Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 189 / Monday, September 30, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 59851 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

Defense Acquisition Regulations 

System 

48 CFR Parts 203 and 252 

RIN 0750–AH97 

Defense Federal Acquisition 

Regulation Supplement: Enhancement 

of Contractor Employee Whistleblower 

Protections (DFARS Case 2013–D010) 

AGENCY: Defense Acquisition 

Regulations System, Department of 

Defense (DoD). 

ACTION: Interim rule. 

SUMMARY: DoD is issuing an interim rule 

amending the Defense Federal 

Acquisition Regulation Supplement 

(DFARS) to implement statutory 

amendments to whistleblower 

protections for contractor and 

subcontractor employees. 

DATES: Effective date: September 30, 

2013. In accordance with FAR 

1.108(d)(3), contracting officers are 

encouraged to include the changes in 

these rules in major modifications to 

contracts and orders awarded prior to 

the effective date of this interim rule. 

Comment Date: Comments on the 

interim rule should be submitted in 

writing to the address shown below on 

or before November 29, 2013, to be 

considered in the formation of a final 

rule. 

ADDRESSES: Submit comments 

identified by DFARS Case 2013–D010, 

using any of the following methods: 

Æ Regulations.gov: http://

www.regulations.gov. Submit comments 

via the Federal eRulemaking portal by 

entering ‘‘DFARS Case 2013–D010’’ 

under the heading ‘‘Enter keyword or 

ID’’ and selecting ‘‘Search.’’ Select the 

link ‘‘Submit a Comment’’ that 

corresponds with ‘‘DFARS Case 2013– 

D010.’’ Follow the instructions provided 

at the ‘‘Submit a Comment’’ screen. 

Please include your name, company 

name (if any), and ‘‘DFARS Case 2013– 

D010’’ on your attached document. 

Æ Email: dfars@osd.mil. Include 

DFARS Case 2013–D010 in the subject 

line of the message. 

Æ Fax: 571–372–6094. 

Æ Mail: Defense Acquisition 

Regulations System, Attn: Ms. Meredith 

Murphy, OUSD(AT&L)DPAP/DARS, 

Room 3B855, 3060 Defense Pentagon, 

Washington, DC 20301–3060. 

Comments received generally will be 

posted without change to http://

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. 

Meredith Murphy, Defense Acquisition 

Regulations System, 

OUSD(AT&L)DPAP/DARS, Room 

3B855, 3060 Defense Pentagon, 

Washington, DC 20301–3060. 

Telephone 571–372–6098; facsimile 

571–372–6101.’’ 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

This interim rule revises the DFARS 

to implement section 827 (except 

paragraph (g)) of the National Defense 

Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal 

Year (FY) 2013 (Pub. L. 112–239, 

enacted January 2, 2013). Section 827 

(Enhancement of Whistleblower 

Protections for Contractor Employees) 

made extensive changes to 10 U.S.C. 

2409, entitled ‘‘Contractor employees: 

Protection from reprisal or disclosure.’’ 

Paragraph (g) of section 827, which 

amended paragraph (k) of 10 U.S.C. 

2324, entitled ‘‘Allowable costs under 

defense contracts,’’ is partially 

addressed under a separate DFARS case, 

2013–D022, Allowability of Legal Costs 

for Whistleblower Proceedings. 

Section 827 of the NDAA for FY 2013 

created a standalone statute for DoD that 

is not dependent on the Federal 

Acquisition Regulation (FAR) coverage. 

The DoD contractor whistleblower rules 

are based on an independent statute that 

applies only to Title 10 agencies. 

Section 828, Pilot Program for 

Enhancement of Contractor 

Whistleblower Protections, of the NDAA 

for FY 2013 will be implemented in the 

FAR; see FAR Case 2013–015. Section 

828 establishes a four-year ‘‘pilot 

program’’ to provide enhanced 

whistleblower protections for 

employees of civilian agency contractors 

and subcontractors and suspend the use 

of FAR 3.901 through 3.906. The FAR 

will also incorporate sections 827(g) and 

828(d) of the NDAA for FY 2013 (Pub. 

L. 112–239). 

Section 827(g) amends 10 U.S.C. 

