83 FR 48271 - Federal Acquisition Regulation: Evaluation Factors for Multiple-Award Contracts
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION
NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION Federal Register Volume 83, Issue 185 (September 24, 2018)
GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION
NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION
Federal Register Volume 83, Issue 185 (September 24, 2018)
| Page Range | 48271-48273 | |
| FR Document | 2018-20669 |
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 185 (Monday, September 24, 2018)] [Proposed Rules] [Pages 48271-48273] From the Federal Register Online [www.thefederalregister.org] [FR Doc No: 2018-20669] ======================================================================= ----------------------------------------------------------------------- DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION 48 CFR Parts 13, 15, and 16 [FAR Case 2017-010; Docket No. 2017-0009; Sequence No. 1] RIN 9000-AN54 Federal Acquisition Regulation: Evaluation Factors for Multiple- Award Contracts AGENCY: Department of Defense (DoD), General Services Administration (GSA), and National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). ACTION: Proposed rule. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: DoD, GSA, and NASA are proposing to amend the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) to implement a section of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year (FY) 2017. DATES: Interested parties should submit comments to the Regulatory Secretariat Division at one of the addresses shown below on or before November 23, 2018 to be considered in the formulation of a final rule. ADDRESSES: Submit comments in response to FAR Case 2017-010 by any of the following methods:Regulations.gov: http://www.regulations.gov. Submit comments via the Federal eRulemaking portal by entering ``FAR Case 2017-010'' under the heading ``Enter Keyword or ID'' and selecting ``Search''. Select the link ``Comment Now'' that corresponds with ``FAR Case 2017-010''. Follow the instructions provided on the screen. Please include your name, company name (if any), and ``FAR Case 2017-010'' on your attached document. Mail: General Services Administration, Regulatory Secretariat Division, ATTN: Lois Mandell, 1800 F Street NW, 2nd Floor, Washington, DC 20405. Instructions: Please submit comments only and cite ``FAR case 2017- 010'' in all correspondence related to this case. Comments received generally will be posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal and/or business confidential 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: For clarification of content, contact Mr. Michael O. Jackson, Procurement Analyst, at 202-208-4949. For information pertaining to status or publication schedules, contact the Regulatory Secretariat Division at 202-501-4755. Please cite ``FAR Case 2017-010.'' SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background Section 825 of the NDAA for FY 2017 (Pub. L. 114-328) amends 10 U.S.C. 2305(a)(3) to modify the requirement to consider cost or price as an evaluation factor for the award for certain multiple-award task order contracts issued by DoD, NASA, or the Coast Guard. Section 825 provides that, at the Government's discretion, solicitations for multiple-award contracts for the same or similar services that state the Government [[Page 48272]] intends to award a contract to each qualifying offeror do not require price or cost as an evaluation factor for contract award. This exception does not apply to solicitations for multiple-award contracts that provide for sole source orders pursuant to section 8(a) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 637(a)). When cost or price is not evaluated during contract award, the contracting officer shall consider price or cost as a factor for the award of each order under the contract. Section 825 of the NDAA for FY 2017 also amends 10 U.S.C. 2304c(b) to add exemptions for the use of competitive procedures when placing an order under a multiple-award contract. II. Discussion and Analysis This rule proposes to amend the FAR, as follows: FAR parts 13 and 15 are revised to add, for use by DoD, NASA, or the Coast Guard, the exception to requiring price or cost as an evaluation factor in solicitations valued above the simplified acquisition threshold for multiple-award contracts for the same or similar services when the Government intends to award a contract to each and all qualifying offerors; explain what a qualifying offeror is in terms of the rule; and clarify that the exception shall not apply to solicitations for multiple-award contracts that provide for sole source orders pursuant to section 8(a) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 637(a)). FAR part 16 is revised to add, for use by DoD, NASA, or the Coast Guard, the exceptions for use of other than full and open competition, listed in FAR 6.302, to the list of exceptions to fair opportunity at FAR 16.505(b)(2). III. Expected Impact of the Proposed Rule and Proposed Cost Savings Currently, offerors on solicitations for multiple-award contracts for services are required to submit cost or price information with their proposals in order to be eligible for award. The time and effort that offerors expend to produce this cost or price information varies according to numerous factors, such as the proposed contract type, the source selection approach, or the offeror's internal processes and resources. Upon implementation of a final