Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 75 / Wednesday, April 18, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 23365 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

GENERAL SERVICES 

ADMINISTRATION 

NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND 

SPACE ADMINISTRATION 

48 CFR Parts 1, 2, 11, 23, and 52 

[FAC 2005–58; FAR Case 2010–004; 

Item I; Docket 2010–0004, Sequence 2] 

RIN 9000–AM03 

Federal Acquisition Regulation; 

Biobased Procurements 

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 changes due to the Farm 

Security and Rural Investment Act that 

require contractors to report the 

biobased products purchased under 

service and construction contracts. This 

reporting will enable agencies to 

monitor compliance with the Federal 

preference for purchasing biobased 

products. 

DATES: Effective Date: May 18, 2012. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. 

William Clark, Procurement Analyst, at 

202–219–1813, for clarification of 

content. For information pertaining to 

status or publication schedules, contact 

the Regulatory Secretariat at 202–501– 

4755. Please cite FAC 2005–58, FAR 

Case 2010–004. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

DoD, GSA, and NASA published a 

proposed rule in the Federal Register at 

76 FR 41179 on July 13, 2011, to 

implement section 9002 of the Farm 

Security and Rural Investment Act of 

2002, as amended by the Food, 

Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 

(Pub. L. 110–246). These statutory 

provisions are codified at 7 U.S.C. 8102. 

This section of the United States Code 

requires Federal agencies to establish a 

procurement program, develop 

procurement specifications, procure 

biobased products, and give preference 

to those items that are composed of the 

highest percentage of biobased products 

practicable or those products that 

comply with the regulations issued 

under section 103 of Public Law 100– 

556 (42 U.S.C. 6914b–1). Title 7 U.S.C. 

8102 provides Federal agencies the 

flexibility not to procure biobased 

products if the product cannot be 

acquired— 

(a) Within a reasonable time frame 

providing for compliance with the 

contract performance schedule; 

(b) Meeting reasonable performance 

requirements; or 

(c) At a reasonable price. 

The Biobased Products Preference 

Program was originally implemented in 

FAR Case 2004–032, which was 

published in the Federal Register at 72 

FR 63040, November 7, 2007. This final 

rule implements additional elements of 

7 U.S.C. 8102 as amended by Public 

Law 110–246. This final rule also meets 

the direction in the Presidential 

Memorandum, ‘‘Driving Innovation and 

Creating Jobs in Rural America through 

Biobased and Sustainable Product 

Procurement,’’ dated February 21, 2012, 

to amend the FAR to require reporting 

of biobased product purchases. Two 

respondents submitted 14 public 

comments on 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 

discussion of the comments and the 

changes made to the rule as a result of 

those comments are provided as 

follows: 

A. Summary of Changes to the FAR 

1. The definition of ‘‘biobased 

product’’ is revised at FAR 2.101. 

2. A prohibition against agencies 

collecting more data than typically 

would be provided by other entities 

(other than data confirming the biobased 

content) was added to FAR 11.302. 

3. The clause at FAR 52.223–2, 

Affirmative Procurement of Biobased 

Products Under Service and 

Construction Contracts, is amended to 

require annual reporting by the 

contractor of the types and dollar value 

of any U.S. Department of Agriculture 

(USDA)-designated biobased products 

purchased during the preceding fiscal 

year on the contract. 

4. References to the USDA’s 

BioPreferred Program are updated to 

conform to the agency’s relocation of the 

program’s rules in the Code of Federal 

Regulations (see 76 FR 53631 dated 

August 29, 2011). 

5. USDA established a blanket 

exemption for all USDA-designated 

biobased items from the Biopreferred 

Program’s requirements for 

procurements involving combat or 

combat-related missions and for 

spacecraft systems and launch support 

equipment (see 73 FR 27953 dated May 

14, 2008). FAR 23.404(b)(2) and 52.223– 

2(a)(2) are updated to conform to the 

blanket exemption. 