2324(k). In a like manner, section 828(d) 

amends 41 U.S.C. 4310 to address legal 

costs incurred by a contractor in 

connection with a proceeding 

commenced by a contractor employee 

submitting a complaint under the 

applicable whistleblower section (10 

U.S.C. 2409 or 41 U.S.C. 4712, 

respectively). See FAR Case 2013–017, 

entitled Allowability of Legal Costs for 

Whistleblower Proceedings. 

II. Discussion and Analysis 

The current FAR addresses this 

subject at subpart 3.9, and the DoDunique rules are contained in DFARS 

subpart 203.9, entitled ‘‘Whistleblower 

Protections for Contractor Employees.’’ 

DFARS subpart 203.9 implements 10 

U.S.C. 2409, as amended. The subpart 

covers the policy, procedures for filing 

and investigating complaints, remedies, 

and the prescription for the clause at 

DFARS 252.203–7002, entitled 

‘‘Requirement to Inform Employees of 

Whistleblower Rights.’’ 

A. Section 827 Changes to 10 U.S.C. 

2409 

Section 827 revised 10 U.S.C. 2409 as 

follows: 

(a)(1): Amended grounds for 

disclosure. 

(a)(2): Amended persons and bodies 

to whom disclosure may be made and 

for which reprisal is prohibited. 

(a)(3)(A): Provided a definition of who 

is deemed to have made a disclosure, 

see 203.903(3). 

(a)(3)(B): Added prohibition against 

reprisal even if undertaken at the 

request of a DoD or Administration 

official. 

(b)(1): Provided an additional basis on 

which the Inspector General may 

determine not to investigate. 

(b)(2)(B): Provided a reporting 

timeframe for any additional period for 

investigation. 

(b)(3): Provided specific exemptions 

to the prohibition against disclosure of 

information from or about any person 

alleging the reprisal. 

(b)(4): Added a three-year time limit 

for bringing a complaint. 

(c)(1)(B): Modified the types of 

damages that may be ordered. 

(c)(2): Created a two-year time limit 

for bringing an action if remedies have 

been denied or after remedies are 

deemed to have been exhausted. 

(c)(4): Expanded on the types of relief 

that may be granted when a person fails 

to comply with an order for relief. 

(c)(5): Clarified that filing an appeal 

generally may not be grounds for staying 

enforcement of the order. 

(c)(6): Stated the legal burden of proof 

to be used. 

(c)(7): Prohibited any waiver of the 

rights and remedies in the statute. 

(d): Added a new requirement to 

notify employees of their rights and 

remedies. 

(e): Created an exemption for 

elements of the intelligence community. 

(g)(6): Added a definition of ‘‘abuse of 

authority.’’ 

B. Changes to DFARS 

The statutory changes to 10 U.S.C. 

2409 made by section 827 are 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES

59852 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 189 / Monday, September 30, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 

implemented in DFARS subpart 203.9. 

The statutory changes to 10 U.S.C. 

2324(k) made by section 827 are being 

implemented separately. 

The interim rule amends DFARS 

203.900, Scope of subpart, to add a 

reference to section 827 and implement 

the exclusion of the intelligence 

community from applicability of the 

subpart. The definition of ‘‘abuse of 

authority’’ is added to DFARS 203.901, 

Definition. 

Amendments are made to DFARS 

203.903, Policy. The applicability of the 

subpart is expanded to include 

violations of rule or regulation and 

abuse of authority relating to a DoD 

contract. The entities covered are 

expanded to include other law 

enforcement agencies, a court or grand 

jury, and certain contractor or 

subcontractor management officials or 

employees. In addition, the changes to 

this section include a clarification of 

what constitutes a ‘‘disclosure.’’ 

DFARS 203.904 is revised to add the 

specific procedures for filing complaints 

from FAR 3.904. DFARS 203.905 is 

amended to address specific reasons for 

which the DoD Inspector General would 

be justified in not investigating a 

complaint of discrimination or reprisal, 

add timelines, and clarify the narrow 

circumstances under which the DoD 

Inspector General could respond to any 

inquiry or disclose information about 

alleged reprisal. 

The remedies at DFARS 203.906 are 

amended to prohibit reprisal, add a time 

limit for bringing an action, and state 

that the rights and remedies provided in 

DFARS subpart 203.9 cannot be waived. 