rule, contracting officers from DoD, NASA, and the Coast Guard may choose not to include cost or price as an evaluation factor in solicitations for multiple-award contracts for services, as long as an award will be made to each and all qualified offerors. As a result, offerors responding to these solicitations will not incur costs to develop and prepare the cost or price information typically required to be eligible for contract award. Subsequently, the FAR also requires cost and price information to be evaluated before the award of an order placed under a multiple-award contract. This rule does not impact that process. As this rule, when utilized, will remove a burden from offerors and does not implement any new requirements on offerors, DoD, GSA, and NASA consider this rule to be deregulatory. In an attempt to monetize an offeror's cost savings as a result of this rule, DoD, GSA, and NASA seek input from service contractors that could be impacted by this rule. In particular, DoD, GSA, and NASA welcome feedback on (i) the type of personnel (e.g., accountants or program managers) used to develop and prepare cost or price information for proposals on multiple-award service contracts; (ii) the number of hours (in a range) that would be spent by each type of personnel to develop and prepare the cost or price information for such a proposal; and (iii) the average hourly rate for each type of personnel used to develop and prepare the cost or price information for such a proposal, or the total average amount spent for each type of personnel to develop and prepare the cost or price information for such a proposal. Please identify the types of services you typically submit proposals for and whether or not your efforts/costs to provide cost or price information vary depending on different factors related to the solicitation (e.g., contract type or service type). If you do experience a variation in your efforts/costs to provide cost or price information, please describe these variations in your efforts/cost, to the extent possible, in your response. IV. Applicability to Contracts at or Below the Simplified Acquisition Threshold and for Commercial Items, Including Commercially Available Off-the-Shelf Items No contract clauses or solicitation provisions are being created or revised by this rule. V. Executive Order 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 not a significant regulatory action and, therefore, was not 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. VI. Executive Order 13771 This rule is not subject to E.O. 13771, because this rule is not a significant regulatory action under E.O. 12866. However, as explained in Section III of this preamble, DoD, GSA, and NASA believe the rule is deregulatory and seek public input on this preliminary determination, as well as information that can help monetize any savings. VII. Regulatory Flexibility Act DoD, GSA, and NASA do not expect this 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. However, an Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) has been performed and is summarized as follows: DoD, GSA, and NASA are proposing to amend the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) to implement section 825 of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for FY 2017 (Pub. L. 114- 328; 10 U.S.C. 2305(a)(3) and 10 U.S.C. 2304c(b)(5)). The objective of this proposed rule is to implement section 825 of the NDAA for FY 2017. This rule is not expected 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. There were 3,963 new multiple-award contracts for services awarded in Fiscal Year 2016, and 2,810 (71 percent) of these actions were awarded to small business. The proposed rule applies to all entities who do business with the Federal Government, but it is not expected to have a significant impact. This rule does not impose any new reporting, recordkeeping or other compliance requirements. The rule does not duplicate, overlap, or conflict with any other Federal rules. There are no known significant alternative approaches to the proposed rule that would meet the requirements of the applicable statute. The Regulatory Secretariat has submitted a copy of the IRFA to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration. A copy of the IRFA may be obtained from the Regulatory Secretariat. DoD, GSA, and NASA invite comments from small business concerns and other interested parties on the expected impact of this rule on small entities. DoD, GSA, and NASA will also consider comments from small entities concerning the existing regulations in [[Page 48273]] subparts affected by this rule consistent with 5 U.S.C. 610. Interested parties must submit such comments separately and should cite 5 U.S.C. 610 (FAR Case 2017-010) in correspondence. VIII. Paperwork Reduction Act This proposed 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 13, 15, and 16 Government procurement. Dated: September 18, 2018. William F. Clark, Director, Office of Government-wide Acquisition Policy, Office of Acquisition Policy, Office of Government-wide Policy. Therefore, DoD, GSA, and NASA are proposing to amend 48 CFR parts 13, 15, and 16 as set forth below: 0 1. The authority citation for 48 CFR parts 13, 15, and 16 continues to read as follows: Authority: 40 U.S.C. 121(c); 10 U.S.C. chapter 137; and 51 U.S.C. 20113. PART 13--SIMPLIFIED ACQUISITION PROCEDURES 0 2. Amend 13.106-1 by revising paragraph (a)(2) to read as follows: 13.106-1 Soliciting competition. (a) * * * (2)(i) When soliciting quotations or offers, the