Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 189 / Friday, September 30, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 57473 

level studies) when the employee is 

working in a foreign country where 

suitable public education is not 

available may be included in overseas 

differential pay. 

(f) Contractor contributions to college 

savings plans for employee dependents 

are unallowable. 

[FR Doc. 05–19478 Filed 9–29–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6820–EP–S 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

GENERAL SERVICES 

ADMINISTRATION 

NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND 

SPACE ADMINISTRATION 

48 CFR Chapter 1 

Federal Acquisition Regulation; Small 

Entity Compliance Guide 

AGENCIES: Department of Defense (DoD), 

General Services Administration (GSA), 

and National Aeronautics and Space 

Administration (NASA). 

ACTION: Small Entity Compliance Guide. 

SUMMARY: This document is issued 

under the joint authority of the 

Secretary of Defense, the Administrator 

of General Services and the 

Administrator for the National 

Aeronautics and Space Administration. 

This Small Entity Compliance Guide 

has been prepared in accordance with 

Section 212 of the Small Business 

Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 

1996. It consists of a summary of rules 

appearing in Federal Acquisition 

Circular (FAC) 2005–06 which amend 

the FAR. An asterisk (*) next to a rule 

indicates that a regulatory flexibility 

analysis has been prepared. Interested 

parties may obtain further information 

regarding these rules by referring to FAC 

2005–06 which precedes this document. 

These documents are also available via 

the Internet at http://www.acqnet.gov/ 

far. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Laurieann Duarte, FAR Secretariat, (202) 

501–4755. For clarification of content, 

contact the analyst whose name appears 

in the table below. 

List of Rules in FAC 2005–06 

Item Subject FAR case Analyst 

*I ........... Information Technology Security (Interim) .......................................................................................... 2004–018 Davis. 

II ........... Improvements in Contracting for Architect-EngineerServices ............................................................ 2004–001 Davis. 

III .......... Title 40 of United States Code Reference Corrections ...................................................................... 2005–010 Zaffos. 

*IV ........ Implementation of the Anti-Lobbying Statute ...................................................................................... 1989–093 Woodson. 

V ........... Increased Justification and Approval Threshold forDOD, NASA, and Coast Guard .......................... 2004–037 Jackson. 

*VI ........ Addition of Landscaping and Pest Control Services to theSmall Business Competitiveness Demonstration Program.2004–036 Marshall. 

*VII ....... Powers of Attorney for Bid Bonds ....................................................................................................... 2003–029 Davis. 

*VIII ...... Expiration of the Price Evaluation Adjustment(Interim) ...................................................................... 2005–002 Cundiff. 

IX .......... Accounting for Unallowable Costs ...................................................................................................... 2004–006 Olson. 

X ........... Reimbursement of Relocation Costs on a Lump-Sum Basis ............................................................. 2003–002 Olson. 

XI .......... Training and Education Cost Principle ................................................................................................ 2001–021 Olson. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Summaries for each FAR rule follow. 

For the actual revisions and/or 

amendments to these FAR cases, refer to 

the specific item number and subject set 

forth in the documents following these 

item summaries. 

FAC 2005–06 amends the FAR as 

specified below: 

*Item I—Information Technology 

Security (FAR Case 2004–018) 

This interim rule amends the FAR to 

implement the Information Technology 

(IT) Security provisions of the Federal 

Information Security Management Act 

of 2002 (FISMA) (Title III of the EGovernment Act of 2002 (E-Gov Act)). 

This interim rule focuses on the 

importance of system and data security 

by contracting officials and other 

members of the acquisition team. The 

intent of adding specific guidance in the 

FAR is to provide clear, consistent 

guidance to acquisition officials and 

program managers; and to encourage 

and strengthen communication with IT 

security officials, chief information 

officers, and other affected parties. 

Item II—Improvements in Contracting 

for Architect-Engineer Services (FAR 

Case 2004–001) 

This final rule implements Section 

1427(b) of the Services Acquisition 

Reform Act of 2003, which prohibits 

architect-engineering services from 

being offered under GSA multipleaward schedule contracts or under 

Governmentwide task and delivery 

order contracts unless they are awarded 

using the procedures of the Brooks 

Architect-Engineer Act and the services 

are performed under the direct 

supervision of a professional architect 

or engineer licensed, registered, or 

certified in the State, Federal district or 

outlying area, in which the services are 

to be performed. This rule is of interest 

to agencies and contracting officers that 

use GSA schedules and 

Governmentwide task and delivery 

order contracts. 

Item III—Title 40 of United States Code 

Reference Corrections (FAR Case 2005–

010) 

This final rule amends the FAR to 

reflect the most recent codification of 

Title 40 of the United States Code. No 

substantive changes are being made to 

the FAR. 

*Item IV—Implementation of the AntiLobbying Statute (FAR Case 1989–093) 

This final rule converts the interim 

rule published in the Federal Register at 

55 FR 3190, January 30, 1990 to a final 

rule with minor changes amends the 

FAR to implement section 319 of the 

Department of the Interior and Related 

Agencies Appropriations Act, Public 

Law 101–121, which added a new 

section 1352 to Title 31 of the United 

States Code, entitled ‘‘Limitations on 

the use of funds to influence certain 

Federal contracting and financial 

transactions.’’ Section 319 generally 

prohibits recipients of Federal contracts, 

grants, and loans from using 

appropriated funds for lobbying the 

executive or legislative branches of the 

57474 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 189 / Friday, September 30, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 

Federal Government in connection with 

a specific contract, grant or loan. It also 

requires that each person who requests 

or receives a contract, grant or 

cooperative agreement in excess of 

$100,000 or a Federal commitment to 

insure or guarantee a loan in excess of 

$150,000 must disclose lobbying with 

other than appropriated funds. The rule 

requires contracting officers, in 

accordance with FAR 3.808, to insert in 

all solicitations and contracts expected 

to exceed $100,000 the provision at FAR 

52.203–11, ‘‘Certification and Disclosure 

Regarding Payments to Influence 

Certain Federal Transaction,’’ and the 

clause at FAR 52.203–12, ‘‘Limitations 

on Payments to Influence Certain 

Federal Transactions.’’