Paragraph (h) of section 827 provides 

that nothing in the new law may be 

construed to provide any rights to 

disclose classified information not 

otherwise provided by law. This 

important caveat is included in a new 

section 203.907, entitled ‘‘Classified 

information.’’ 

The clause prescribed at DFARS 

203.970 is 252.203–7002, Requirement 

to Inform Employees of Whistleblower 

Rights. The interim rule amends the 

clause to apply to subcontractors the 

specific requirement to inform 

employees in writing of their 

whistleblower rights. In addition, the 

written notification of employee 

whistleblower rights and protections is 

required in the predominant native 

language of the workforce. 

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 a significant 

regulatory action and, therefore, was 

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 interim 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 neither changes the 

substance of contract or solicitation 

procedures or policies nor creates a 

whistleblower protection for contractor 

employees. Such protections currently 

exist, and this case only clarifies 

contractors’ rights and the remedies 

available to their employees. However, 

an initial regulatory flexibility analysis 

has been performed and is summarized 

as follows: 

DoD is amending the DFARS to 

implement changes to the existing 

protections for contractor whistleblower 

employees as a result of amendments 

made by section 827 of the National 

Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for 

Fiscal Year (FY) 2013. Section 827 of 

the NDAA for FY 2013 amended 10 

U.S.C. 2409 and 10 U.S.C. 2324(k). 

Section 827 changes are applicable to 

DoD, NASA, and the Coast Guard. Each 

agency will amend its Federal 

Acquisition Regulation supplement to 

incorporate these provisions. This 

Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

pertains only to this DFARS interim 

rule. This rule makes revisions to 

subpart 203.9, ‘‘Whistleblower 

Protections for Contractor Employees.’’ 

The subpart covers the policy, 

procedures for filing and investigating 

complaints, remedies, and the 

prescription for the clause at DFARS 

252.203–7002, entitled ‘‘Requirement to 

Inform Employees of Whistleblower 

Rights.’’ 

The rule applies to all entities, small 

as well as large, at the prime contract 

and subcontract level. However, not all 

entities will have a situation occur that 

requires an employee to use the 

whistleblower provisions. Given that a 

whistleblower employee may work for 

any size business, the impact on small 

businesses is directly associated with 

the number of whistleblowers it 

employs. There is no way to predict this 

number in advance. However, a small 

entity could be impacted by a 

whistleblower employee either as a 

Government prime contractor or 

subcontractor. In addition, the impact 

on an entity is directly related to the 

seriousness of the alleged wrongdoing. 

There are no reporting requirements 

associated with reporting of the 

wrongdoing as stated in the interim 

rule. A firm accused of retaliating 

against an employee whistleblower is 

likely to be required to furnish human 

resources documentation to disprove 

the accusation. This documentation, 

however, would only be required in the 

course of an investigation of the 

accusation, not as a result of a contract 

clause. 

The rule does not duplicate, overlap, 

or conflict with any other Federal rules. 

Because of the terms used in the statute, 

DoD is unable to create alternatives, 

such as exempting small entities or 

establishing a dollar threshold for 

coverage. Regardless of the size of the 

business, a whistleblower employee 

must be protected from retaliation by 

his/her employer. 

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 

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 2013–D010), in 

correspondence. 

V. Paperwork Reduction Act 

The rule does not contain any 

information collection additional 

requirements that require the approval 

of the Office of Management and Budget 

under the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 

U.S.C. chapter 35). 

VI. Determination To Issue an Interim 

Rule 

A determination has been made by 

the Secretary of Defense pursuant to 41 

U.S.C. 1701(d) that urgent and 

compelling reasons exist to justify 

promulgating this rule on an interim 

basis without prior opportunity for 

public comment. This action is 

necessary for the following reasons: 

First, by operation of law, the revised 

statute became effective on July 1, 2013 

(i.e., Congress included language in 

section 827 specifically addressing the 

effective date of the changes to 10 U.S.C. 