contracting officer shall notify potential quoters or offerors of the basis on which award will be made (price alone or price and other factors, e.g., past performance and quality). (ii) Contracting officers are encouraged to use best value. (iii) Solicitations are not required to state the relative importance assigned to each evaluation factor and subfactor, nor are they required to include subfactors. (iv) For DoD, NASA, and the Coast Guard-- (A) When issuing a solicitation valued above the simplified acquisition threshold for a multiple-award contract for the same or similar services and the solicitation states that the Government intends to make an award to each and all qualifying offerors, the contracting officer may choose not to include price or cost as an evaluation factor for the contract award (10 U.S.C. 2305(a)(3)); (B) Whether or not cost or price is evaluated at contract award, the contracting officer shall consider price or cost as one of the factors in the selection decision for each order (see 16.505); (C) A qualifying offeror is an offeror that is determined to be a responsible source, submits a technically acceptable proposal that conforms to the requirements of the solicitation, and the contracting officer has no reason to believe would be likely to offer other than fair and reasonable pricing (10 U.S.C. 2305(a)(3)); and (D) The exception at 13.106-1(a)(2)(iv)(A) shall not apply to solicitations for multiple-award contracts that provide for sole source orders pursuant to section 8(a) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 637(a)). PART 15--CONTRACTING BY NEGOTIATION 0 3. Amend 15.304 by revising paragraph (c)(1) and paragraph (e) introductory text to read as follows: 15.304 Evaluation factors and significant subfactors. * * * * * (c) * * * (1)(i) Price or cost to the Government shall be evaluated in every source selection (10 U.S.C. 2305(a)(3)(A)(ii) and 41 U.S.C. 3306(c)(1)(B)) (also see part 36 for architect-engineer contracts), subject to the exception listed in paragraph (c)(1)(ii) of this section for use by DoD, NASA, and the Coast Guard. (ii) For DoD, NASA, and the Coast Guard-- (A) When issuing a solicitation valued above the simplified acquisition threshold for a multiple-award contract for the same or similar services and the solicitation states that the Government intends to make an award to each and all qualifying offerors, the contracting officer may choose not to include price or cost as an evaluation factor for the contract award (10 U.S.C. 2305(a)(3)); (B) Whether or not cost or price is evaluated at contract award, the contracting officer shall consider price or cost as one of the factors in the selection decision for each order (see 16.505); (C) A qualifying offeror is an offeror that is determined to be a responsible source, submits a technically acceptable proposal that conforms to the requirements of the solicitation, and the contracting officer has no reason to believe would be likely to offer other than fair and reasonable pricing (10 U.S.C. 2305(a)(3)); and (D) The exception in paragraph (c)(1)(ii)(A) of this section shall not apply to solicitations for multiple-award contracts that provide for sole source orders pursuant to section 8(a) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 637(a)); * * * * * (e) Unless the exception at 15.304(c)(1)(ii)(A) of this section applies, the solicitation shall also state, at a minimum, whether all evaluation factors other than cost or price, when combined, are-- * * * * * PART 16--TYPES OF CONTRACTS 0 4. Amend 16.505 by adding paragraph (b)(2)(i)(G) to read as follows: 16.505 Ordering. * * * * * (b) * * * (2) * * * (i) * * * (G) For DoD, NASA, and the Coast Guard, the order satisfies one of the exceptions permitting the use of other than full and open competition listed in 6.302 (10 U.S.C. 2304c(b)(5)). The public interest exception shall not be used unless Congress is notified in accordance with 10 U.S.C. 2304(c)(7). * * * * * [FR Doc. 2018-20669 Filed 9-21-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6820-EP-P
![Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 185 / Monday, September 24, 2018 / Proposed Rules 48271
acquisition that may be subject to (iv) * * * Acquisition Regulation (FAR) to
§ 1.385–3(b)(2) or (3)). (A) A debt instrument that is issued implement a section of the National
* * * * * by a disregarded entity is deemed to be Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for
(d) * * * exchanged for stock of the regarded Fiscal Year (FY) 2017.
(1) * * * owner under § 1.385–3T(d)(4); * * * DATES: Interested parties should submit
(i) In general. If a debt instrument (as * * * * * comments to the Regulatory Secretariat
defined in § 1.385–3(g)(4)) is deemed to Division at one of the addresses shown
§ 1.385–2 [Removed] below on or before November 23, 2018
be exchanged under the section 385
regulations, in whole or in part, for ■ Par. 3. Section 1.385–2 is removed. to be considered in the formulation of
stock, the holder is treated for all federal ■ Par. 4. Section 1.385–3 is amended by a final rule.
tax purposes as having realized an revising paragraph (g)(4) to read as ADDRESSES: Submit comments in
amount equal to the holder’s adjusted follows: response to FAR Case 2017–010 by any
basis in that portion of the debt § 1.385–3 Transaction in which debt of the following methods:
instrument as of the date of the deemed proceeds are distributed or that have a • Regulations.gov: http://
exchange (and as having basis in the similar effect. www.regulations.gov.