Item V—Increased Justification and 

Approval Threshold for DOD, NASA, 

and Coast Guard (FAR Case 2004–037) 

This final rule converts the interim 

rule published in the Federal Register at 

70 FR 11739, March 9, 2005, to a final 

rule with minor changes. The rule 

amended the FAR by increasing the 

justification and approval thresholds for 

DoD, NASA, and the U.S. Coast Guard 

from $50 million to $75 million. This 

change implemented section 815 of the 

Ronald W. Reagan National Defense 

Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005, 

which amends 10 U.S.C. 2304(f)(1)(B). 

In addition, corresponding changes have 

been made to FAR 13.501. The rule will 

reduce administrative burden for 

ordering activities. 

*Item VI—Addition of Landscaping and 

Pest Control Services to the Small 

Business Competitiveness 

Demonstration Program (FAR Case 

2004–036) 

This final rule finalizes, without 

change, the interim rule published in 

the Federal Register at 70 FR 11740, 

March 9, 2005. The rule implements 

Section 821 of the Ronald W. Reagan 

National Defense Authorization Act for 

Fiscal Year 2005. Section 821 amended 

Section 717 of the Small Business 

Competitiveness Demonstration 

Program Act of 1988 by adding 

landscaping and pest control services to 

the program. As a result, agencies are 

precluded from considering acquisitions 

for landscaping and pest control 

services over the emerging small 

business reserve amount, currently 

$25,000, for small business set-asides 

unless the set-asides are needed to meet 

their assigned goals. The change may 

impact small businesses because these 

awards were previously set-aside for 

small businesses. 

*Item VII—Powers of Attorney for Bid 

Bonds (FAR Case 2003–029) 

This final rule is of particular interest 

to contracting officers and offerors in 

acquisitions of construction that require 

a bid bond. This rule was initiated at the 

request of the Office of Federal 

Procurement Policy to resolve the 

controversy surrounding contracting 

officers’ decisions regarding the 

evaluation of bid bonds and 

accompanying powers of attorney. This 

rule amends the FAR to revise the 

policy relating to acceptance of copies 

of powers of attorney accompanying bid 

bonds. This revision to FAR parts 19 

and 28 removes the matter of 

authenticity and enforceability of 

powers of attorney from a contracting 

officer’s responsiveness determination, 

which is based solely on documents 

available at the time of bid opening. 

Instead, the rule instructs contracting 

officers to address these issues after bid 

opening. 

*Item VIII—Expiration of the Price 

Evaluation Adjustment (FAR Case 

2005–002) 

This interim rule cancels the 

authority for civilian agencies, other 

than NASA and the U.S. Coast Guard, 

to apply the price evaluation adjustment 

to certain small disadvantaged business 

concerns in competitive acquisitions. 

The change is required because the 

statutory authority for the adjustments 

has expired. As a result, certain small 

disadvantaged business concerns will 

no longer benefit from the adjustments. 

DoD, NASA, and the U.S. Coast Guard 

are authorized to continue applying the 

price evaluation adjustment. 

Item IX—Accounting for Unallowable 

Costs (FAR Case 2004–006) 

This final rule amends FAR 31.201–

6, Accounting for unallowable costs, by 

adding paragraphs (c)(2) through (c)(5) 

to provide specific criteria on the use of 

statistical sampling as an acceptable 

practice to identify unallowable costs, 

including the applicability of penalties 

for failure to exclude certain projected 

unallowable costs. The final rule also 

amends FAR 31.109, Advance 

agreements, by adding ‘‘statistical 

sampling methods’’ as an example of the 

type of item for which an advance 

agreement may be appropriate. The case 

was initiated by the Director, Defense 

Procurement and Acquisition Policy, 

who established an interagency ad hoc 

committee to perform a comprehensive 

review of FAR Part 31, Contract Cost 

Principles and Procedures. The rule is 

of particular importance to contracting 

officers and contractors who negotiate 

contracts and modifications, and 

determine costs in accordance with FAR 

Part 31. 

Item X—Reimbursement of Relocation 

Costs on a Lump-Sum Basis (FAR Case 

2003–002) 

This final rule amends FAR 31.205–

35 to permit contractors the option of 

being reimbursed on a lump-sum basis 

for three types of employee relocation 

costs: (1) costs of finding a new home, 

(2) costs of travel to the new location, 

and (3) costs of temporary lodging. 

These three types of costs are in 

addition to the miscellaneous relocation 

costs for which lump-sum 

reimbursements are already permitted. 

Item XI—Training and Education Cost 

Principle (FAR Case 2001–021) 

This final rule amends the FAR by 

revising the contract cost principle at 

FAR 31.205–44, Training and education 

costs. The amendment streamlines the 

cost principle and increases clarity by 

eliminating restrictive and confusing 

language, and by restructuring the rule 

to list only specifically unallowable 

costs. 

Dated: September 22, 2005. 

Julia B. Wise, 

Director, Contract Policy Division. 

[FR Doc. 05–19479 Filed 9–29–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6820–EP–S