2409). Second, the revisions impose 

new responsibilities on agencies and 

create certain new rights for contractor 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES

Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 189 / Monday, September 30, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 59853 

employees. Specifically, as of July 1, 

2013: 

• There are changes and additions in 

the list of entities to whom a 

whistleblower disclosure makes the 

whistleblower eligible for additional 

protections against reprisal; 

• Agency heads have expanded 

responsibilities to take specific actions 

with regard to a DoD Inspector General 

finding of reprisal against a contractor 

whistleblower: 

• The law requires that the written 

notice to employees of their 

whistleblower rights must be provided 

in the ‘‘predominant native language of 

the workforce;’’ and 

• For the first time, contractors must 

flow down to subcontractors the 

requirement to provide written notice to 

subcontractor employees. 

In addition, there is a new exemption 

for elements of the intelligence 

community that was not available under 

previous laws. 

The most effective and efficient way 

to ensure awareness and compliance by 

agencies and contractors with all of 

these requirements is through 

immediate regulatory change. Delaying 

promulgation may delay the effective 

date of regulations but will not postpone 

when the law becomes applicable to 

contractors and subcontractors. Thus, 

ordinary notice and comment 

procedures would unnecessarily 

increase the risk of confusion and 

noncompliance, defeating the regulatory 

objective. 

Moreover, there is little likelihood 

that the publication of this rule without 

prior comment will increase burden on 

contractors. This interim regulation 

qualifies as an interpretative rule, as it 

provides basic guidance that agencies 

and contractors need to comply with the 

statute. Indeed, this regulation 

prescribes little beyond that which is set 

forth clearly in the statute. 

Nevertheless, pursuant to 41 U.S.C. 

1707 and FAR 1.501–3(b), DoD will 

consider public comments received in 

response to this interim rule in the 

formation of the Department’s final rule. 

List of Subjects in 48 CFR Parts 203 and 

252 

Government procurement. 

Manuel Quinones, 

Editor, Defense Acquisition Regulations 

System. 

Therefore, 48 CFR parts 203 and 252 

are amended as follows: 

■ 1. The authority citation for 48 CFR 

parts 203 and 252 continues to read as 

follows: 

Authority: 41 U.S.C. 1303 and 48 CFR 

chapter 1. 

PART 203—IMPROPER BUSINESS 

PRACTICES AND PERSONAL 

CONFLICTS OF INTEREST 

■ 2. Section 203.900 is revised to read 

as follows: 

203.900 Scope of subpart. 

(a) This subpart implements 10 U.S.C. 

2409 as amended by section 846 of the 

National Defense Authorization Act for 

Fiscal Year 2008 (Pub. L. 110–181), 

section 842 of the National Defense 

Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2009 

(Pub. L. 110–417), and section 827 of 

the National Defense Authorization Act 

for Fiscal Year 2013 (Pub. L. 112–239). 

(b) This subpart does not apply to any 

element of the intelligence community, 

as defined in 50 U.S.C. 3003(4). This 

subpart does not apply to any disclosure 

made by an employee of a contractor or 

subcontractor of an element of the 

intelligence community if such 

disclosure— 

(1) Relates to an activity or an element 

of the intelligence community; or 

(2) Was discovered during contract or 

subcontract services provided to an 

element of the intelligence community. 

■ 3. Section 203.901 is added to read as 

follows: 

203.901 Definition. 

Abuse of authority, as used in this 

subpart, means an arbitrary and 

capricious exercise of authority that is 

inconsistent with the mission of DoD or 

the successful performance of a DoD 

contract. 

■ 4. Section 203.903 is revised to read 

as follows: 

203.903 Policy. 

(1) Policy. 10 U.S.C. 2409 prohibits 

contractors or subcontractors from 

discharging, demoting, or otherwise 

discriminating against an employee as a 

reprisal for disclosing, to any of the 

entities listed at paragraph (2) of this 

section, information that the employee 

reasonably believes is evidence of gross 

mismanagement of a DoD contract, a 

gross waste of DoD funds, an abuse of 

authority relating to a DoD contract, a 

substantial and specific danger to public 

health or safety, or a violation of law, 

rule, or regulation related to a DoD 

contract (including the competition for 

or negotiation of a contract). Such 

reprisal is prohibited even if it is 

undertaken at the request of an 

executive branch official, unless the 

request takes the form of a nondiscretionary directive and is within the 

authority of the executive branch 

official making the request. 

(2) Entities to whom disclosure may 

be made: 

(i) A Member of Congress or a 

representative of a committee of 

Congress. 

