Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 189 / Friday, September 30, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 57449 

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. 

Federal Acquisition Circular 

Federal Acquisition Circular (FAC) 

2005-06 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 2005-06 is effective October 31, 

2005, except for Items I, II, III, IV, V, VI, 

VII, and VIII, which are effective 

September 30, 2005. 

Dated: September 15, 2005. 

Vincent J. Feck, Lt Col, USAF 

Acting Director, Defense Procurement and 

Acquisition Policy. 

Dated: September 22, 2005. 

David A. Drabkin, 

Senior Procurement Executive, Office of the 

Chief Acquisition Officer, General Services 

Administration. 

Dated: September 14, 2005. 

Anne Guenther, 

Acting Assistant Administrator for 

Procurement, National Aeronautics and 

Space Administration. 

[FR Doc. 05–19467 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 Parts 1, 2, 7, 11, and 39 

[FAC 2005–06; FAR Case 2004–018; 

Item I] 

RIN 9000–AK29 

Federal Acquisition Regulation; 

Information Technology Security 

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 on an interim 

rule amending the Federal Acquisition 

57450 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 189 / Friday, September 30, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 

Regulation (FAR) to implement the 

Information Technology (IT) Security 

provisions of the Federal Information 

Security Management Act of 2002 

(FISMA) (Title III of the E-Government 

Act of 2002 (E-Gov Act)). 

DATES: Effective Date: September 30, 

2005. 

Comment Date: Interested parties 

should submit written comments to the 

FAR Secretariat on or before November 

29, 2005 to be considered in the 

formulation of a final rule. 

ADDRESSES: Submit comments 

identified by FAC 2005–06, FAR case 

2004–018, by any of the following 

methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Agency Web Site: http:// 

www.acqnet.gov/far/ProposedRules/ 

proposed.htm. Click on the FAR case 

number to submit comments. 

• E-mail: farcase.2004–018@gsa.gov. 

Include FAC 2005–06, FAR case 2004–

018 in the subject line of the message. 

• 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 2005–06, FAR case 

2004–018, in all correspondence related 

to this case. All comments received will 

be posted without change to http:// 

www.acqnet.gov/far/ProposedRules/ 

proposed.htm, including any personal 

and/or business confidential 

information provided. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The 

FAR Secretariat at (202) 501–4755, for 

information pertaining to status or 

publication schedules. For clarification 

of content, contact Ms. Cecelia L. Davis, 

Procurement Analyst, at (202) 219–

0202. The TTY Federal Relay Number 

for further information is1–800–877–

8973. Please cite FAC 2005–06, FAR 

case 2004–018. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

A. Background 

American society relies on the Federal 

Government for essential information 

and services provided through 

interconnected computer systems. Both 

Government and industry face 

increasing security threats to essential 

services and must work in close 

partnership to address those risks. 

Increasingly, contractors are supplying, 

operating, and accessing critical IT 

systems, performing critical functions 

throughout the life of IT systems. At the 

same time, it is apparent that 

information technology and the IT 

marketplace have become truly global. 

The security risks are shared globally as 

well. 

Unauthorized disclosure, corruption, 

theft, or denial of IT resources have the 

potential to disrupt agency operations 

and could have financial, legal, human 

safety, personal privacy, and public 

confidence impacts. The Federal 

community has not focused on 

unclassified activities with regard to 

information technology resources 

involved in the acquisition and use of 

information on behalf of the 

Government. In particular, there is need 

to focus on the role of contractors in 

security as more and more Federal 

agencies outsource various information 

technology functions. Until now, 

regulations have generally been silent 

regarding security requirements for 

contractors who provide goods and 

services with IT security implications. 

This rule amends FAR parts 1, 2, 7, 

11, and 39 to implement the information 

technology security provisions of the 

Federal Information Security 

Management Act of 2002 (FISMA) (Title 

III of the E-Government Act of 2002 (EGov Act)). The rule recognizes security 

as an important part of all phases of the 

IT acquisition life cycle. The rule 

focuses much needed attention 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. 

The Councils recognize that IT 

security standards will continue to 

evolve and that agency-specific policy 

and implementation will evolve 

differently across the spectrum of 

Federal agencies, depending on their 

missions. Agencies will customize IT 

security policies and implementations 

to meet mission needs as they adapt to 

a dynamic IT security environment. 