B. Positive Comments 

Comments: Both respondents stated 

their strong support for the proposed 

rule. One respondent viewed it ‘‘as a 

necessary action to implement existing 

laws and policies for purchasing 

biobased products by federal agencies 

and contractors.’’ 

Response: Noted. 

Comments: One respondent expressed 

particular support for the provision in 

the proposed rule directing contracting 

officers to refer to the USDA list of 

designated biobased items. Both 

respondents agreed that the USDA list is 

an important and growing reminder of 

the availability of biobased products. 

Response: Noted. However, the 

preference for use of biobased products 

that are USDA-designated items existed 

at FAR 52.223–2(a) prior to the 

proposed rule. 

Comments: Both respondents 

expressed support for the requirement 

that contractors report annually on the 

biobased products purchased and their 

dollar value. One respondent stated that 

such annual reports, by contractors and 

agencies, will help measure the growth 

and success of the program and ensure 

agency and contractor compliance with 

the law. 

Response: Noted. Also see section C 

below regarding reporting and section V 

for a comment on the reporting burden 

associated with this rule. 

C. Definitions 

Comment: One respondent noted that 

neither ‘‘cognizant environmental 

manager’’ nor ‘‘agency environmental 

manager’’ was defined in the proposed 

rule. The respondent suggested that 

more clarity was needed, and the 

‘‘person to whom the product type and 

dollar value data are reported should be 

someone who can ensure that the data 

are properly collected and tabulated and 

made available for reporting into the 

Federal Procurement Data System or 

other system that will allow each agency 

to report the information to the Office of 

Federal Procurement Policy, as 

required.’’ 

Response: The clause at FAR 52.223– 

2, Affirmative Procurement of Biobased 

Products Under Service and 

Construction Contracts, has been 

revised at paragraphs (c) and (d) to 

eliminate any reference to the 

environmental manager and change the 

reporting requirement to the 

environmental point of contact, with a 

copy of the report to be sent to the 

contracting officer. Together, these 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2

23366 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 75 / Wednesday, April 18, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 

revisions eliminate any need for 

additional definitions in the FAR 

coverage. 

D. Allow No Exceptions or Waivers 

Comment: Strongly supporting the 

program’s requirement that all Federal 

agencies and contractors purchase 

USDA-designated biobased products, 

one respondent recommended that no 

exemptions or waivers should be 

allowed under any circumstances. 

Response: Exemptions or waivers, 

under certain circumstances, to the 

acquisition of USDA-designated 

biobased products are recognized by the 

Farm Security and Rural Investment Act 

of 2002, 7 U.S.C. 8102, and Executive 

Order 13514, entitled ‘‘Federal 

Leadership in Environmental, Energy, 

and Economic Performance,’’ dated 

October 5, 2009. These exemptions or 

exceptions previously have been 

implemented in the FAR. 

E. Out-of-Scope Comments 

Comments: One respondent presented 

recommendations for the elements on 

which the Office of Management and 

Budget (OMB) should report annually in 

order to ensure compliance. These 

recommendations included mandatory 

reporting elements for each agency, 

department, and its contractors. The 

respondent asserted that there should be 

additional reporting required by DoD. 

The second respondent noted that 

section 9002(a)(4)(B) of the statute 

provides specific annual reporting 

requirements for the GSA and Defense 

Logistics Agency and queried why those 

agency reporting requirements were not 

addressed in the proposed rule. 

Response: The FAR addresses 

requirements for contractors. OMB is 

responsible for determining agency 

reporting requirements. Therefore, these 

comments are outside the scope of this 

rule. 

Comment: One respondent 

recommended that, in order to ensure 

full compliance, DoD should seek to 

update 100 percent of its specifications 

to include biobased products by 

December 31, 2013. 

Response: The internal review of 

specifications by a particular agency is 

outside the scope of this rule. 