(ii) An Inspector General that receives 

funding from or has oversight over 

contracts awarded for or on behalf of 

DoD. 

(iii) The Government Accountability 

Office. 

(iv) A DoD employee responsible for 

contract oversight or management. 

(v) An authorized official of the 

Department of Justice or other law 

enforcement agency. 

(vi) A court or grand jury. 

(vii) A management official or other 

employee of the contractor or 

subcontractor who has the 

responsibility to investigate, discover, or 

address misconduct. 

(3) Disclosure clarified. An employee 

who initiates or provides evidence of 

contractor or subcontractor misconduct 

in any judicial or administrative 

proceeding relating to waste, fraud, or 

abuse on a DoD contract shall be 

deemed to have made a disclosure. 

(4) Contracting officer actions. A 

contracting officer who receives a 

complaint of reprisal of the type 

described in paragraph (1) of this 

section shall forward it to legal counsel 

or to the appropriate party in 

accordance with agency procedures. 

■ 5. Section 203.904 is revised to read 

as follows: 

203.904 Procedures for filing complaints. 

(a) Any employee of a contractor or 

subcontractor who believes that he or 

she has been discharged, demoted, or 

otherwise discriminated against 

contrary to the policy in 203.903 may 

file a complaint with the Inspector 

General of the Department of Defense. 

(b) A complaint may not be brought 

under this section more than three years 

after the date on which the alleged 

reprisal took place. 

(c) The complaint shall be signed and 

shall contain— 

(1) The name of the contractor; 

(2) The contract number, if known; if 

not, a description reasonably sufficient 

to identify the contract(s) involved; 

(3) The violation of law, rule, or 

regulation giving rise to the disclosure; 

(4) The nature of the disclosure giving 

rise to the discriminatory act, including 

the party to whom the information was 

disclosed; and 

(5) The specific nature and date of the 

reprisal. 

■ 6. Section 203.905 is amended by— 

■ a. Removing the introductory text; 

■ b. Revising paragraphs (1) and (3); and 

■ c. Adding paragraphs (4) and (5). 

The revision and addition read as 

follows: 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES

59854 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 189 / Monday, September 30, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 

203.905 Procedures for investigating 

complaints. 

(1) Unless the DoD Inspector General 

makes a determination that the 

complaint is frivolous, fails to allege a 

violation of the prohibition in 203.903, 

or has been previously addressed in 

another Federal or State judicial or 

administrative proceeding initiated by 

the complainant, the DoD Inspector 

General will investigate the complaint. 

* * * * * 

(3) Upon completion of the 

investigation, the DoD Inspector 

General— 

(i) Either will determine that the 

complaint is frivolous, fails to allege a 

violation of the prohibition in 203.903, 

or has been previously addressed in 

another Federal or State judicial or 

administrative proceeding initiated by 

the complainant, or will submit the 

report addressed in paragraph (2) of this 

section within 180 days after receiving 

the complaint; and 

(ii) If unable to submit a report within 

180 days, will submit the report within 

the additional time period, up to 180 

days, as agreed to by the person 

submitting the complaint. 

(4) The DoD Inspector General may 

not respond to any inquiry or disclose 

any information from or about any 

person alleging the reprisal, except to 

the extent that such response or 

disclosure is— 

(i) Made with the consent of the 

person alleging reprisal; 

(ii) Made in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 

552a (the Freedom of Information Act) 

or as required by any other applicable 

Federal law; or 

(iii) Necessary to conduct an 

investigation of the alleged reprisal. 

(5) The legal burden of proof specified 

at paragraph (e) of 5 U.S.C. 1221 

(Individual Right of Action in Certain 

Reprisal Cases) shall be controlling for 

the purposes of an investigation 

conducted by the DoD Inspector 

General, decision by the head of an 

agency, or judicial or administrative 

proceeding to determine whether 

prohibited discrimination has occurred. 

■ 7. Section 203.906 is amended by— 

■ a. Revising paragraph (1); 

■ b. Amending paragraph (2)(ii) by 

adding a sentence at the end of the 

paragraph; and 

■ c. By adding paragraphs (4), (5), and 

(6). 