The rule is proposing to amend the 

FAR by—

• Adding the stipulation that when 

buying goods and services contracting 

officers shall seek advice from 

specialists in information security; 

• Adding a definition for the term 

‘‘Information Security’’; 

• Incorporating security requirements 

in acquisition planning and when 

describing agency needs; 

• Requiring adherence to Federal 

Information Processing Standards; and 

• Revising the policy in FAR 39.101 

to require including the appropriate 

agency security policy and requirements 

in information technology acquisitions. 

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 changes may 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. Although the 

FAR rule will itself have no direct 

impact on small business concerns, the 

subsequent supplemental policy-making 

at the agency level may have some 

impact on these entities. Since FISMA 

requires that agencies establish IT 

security policies that are commensurate 

with agency risk and potential for harm 

and that meet certain minimum 

requirements, the real implementation 

of this will occur at the agency level. 

The impact on small entities will, 

therefore, be variable depending on the 

agency implementation. The bulk of the 

policy requirements for information 

security are expected to be issued as 

either changes to agency supplements to 

the FAR or as internal IT policies 

promulgated by the agency Chief 

Information Officer (CIO), or equivalent, 

to assure compliance with agency 

security policies. These agency 

supplements and IT policies may affect 

small business concerns in terms of 

their ability to compete and win Federal 

IT contracts. The extent of the effect and 

impact on small business concerns is 

unknown and will vary from agency to 

agency due to the wide variances among 

agency missions and functions. 

An Initial Regulatory Flexibility 

Analysis (IRFA) has been prepared. The 

analysis is summarized as follows: 

Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis FAC 

2005–06, FAR Case 2004–018, Information 

Technology Security 

This Initial Regulatory Flexibility 

Analysis has been prepared consistent 

with 5 U.S.C. 603. 

1. Description of the reasons why the 

action is being taken. 

This interim rule amends the Federal 

Acquisition Regulation to implement 

the information technology (IT) security 

provisions of the Federal Information 

Security Management Act of 2002 

(FISMA), (Title III of the E-Government 

Act of 2002 (E-Gov Act)). FISMA 

requires agencies to identify and 

provide information security protections 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 189 / Friday, September 30, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 57451 

commensurate with security risks to 

Federal information collected or 

maintained for the agency and 

information systems used or operated 

on behalf of an agency by a contractor. 

2. Succinct statement of the objectives 

of, and legal basis for, the rule. 

The rule implements the IT security 

provisions of the FISMA. Section 301 of 

FISMA (44 U.S.C. 3544) requires that 

contractors be held accountable to the 

same security standards as Government 

employees when collecting or 

maintaining information or using or 

operating information systems on behalf 

of an agency. Security is to be 

considered during all phases of the 

acquisition life cycle. FISMA requires 

that agencies establish IT security 

policies that are commensurate with 

agency risk and potential for harm and 

that meet certain minimum 

requirements. Agencies are further 

required, through the Chief Information 

Officer (CIO) or equivalent, to assure 

compliance with agency security 

policies. The law requires that 

contractors and Federal employees be 

subjected to the same requirements in 

accessing Federal IT systems and data. 

3. Description of and, where feasible, 

estimate of the number of small entities 

to which the rule will apply. 

The FAR rule will itself have no 

direct impact on small business 

concerns. As stated in #2 above, FISMA 

requires that agencies establish IT 

security policies that are commensurate 

with agency risk and potential for harm 

and that meet certain minimum 

requirements. The real implementation 

of this will occur at the agency level. 

The impact on small entities will, 

therefore, be variable depending on the 

agency implementation. The bulk of the 

policy requirements for information 

security are expected to be issued as 

either changes to agency supplements to 

the FAR or as internal IT policies 

promulgated by the agency Chief 

Information Officer (CIO), or equivalent, 

to assure compliance with agency 

security policies. These agency 

supplements and IT policies may affect 

small business concerns in terms of 

their ability to compete and win Federal 

IT contracts. The extent of the effect and 

impact on small business concerns is 

unknown and will vary from agency to 

agency due to the wide variances among 

agency missions and functions. 

4. Description of projected reporting, 

recordkeeping, and other compliance 

requirements of the rule, including an 

estimate of the classes of small entities 

which will be subject to the requirement 

and the type of professional skills 

necessary for preparation of the report 

or record. 

The rule does not impose any new 

reporting, recordkeeping, or compliance 

requirements. 

5. Identification, to the extent 

practicable, of all relevant Federal rules 

which may duplicate, overlap, or 

conflict with the rule. 

The rule does not duplicate, overlap, 

or conflict with any other Federal rules. 