Comment: One respondent 

recommended that a complete inventory 

management system needed to be 

created to track the biobased products 

purchased by all Federal agencies. The 

respondent stated that ‘‘(t)his scorecard 

should contain information on agencies 

and departments purchasing biobased 

products and contracts.’’ According to 

the respondent, codifying the biobased 

products acquisition reporting structure 

in the FAR would lead to more market 

pull. 

Response: The FAR addresses 

requirements for contractors. OMB is 

responsible for determining agency 

management and reporting 

requirements. Therefore, this 

recommendation is outside the scope of 

this rule. 

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 

The Department of Defense, General 

Services Administration, and National 

Aeronautics and Space Administration 

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: 

DoD, GSA, and NASA are amending the 

Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) to 

implement section 9002 of the Farm Security 

and Rural Investment Act of 2002, codified 

at 7 U.S.C. 8102, as amended by the Food, 

Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 (Pub. 

L. 110–246). 

Title 7 U.S.C. 8102 requires Federal 

agencies to establish a procurement program, 

develop procurement specifications, procure 

biobased products, and give preference to 

those items that are composed of the highest 

percentage of biobased products practicable 

or products that comply with the regulations 

issued under section 103 of Public Law 100– 

556 (42 U.S.C. 6914b–1). 

This final rule modifies FAR 52.223–2, 

Affirmative Procurement of Biobased 

Products Under Service and Construction 

Contracts, to require prime contractors to 

report the product types and dollar value of 

any USDA-designated biobased products 

purchased during the preceding fiscal year. 

The information reported by prime 

contractors will enable Federal agencies to (a) 

report annually to the Office of Federal 

Procurement Policy (OFPP) information 

concerning actions taken to implement the 

preference for biobased products and (b) 

assess compliance and measure progress in 

carrying out the preference for biobased 

products. Further, OFPP must collect the 

information reported by the agencies and 

make it publicly available on an annual basis. 

There were no public comments filed in 

response to the Initial Regulatory Flexibility 

Analysis. 

The rule promotes the use of biobased 

products and requires an annual report on 

the product types and dollar value of any 

U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA)- 

designated biobased products purchased by 

the prime contractor during the previous 

year. By averaging data from Fiscal Years 

2009 and 2010 in the Federal Procurement 

Data System (FPDS), we estimate that 48,376 

contractors will be affected. Of those entities, 

approximately 35,927 (70 percent) will be 

small businesses. This estimate is based on 

contract actions from the following selected 

Product Services Codes (PSCs): 

• A—Research and Development; 

• F—Natural Resources Management; 

• J—Maintenance, Repair, and Rebuilding 

of Equipment; 

• M—Operation of Government-Owned 

Facility; 

• S—Utilities and Housekeeping Services; 

• T—Photographic, Mapping, Printing, and 

Publication Services; 

• Y—Construction of Structures and 

Facilities; and 

• Z—Maintenance, Repair or Alteration of 

Real Property. 

We believe the clause will apply to most 

of the contract actions in the selected PSCs. 

Based on the Fiscal Year 2009 FPDS data 

collected, there were 55,174 unique Data 

Universal Numbering System (DUNS) 

numbers performing such contracts, and 

40,741 of these were small businesses. Based 

on the Fiscal Year 2010 FPDS data collected, 

there were 41,578 unique DUNS numbers, 

and 31,113 of these were small businesses. 

Where information on the biobased nature 

of products is not already available, 

contractors may need to create an inventory 

management system to track the product 

types and dollar value of USDA-designated 

biobased products purchased for each 

contract. However, DoD, GSA, and NASA 

expect that the impact will be minimal 

because the existing clause already requires 

contractors to make maximum use of 

biobased products in the performance of 

services and construction contracts, and the 

change does not impose any substantial new 

requirements other than the prime contractor 

reports. Small businesses are active suppliers 

of biobased products, and this rule may serve 

to enhance their participation in this market. 

The types of skills required to prepare the 

report include data gathering, research, 

quantitative, editing, and drafting. We 

estimate the personnel required would be 

equivalent to a Government employee at a 

GS–11, step 5 salary. 