The revision and additions read as 

follows: 

203.906 Remedies. 

(1) Not later than 30 days after 

receiving a DoD Inspector General 

report in accordance with 203.905, the 

head of the agency shall determine 

whether sufficient basis exists to 

conclude that the contractor has 

subjected the complainant to a reprisal 

as prohibited by 203.903; and shall 

either issue an order denying relief or 

shall take one or more of the following 

actions: 

(i) Order the contractor to take 

affirmative action to abate the reprisal. 

(ii) Order the contractor to reinstate 

the person to the position that the 

person held before the reprisal, together 

with compensatory damages (including 

back pay), employment benefits, and 

other terms and conditions of 

employment that would apply to the 

person in that position if the reprisal 

had not been taken. 

(iii) Order the contractor to pay the 

complainant an amount equal to the 

aggregate amount of all costs and 

expenses (including attorneys’ fees and 

expert witnesses’ fees) that were 

reasonably incurred by the complainant 

for, or in connection with, bringing the 

complaint regarding the reprisal, as 

determined by the head of the agency. 

(2) * * * 

(ii) * * * An action under this 

authority may not be brought more than 

two years after the date on which 

remedies are deemed to have been 

exhausted. 

* * * * * 

(4) Whenever a contractor fails to 

comply with an order issued by the 

head of agency in accordance with 10 

U.S.C. 2409, the head of the agency or 

designee shall request the Department of 

Justice to file an action for enforcement 

of such order in the United States 

district court for a district in which the 

reprisal was found to have occurred. In 

any action brought under this 

paragraph, the court may grant 

appropriate relief, including injunctive 

relief, compensatory and exemplary 

damages, and reasonable attorney fees 

and costs. The person upon whose 

behalf an order was issued may also file 

such an action or join in an action filed 

by the head of the agency. 

(5) Any person adversely affected or 

aggrieved by an order issued by the 

head of the agency in accordance with 

10 U.S.C. 2409 may obtain judicial 

review of the order’s conformance with 

the law, and the implementing 

regulation, in the United States Court of 

Appeals for a circuit in which the 

reprisal is alleged in the order to have 

occurred. No petition seeking such 

review may be filed more than 60 days 

after issuance of the order by the head 

of the agency or designee. Review shall 

conform to Chapter 7 of Title 5, Unites 

States Code. Filing such an appeal shall 

not act to stay the enforcement of the 

order by the head of an agency, unless 

a stay is specifically entered by the 

court. 

(6) The rights and remedies provided 

for in this subpart may not be waived 

by any agreement, policy, form, or 

condition of employment. 

■ 8. Section 203.907 is added to read as 

follows. 

203.907 Classified information. 

As provided in section 827(h) of the 

National Defense Authorization Act for 

Fiscal Year 2013, nothing in this 

coverage provides any rights to disclose 

classified information not otherwise 

provided by law. 

252—SOLICITATION PROVISIONS AND 

CONTRACT CLAUSES 

■ 9. Section 252.203–7002 is amended 

by— 

■ a. Amending the clause date by 

removing ‘‘(JAN 2009)’’ and adding in 

its place ‘‘(SEP 2013)’’; 

■ b. Designating the clause text as 

paragraph (a); 

■ c. Revising the newly designated 

paragraph (a); and 

■ d. Adding a new paragraph (b). 

The revision and addition read as 

follows: 

252.203–7002 Requirement to Inform 

Employees of Whistleblower Rights. 

* * * * * 

(a) The Contractor shall inform its 

employees in writing, in the predominant 

native language of the workforce, of 

contractor employee whistleblower rights 

and protections under 10 U.S.C. 2409, as 

described in subpart 203.9 of the Defense 

Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement. 

(b) The Contractor shall include the 

substance of this clause, including this 

paragraph (b), in all subcontracts. 

(End of clause) 

[FR Doc. 2013–23768 Filed 9–27–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 5001–06–P 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

Defense Acquisition Regulations 

System 

48 CFR Parts 206, 212, 225, and 252 

RIN 0750–AH98 

Defense Federal Acquisition 

Regulation Supplement: Acquisitions 

in Support of Operations in 

Afghanistan (DFARS Case 2013–D009) 

AGENCY: Defense Acquisition 

Regulations System, Department of 

Defense (DoD). 

ACTION: Interim rule. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES