31658 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 120 / Thursday, June 20, 1996 / Rules and Regulations

(7) Costs shall be allowable only if the

following information is documented:

(i) Date and place (city, town, or other

similar designation) of the expenses;

(ii) Purpose of the trip; and

(iii) Name of person on trip and that

person’s title or relationship to the

contractor.

[FR Doc. 96–14536 Filed 6–19–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6820–EP–P

48 CFR Parts 32 and 52

[FAC 90–39; FAR Case 92–046; Item XXII]

RIN 9000–AF41

Federal Acquisition Regulation;

Prompt Payment Overseas

AGENCIES: Department of Defense (DOD),

General Services Administration (GSA),

and National Aeronautics and Space

Administration (NASA).

ACTION: Interim rule adopted as final.

SUMMARY: The Civilian Agency

Acquisition Council and the Defense

Acquisition Regulations Council have

agreed to convert the interim rule

published in the Federal Register at 59

FR 11379, March 10, 1994, and

amended by FAR case 94–770 (60 FR

34741, July 3, 1995), to a final rule. This

rule amends the Federal Acquisition

Regulation (FAR) to reflect that the

Prompt Payment Act applies to overseas

contracts. This regulatory action was not

subject to Office of Management and

Budget review under Executive Order

12866, dated September 30, 1993, and is

not a major rule under 5 U.S.C. 804.

EFFECTIVE DATE: June 20, 1996.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.

Jeremy F. Olson at (202) 501–3221 in

reference to this FAR case. For general

information, contact the FAR

Secretariat, Room 4037, GS Building,

Washington, DC 20405 (202) 501–4755.

Please cite FAC 90–39, FAR case 92–

046.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

A. Background

On January 13, 1992, the Armed

Services Board of Contract Appeals

(ASBCA), in Held & Francke

Baukittengesellschaft (ASBCA Nos.

42463 and 42464), held that FAR 32.901

improperly excluded applicability of the

Prompt Payment Act (31 U.S.C. 3901, et

seq.) to contracts awarded to foreign

contractors for work performed outside

the United States. As a result of the

ASBCA decision, an interim rule was

issued which, in effect, makes the

Government liable for payment of

interest and interest penalties under the

Act for contracts with foreign

contractors for work performed or

supplies delivered overseas.

Section 32.901 and the clauses at

52.232–25, 52.232–26, and 52.232–27

were amended by the interim rule to

remove the statements that no interest

penalty will be paid on contracts

awarded to foreign vendors outside the

United States for work performed

outside the United States and to remove

the definition of ‘‘foreign vendor’’ from

the clauses. That interim rule, as

amended on July 3, 1995, is now

converted to a final rule without further

change.

B. 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 the

rule only applies to contracts with

foreign contractors for work performed

overseas by extending the Government’s

liability to pay interest and penalties

under the Prompt Payment Act to such

entities. No comments were received on

the impact of this rule on small entities

during the public comment period.

C. Paperwork Reduction Act

The Paperwork Reduction Act does

not apply because the changes to the

FAR do not impose recordkeeping or

information collection requirements, or

collections of information from offerors,

contractors, or members of the public

which require the approval of the Office

of Management and Budget under 44

U.S.C. 3501, et seq.

List of Subjects in 48 CFR Parts 32 and

52

Government procurement.

Interim Rule Adopted as Final Without

Change

Accordingly, the interim rule

amending CFR Parts 32 and 52, which

was published at 59 FR 11379, March

10, 1994 (FAC 90–20, Item XIII), and

further amended by FAR case 94–770

(60 FR 34741, July 3, 1995), is adopted

as a final rule without further change.

The authority citation for 48 CFR

Parts 32 and 52 continues to read as

follows:

Authority: 40 U.S.C. 486(c); 10 U.S.C.

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

Dated: June 4, 1996.

Edward C. Loeb,

Director, Federal Acquisition Policy Division.

[FR Doc. 96–14537 Filed 6–19–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6820–EP–P

48 CFR Parts 33, 42, and 52

[FAC 90–39; FAR Cases 91–062 and 92–

301; Item XXIII]

RIN 9000–AE96/9000–AF35

Federal Acquisition Regulation;

Alternate Dispute Resolution and

Federal Courts Administration Act

AGENCIES: Department of Defense (DOD),

General Services Administration (GSA),

and National Aeronautics and Space

Administration (NASA).

ACTION: Interim rules adopted as final.

SUMMARY: The Civilian Agency

Acquisition Council and the Defense

Acquisition Regulations Council have

agreed to adopt two interim rules as

final: FAR Case 91–62, Alternative

Dispute Resolution, published in the

Federal Register (FR) at 56 FR 67416,

December 30, 1991, and 92–301, Federal

Courts Administration Act, published at

59 FR 11380 on March 10, 1994. The

rules amend the claim certification

procedures and the Alternative Means

of Dispute Resolution (ADR)

procedures, and implement section

907(a) of the Federal Courts

Administration Act of 1992. These

regulatory actions were not subject to

Office of Management and Budget

review under Executive Order 12866,

dated September 30, 1993, and are not

major rules under 5 U.S.C. 804.

EFFECTIVE DATE: June 20, 1996.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.

Jack O’Neill at (202) 501–3856 in

reference to this FAR case. For general

information, contact the FAR

Secretariat, Room 4037, GS Building,

Washington, DC 20405 (202) 501–4755.

Please cite FAC 90–39, FAR cases 91–

062 and 92–301.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

A. Background

Upon passage of the Federal Courts

Administration Act (Act) of 1992, the

Civilian Agency Acquisition Council

and the Defense Acquisition Regulations

Council issued two interim rules

implementing the changes made by the

Act as well as changes to the Alternative

Disputes Resolution procedures and

claim certification procedures. Only

three parties submitted comments in

response to the interim rules. No issue

was raised by the public comments that