6. Description of any significant 

alternatives to the rule which 

accomplish the stated objectives of 

applicable statutes and which minimize 

any significant economic impact of the 

rule on small entities. 

There are no practical alternatives 

that will accomplish the objectives of 

the applicable statutes. 

The FAR Secretariat has submitted a 

copy of the IRFA to the Chief Counsel 

for Advocacy of the Small Business 

Administration. Interested parties may 

obtain a copy from the FAR Secretariat. 

The Councils will consider comments 

from small entities concerning the 

affected FAR Parts 1, 2, 7, 11, and 39 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 2005–06, FAR case 2004–

018), in correspondence. 

C. Paperwork Reduction Act 

The Paperwork Reduction Act does 

not apply because the changes to the 

FAR do not impose information 

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 implement the 

requirements of the Federal Information 

Security Management Act (FISMA) of 

2002, which went into effect December 

17, 2002 and associated implementing 

guidance from the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) and 

National Institute of Standards and 

Technology, particularly FISMA’s 

requirement for agencies to ensure 

contractor compliance with all current 

IT security laws and policies. The FAR 

does not currently provide adequate 

security for, or sufficient oversight of, 

the operations of Government 

contractors (including service 

providers), and this interim rule is 

necessary to ensure the Federal 

Government is not exposed to 

inappropriate and unknown risk. 

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 1, 2, 7, 

11, and 39 

Government procurement. 

Dated: September 22, 2005. 

Julia B. Wise, 

Director,Contract Policy Division. 

■ Therefore, DoD, GSA, and NASA 

amend 48 CFR parts 1, 2, 7, 11, and 39 

as set forth below: 

■ 1. The authority citation for 48 CFR 

parts 1, 2, 7, 11, and 39 continues to 

read as follows: 

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

chapter 137; and42 U.S.C. 2473(c). 

PART 1—FEDERAL ACQUISITION 

REGULATIONS SYSTEM 

1.602–2 [Amended] 

■ 2. Amend section 1.602–2 by 

removing from paragraph (c) 

‘‘engineering,’’ and adding 

‘‘engineering, information security,’’ in 

its place. 

PART 2—DEFINITIONS OF WORDS 

AND TERMS 

■ 3. Amend section 2.101 in paragraph 

(b) by adding, in alphabetical order, the 

definitions ‘‘Information security’’ and 

‘‘Sensitive But Unclassified (SBU) 

information’’ to read as follows: 

2.101 Definitions. 

* * * * * 

(b) * * * 

Information security means protecting 

information and information systems 

from unauthorized access, use, 

disclosure, disruption, modification, or 

destruction in order to provide—

(1) Integrity, which means guarding 

against improper information 

modification or destruction, and 

includes ensuring information 

nonrepudiation and authenticity; 

(2) Confidentiality, which means 

preserving authorized restrictions on 

access and disclosure, including means 

for protecting personal privacy and 

proprietary information; and 

(3) Availability, which means 

ensuring timely and reliable access to, 

and use of, information. 

* * * * * 

Sensitive But Unclassified (SBU) 

information means unclassified 

information, which, if lost, misused, 

accessed or modified in an 

57452 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 189 / Friday, September 30, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 

unauthorized way, could adversely 

affect the national interest, the conduct 

of Federal programs, or the privacy of 

individuals. Examples include 

information which if modified, 

destroyed or disclosed in an 

unauthorized manner could cause: loss 

of life; loss of property or funds by 

unlawful means; violation of personal 

privacy or civil rights; gaining of an 

unfair commercial advantage; loss of 

advanced technology, useful to 

competitor; or disclosure of proprietary 

information entrusted to the 

Government. 

* * * * * 

PART 7—ACQUISITION PLANNING 

■ 4. Amend section 7.103 by adding 

paragraph (u) to read as follows: 

7.103 Agency-head responsibilities. 

* * * * * 

(u) Ensuring that agency planners on 

information technology acquisitions 

comply with the information technology 

security requirements in the Federal 

Information Security Management Act 

(44 U.S.C. 3544), OMB’s implementing 

policies including Appendix III of OMB 

Circular A–130, and guidance and 

standards from the Department of 

Commerce’s National Institute of 

Standards and Technology. 

■ 5. Amend section 7.105 by adding a 

sentence to the end of paragraph (b)(17) 

to read as follows: 

7.105 Contents of written acquisition 

plans. 

* * * * * 

(b) * * * 

(17) * * * For Information Technology 

acquisitions, discuss how agency 

information security requirements will 

be met. 