There are no other reporting, 

recordkeeping, or other compliance 

requirements associated with this rule. There 

is no impact, positive or negative, on small 

businesses. Thus, there are no professional 

skills necessary on the part of small 

businesses. There are no direct costs to small 

business firms to comply with this rule. 

The rule does not duplicate, overlap, or 

conflict with any other Federal rules. DoD, 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2

Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 75 / Wednesday, April 18, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 23367 

GSA, and NASA were not able to identify 

any significant alternatives that would 

accomplish the objectives of the statute. 

Further, the impact of this rule on small 

entities is expected to be generally positive. 

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 Paperwork Reduction Act (44 

U.S.C. chapter 35) applies. The rule 

contains information collection 

requirements. OMB has cleared this 

information collection requirement 

under OMB Control Number 9000–0180, 

titled ‘‘Biobased Procurements.’’ 

One comment was received on the 

paperwork burden associated with this 

rule. It is summarized below. 

Comment: The respondent believed 

that the required reporting does not 

have to be burdensome, because the 

clause at FAR 52.223–2, Affirmative 

Procurement of Biobased Products 

Under Service and Construction 

Contracts, already provides that the 

contractor shall make maximum use of 

USDA-designated biobased products 

(with certain exceptions). The 

respondent noted that, in order to 

comply with this current requirement, 

contractors should already be keeping 

records. Adding the dollar value of 

those items and reporting annually 

should not add a significant burden, 

according to the respondent. The 

respondent suggested that agencies 

should further simplify the reporting 

burden by making available an 

electronic template for the required 

report. 

Response: The FAR does not 

designate practices to be used internally 

by Government agencies. Although 

providing an electronic reporting 

template for use by contractors seems to 

be a good idea, the FAR is not the 

proper vehicle for its designation. 

List of Subjects in 48 CFR Parts 1, 2, 11, 

23, and 52 

Government procurement. 

Dated: April 11, 2012. 

Laura Auletta, 

Director, Office of Governmentwide 

Acquisition Policy, Office of Acquisition 

Policy, Office of Governmentwide Policy. 

Therefore, DoD, GSA, and NASA 

amend 48 CFR parts 1, 2, 11, 23, and 52 

as set forth below: 

■ 1. The authority citation for 48 CFR 

parts 1, 2, 11, 23, and 52 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 1—FEDERAL ACQUISTION 

REGULATION SYSTEM 

1.106 [Amended] 

■ 2. Amend section 1.106 in the table 

following the introductory text, by 

adding in sequence, FAR segment 

‘‘52.223–2’’ and its corresponding OMB 

Control Number ‘‘9000–0180’’. 

PART 2—DEFINITIONS OF WORDS 

AND TERMS 

2.101 [Amended] 

■ 3. Amend section 2.101 in paragraph 

(b)(2), in the definition ‘‘Biobased 

product’’ by removing ‘‘(including 

plant, animal, and marine materials) or’’ 

and adding ‘‘and’’ in its place. 

PART 11—DESCRIBING AGENCY 

NEEDS 

■ 4. Amend section 11.302 by revising 

paragraph (c)(2) to read as follows: 

11.302 Policy. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

(2) For biobased products, agencies 

may not require, as a condition of 

purchase of such products, the vendor 

or manufacturer to provide more data 

than would typically be provided by 

other business entities offering products 

for sale to the agency, other than data 

confirming the biobased content of a 

product (see 7 CFR 3201.8). 

PART 23—ENVIRONMENT, ENERGY 

AND WATER EFFICIENCY, 

RENEWABLE ENERGY 

TECHNOLOGIES, OCCUPATIONAL 

SAFETY, AND DRUG-FREE 

WORKPLACE 

23.401 [Amended] 

■ 5. Amend section 23.401 by removing 

from paragraph (b)(1) ‘‘part 2902’’ and 

adding ‘‘part 3201’’ in its place. 

■ 6. Amend section 23.404 by revising 

the introductory text of paragraph (b)(2); 

and removing from paragraph (e)(1) 

‘‘(including plant, animal, and marine 

materials)’’. The revised text reads as 

follows: 

23.404 Agency affirmative procurement 

programs. 

* * * * * 

(b) * * * 

(2) EPA and USDA may provide 

categorical exemptions for items that 

they designate, when procured for a 

specific purpose. For example, all 

USDA-designated items (see 7 CFR 

3201.3(e)) are exempt from the preferred 

procurement requirement for the 

following: 

* * * * * 

■ 7. Amend section 23.405 by removing 

from paragraph (a)(2) ‘‘http:// 

www.usda.gov/biopreferred’’ and adding 

‘‘http://www.biopreferred.gov’’ in its 

place; and adding paragraph (a)(3) to 

read as follows: 

23.405 Procedures. 

(a) * * * 

(3) When acquiring recovered material 

or biobased products, the contracting 

officer may request information or data 

on such products, including recycled or 

biobased content or related standards of 

the products (see 11.302(c)). 

* * * * * 

23.406 [Amended] 

■ 8. Amend section 23.406 by removing 

from paragraph (b) ‘‘contracts unless’’ 

and adding ‘‘contracts, unless’’ in its 

place; and removing ‘‘http:// 

www.usda.gov/biopreferred or 7 CFR 

Part 2902’’ and adding ‘‘http:// 

www.biopreferred.gov or 7 CFR part 

3201’’ in its place. 

PART 52—SOLICITATION PROVISIONS 

AND CONTRACT CLAUSES 

52.223–1 [Amended] 

■ 9. Amend section 52.223–1 by 

removing ‘‘(Dec 2007)’’ and adding 

‘‘(May 2012)’’ in its place; and removing 

‘‘part 2902’’ and adding ‘‘part 3201’’ in 

its place. 

■ 10. Amend section 52.223–2 by: 

■ a. Revising the date of the clause; 

■ b. Revising paragraph (a)(2) 

introductory text; and 

■ c. Adding paragraphs (c) and (d). 

The revised and added text reads as 

follows: 

52.223–2 Affirmative Procurement of 

Biobased Products Under Service and 

Construction Contracts. 

* * * * * 

Affirmative Procurement of Biobased 

Products Under Service and 

Construction Contracts (May 2012) 

* * * * * 

(a) * * * 

(2) The product is to be used in an 

application covered by a USDA categorical 

exemption (see 7 CFR 3201.3(e)). For 

example, all USDA-designated items are 

exempt from the preferred procurement 

requirement for the following: 

* * * * * 

(c) In the performance of this contract, the 

Contractor shall— 

(1) Report to the environmental point of 

contact identified in paragraph (d) of this 

clause, with a copy to the Contracting 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2

23368 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 75 / Wednesday, April 18, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 

Officer, on the product types and dollar value 

of any USDA-designated biobased products 

purchased by the Contractor during the 

previous Government fiscal year, between 

October 1 and September 30; 

(2) Submit this report no later than— 

(i) October 31 of each year during contract 

performance; and 

(ii) At the end of contract performance; and 

(3) Contact the environmental point of 

contract to obtain the preferred submittal 

format, if that format is not specified in this 

contract. 

(d) The environmental point of contact for 

this contract is: ________ [Contracting Officer 

shall insert full name, phone number, and 

email address. In addition, the Contracting 

Officer may include the agency Web site for 

reporting.] 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2012–9201 Filed 4–17–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6820–EP–P 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

GENERAL SERVICES 

ADMINISTRATION 

NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND 

SPACE ADMINISTRATION 

48 CFR Parts 4, 25, and 52 

[FAC 2005–58; FAR Case 2010–018; Item 

II; Docket 2010–0018, Sequence 1] 

RIN 9000–AL91 

Federal Acquisition Regulation; 

Representation Regarding Export of 

Sensitive Technology to Iran 

AGENCY: Department of Defense (DoD), 

General Services Administration (GSA), 

and National Aeronautics and Space 

Administration (NASA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: DoD, GSA, and NASA have 

adopted as final, with changes, the 

interim rule amending the Federal 

Acquisition Regulation (FAR) to add a 

representation to implement section 106 

of the Comprehensive Iran Sanctions, 

Accountability, and Divestment Act of 

2010. Section 106 imposes a 

procurement prohibition relating to 

contracts with persons that export 

certain sensitive technology to Iran. 

