or 

documentation. 

* * * * * 

13.106–3 [Amended] 

■ 11. Amend section 13.106–3 in 

paragraph (b)(3)(i) by adding ‘‘(see 

13.106–1 for brand name purchases)’’

after ‘‘competition’’. 

13.501 [Amended] 

■ 12. Amend section 13.501 by—

■ a. Amending the paragraph heading in 

paragraph (a) by adding ‘‘(including 

brand name)’’ after ‘‘Sole source’’; 

■ b. Amending paragraph (a)(1)(i) by 

adding ‘‘(including brand name)’’ after 

‘‘2.101,’’; and 

■ c. Amending paragraphs (a)(1)(ii) and 

(a)(2) by adding ‘‘(including brand 

name)’’ after ‘‘sole source’’. 

[FR Doc. 06–8200 Filed 9–27–06; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6820–EP–S 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

GENERAL SERVICES 

ADMINISTRATION 

NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND 

SPACE ADMINISTRATION 

48 CFR Parts 1, 2, 7, 11, 31, and 39 

[FAC 2005–13; FAR Case 2004–018; Item 

II; Docket 2006–0020, Sequence 16] 

RIN 9000–AK29 

Federal Acquisition Regulation; FAR 

Case 2004–018, Information 

Technology Security 

AGENCIES: Department of Defense (DoD), 

General Services Administration (GSA), 

and National Aeronautics and Space 

Administration (NASA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Civilian Agency 

Acquisition Council and the Defense 

Acquisition Regulations Council 

(Councils) have agreed to adopt as final 

without change, the interim rule 

amending the Federal Acquisition 

Regulation (FAR) to implement the 

Information Technology (IT) Security 

provisions of the Federal Information 

Security Management Act of 2002 

(FISMA) (Title III of Public Law 107–

347, the E-Government Act of 2002 (EGov Act)). 

DATES: Effective Date: September 28, 

2006. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

clarification of content, contact Ms. 

Cecelia Davis, Procurement Analyst, at 

(202) 219–0202. Please cite FAC 2005–

13, FAR case 2004–018. For information 

pertaining to status or publication 

schedules, contact the FAR Secretariat 

at (202) 501–4755. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

A. Background 

DoD, GSA, and NASA published an 

interim rule in the Federal Register at 

70 FR 57449, September 30, 2005 to 

implement the Information Technology 

(IT) Security provisions of the Federal 

Information Security Management Act 

of 2002 (FISMA) (Title III of Public Law 

107–347, the E-Government Act of 2002 

(E-Gov Act)). There was a correction 

published in the Federal Register at 70 

FR 69100, November 14, 2005, deleting 

the definition at FAR 2.101 of 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with RULES2