* * * * * 

PART 11—DESCRIBING AGENCY 

NEEDS 

■ 6. Revise section 11.102 to read as 

follows: 

11.102 Standardization program. 

Agencies shall select existing 

requirements documents or develop 

new requirements documents that meet 

the needs of the agency in accordance 

with the guidance contained in the 

Federal Standardization Manual, 

FSPM–0001; for DoD components, DoD 

4120.24–M, Defense Standardization 

Program Policies and Procedures; and 

for IT standards and guidance, the 

Federal Information Processing 

Standards Publications (FIPS PUBS). 

The Federal Standardization Manual 

may be obtained from the General 

Services Administration (see address in 

11.201(d)(1)). DoD 4120.24–M may be 

obtained from DoD (see address in 

11.201(d)(2)). FIPS PUBS may be 

obtained from the Government Printing 

Office (GPO), or the Department of 

Commerce′s National Technical 

Information Service (NTIS) (see address 

in 11.201(d)(3)). 

■ 7. Amend section 11.201 by adding 

paragraph (d)(3) to read as follows: 

11.201 Identification and availability of 

specifications. 

* * * * * 

(d) * * * 

(3) The FIPS PUBS may be obtained 

from http://www.itl.nist.gov/fipspubs/, 

or purchased from the Superintendent 

of Documents, U.S. Government 

Printing Office, Washington, DC 20402, 

Telephone (202) 512–1800, Facsimile 

(202) 512–2250; or National Technical 

Information Service (NTIS), 5285 Port 

Royal Road, Springfield, VA 22161, 

Telephone (703) 605–6000, Facsimile 

(703) 605–6900, Email: orders@ntis.gov. 

* * * * * 

PART 39—ACQUISITION OF 

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY 

■ 8. Amend section 39.101 by adding 

paragraph (d) to read as follows: 

39.101 Policy. 

* * * * * 

(d) In acquiring information 

technology, agencies shall include the 

appropriate information technology 

security policies and requirements. 

[FR Doc. 05–19468 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 Parts 2, 8, 16, and 36 

[FAC 2005–06; FAR Case 2004–001; Item 

II] 

RIN 9000–AK15 

Federal Acquisition Regulation; 

Improvements in Contracting for 

Architect-Engineer Services 

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 adopted as final, 

without change, an interim rule 

amending the Federal Acquisition 

Regulation (FAR) to implement Section 

1427(b) of the Services Acquisition 

Reform Act of 2003 (Title XIV of Public 

Law 108–136). This final rule 

emphasizes the requirement to place 

orders for architect-engineer services 

consistent with the FAR and reiterates 

that such orders shall not be placed 

under General Services Administration 

(GSA) multiple award schedule (MAS) 

contracts and Governmentwide task and 

delivery order contracts unless the 

contracts were awarded using the 

procedures as stated in the FAR. 

DATES: Effective Date: September 30, 

2005. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The 

FAR Secretariat at (202) 501–4755 for 

information pertaining to status or 

publication schedules. For clarification 

of content, contact Ms. Cecelia Davis, 

Procurement Analyst, at (202) 219–

0202. Please cite FAC 2005–06, FAR 

case 2004–001. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

A. Background 

This final rule constitutes the 

implementation in the FAR of Section 

1427 of the Services Acquisition Reform 

Act of 2003 (Title XIV of Public Law 

108–136) to ensure that the 

requirements of the Brooks ArchitectEngineers Act (40 U.S.C. 1102 et seq.) 

are not circumvented through the 

placement of orders under GSA MAS 

contracts and Governmentwide task and 

delivery order contracts that were not 

awarded using FAR Subpart 36.6 

procedures. An order cannot be issued 

consistent with FAR Subpart 36.6, as 

currently required by FAR 16.500(d), 

unless the basic underlying contract was 

awarded using the Brooks ArchitectEngineers Act procedures. This final 

rule amends FAR parts 2, 8, 16, and 36 

to ensure appropriate procedures are 

followed when ordering architectengineer services. The interim rule was 

published in the Federal Register at 70 

FR 11737, March 9, 2005. The Councils 

received comments in response to the 

interim rule from seven (7) respondents. 

Summary of the Public Comments 

The comments were organized into 

three groups as follows: 

1. Clarification on the Brooks Act 

Citation (40 U.S.C. 1102). 

Comment: Two commenters indicated 

that they were unable to find any 

relation of 40 U.S.C. 1102 with 

Architect-Engineer Services and 

requested clarification.