DATES: Effective Date: May 18, 2012. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Ms. Cecelia Davis, Procurement Analyst, 

at 202–219–0202, for clarification of 

content. For information pertaining to 

status or publication schedules, contact 

the Regulatory Secretariat at 202–501– 

4755. Please cite FAC 2005–58, FAR 

Case 2010–018. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

DoD, GSA, and NASA published an 

interim rule in the Federal Register at 

76 FR 68028 on November 2, 2011, to 

add a representation to implement 

section 106 of the Comprehensive Iran 

Sanctions, Accountability, and 

Divestment Act of 2010. Section 106 

imposes a procurement prohibition 

relating to contracts with persons that 

export certain sensitive technology to 

Iran. One respondent submitted 

comments on the interim 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. There 

were no significant changes in the final 

rule as a result of the one public 

comment. 

Comment: The respondent pointed 

out that the introductory text at FAR 

25.703–1, Definitions, should refer to 

definitions used in the ‘‘section’’ rather 

than ‘‘subpart.’’ 

Response: The correction has been 

made. 

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 

The Department of Defense, the 

General Services Administration, and 

the National Aeronautics and Space 

Administration certify that this final 

rule will not 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 this 

rule will only have an impact on an 

offeror that is exporting sensitive 

technology to Iran. Domestic entities are 

generally prohibited from engaging in 

activity that would cause them to be 

subject to the procurement bans 

described in this rule due to current 

restrictions on trade with Iran (see, e.g., 

Department of the Treasury Office of 

Foreign Assets Control regulations at 31 

CFR part 560). 

For the definition of ‘‘small business,’’ 

the Regulatory Flexibility Act refers to 

the Small Business Act, which in turn 

allows the U.S. Small Business 

Administration (SBA) Administrator to 

specify detailed definitions or standards 

(5 U.S.C. 601(3) and 15 U.S.C. 632(a)). 

The SBA regulations at 13 CFR 121.105 

discuss who is a small business: 

‘‘(a)(1) Except for small agricultural 

cooperatives, a business concern eligible 

for assistance from SBA as a small 

business is a business entity organized 

for profit, with a place of business 

located in the United States, and which 

operates primarily within the United 

States or which makes a significant 

contribution to the U.S. economy 

through payment of taxes or use of 

American products, materials or labor.’’ 

V. Paperwork Reduction Act 

The rule does not contain any 

information collection requirements that 

require the approval of the Office of 

Management and Budget under the 

Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 

chapter 35). 

List of Subjects in 48 CFR Parts 4, 25, 

and 52 

Government procurement. 

Dated: April 11, 2012. 

Laura Auletta, 

Director, Office of Governmentwide 

Acquisition Policy, Office of Acquisition 

Policy, Office of Governmentwide Policy. 

Interim Rule Adopted as Final With 

Changes 

■ Accordingly, the interim rule 

amending 48 CFR parts 4, 25, and 52, 

which was published in the Federal 

Register at 76 FR 68028, November 2, 

2011, is adopted as final with the 

following changes: 

PART 25—FOREIGN ACQUISITION 

■ 1. The authority citation for 48 CFR 

part 25 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). 

■ 2. Amend section 25.703–1 by 

revising the introductory text to read as 

follows: 

25.703–1 Definitions. 

As used in this section— 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2012–9202 Filed 4–17–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6820–EP–P 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2