stock deemed to be received equal to * * * * * Submit comments via the Federal
that amount), and, except as provided in (g) * * * eRulemaking portal by entering ‘‘FAR
paragraph (d)(1)(iv)(B) of this section, (4) Debt instrument. The term debt Case 2017–010’’ under the heading
the issuer is treated for all federal tax instrument means an interest that ‘‘Enter Keyword or ID’’ and selecting
purposes as having retired that portion would, but for the application of this ‘‘Search’’. Select the link ‘‘Comment
of the debt instrument for an amount section, be treated as a debt instrument Now’’ that corresponds with ‘‘FAR Case
equal to its adjusted issue price as of the as defined in section 1275(a) and 2017–010’’. Follow the instructions
date of the deemed exchange. In § 1.1275–1(d). provided on the screen. Please include
addition, neither party accounts for any your name, company name (if any), and
* * * * *
accrued but unpaid qualified stated ‘‘FAR Case 2017–010’’ on your attached
■ Par. 5. Section 1.1275–1 is amended
interest on the debt instrument or any document.
by revising the last sentence of
foreign exchange gain or loss with • Mail: General Services
paragraph (d) to read as follows:
respect to that accrued but unpaid Administration, Regulatory Secretariat
qualified stated interest (if any) as of the § 1.1275–1 Definitions. Division, ATTN: Lois Mandell, 1800 F
deemed exchange. This paragraph * * * * * Street NW, 2nd Floor, Washington, DC
(d)(1)(i) does not affect the rules that (d) * * * See § 1.385–3 for rules that 20405.
otherwise apply to the debt instrument treat certain instruments that otherwise Instructions: Please submit comments
prior to the date of the deemed would be treated as indebtedness as only and cite ‘‘FAR case 2017–010’’ in
exchange (for example, this paragraph stock for federal tax purposes. all correspondence related to this case.
(d)(1)(i) does not affect the issuer’s Comments received generally will be
* * * * *
deduction of accrued but unpaid posted without change to http://
qualified stated interest otherwise Kirsten Wielobob, www.regulations.gov, including any
deductible prior to the date of the Deputy Commissioner for Services and personal and/or business confidential
deemed exchange). Moreover, the stock Enforcement. information provided. To confirm
issued in the deemed exchange is not [FR Doc. 2018–20652 Filed 9–21–18; 8:45 am] receipt of your comment(s), please
treated as a payment of accrued but BILLING CODE 4830–01–P check www.regulations.gov,
unpaid original issue discount or approximately two to three days after
qualified stated interest on the debt submission to verify posting (except
instrument for federal tax purposes. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE allow 30 days for posting of comments
(ii) Section 988. Notwithstanding the submitted by mail).
first sentence of paragraph (d)(1)(i) of GENERAL SERVICES FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
this section, the rules of § 1.988–2(b)(13) ADMINISTRATION clarification of content, contact Mr.
apply to require the holder and the Michael O. Jackson, Procurement
issuer of a debt instrument that is NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND Analyst, at 202–208–4949. For
deemed to be exchanged under the SPACE ADMINISTRATION information pertaining to status or
section 385 regulations, in whole or in publication schedules, contact the
part, for stock to recognize any exchange 48 CFR Parts 13, 15, and 16 Regulatory Secretariat Division at 202–
gain or loss, other than any exchange [FAR Case 2017–010; Docket No. 2017–
501–4755. Please cite ‘‘FAR Case 2017–
gain or loss with respect to accrued but 0009; Sequence No. 1] 010.’’
unpaid qualified stated interest that is SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
not taken into account under paragraph RIN 9000–AN54
(d)(1)(i) of this section at the time of the I. Background
deemed exchange. * * * Federal Acquisition Regulation: Section 825 of the NDAA for FY 2017
(iii) Section 108(e)(8). For purposes of Evaluation Factors for Multiple-Award (Pub. L. 114–328) amends 10 U.S.C.
section 108(e)(8), if the issuer of a debt Contracts 2305(a)(3) to modify the requirement to
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
instrument is treated as having retired AGENCY: Department of Defense (DoD), consider cost or price as an evaluation
all or a portion of the debt instrument General Services Administration (GSA), factor for the award for certain multiple-
in exchange for stock under paragraph and National Aeronautics and Space award task order contracts issued by
(d)(1)(i) of this section, the stock is Administration (NASA). DoD, NASA, or the Coast Guard. Section
treated as having a fair market value ACTION: Proposed rule. 825 provides that, at the Government’s
equal to the adjusted issue price of that discretion, solicitations for multiple-
portion of the debt instrument as of the SUMMARY: DoD, GSA, and NASA are award contracts for the same or similar
date of the deemed exchange. proposing to amend the Federal services that state the Government
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:58 Sep 21, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\24SEP1.SGM 24SEP1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/83_FR_48456/page/1.svg)
![Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 185 / Monday, September 24, 2018 / Proposed Rules 48273
subparts affected by this rule consistent threshold for a multiple-award contract all qualifying offerors, the contracting
with 5 U.S.C. 610. Interested parties for the same or similar services and the officer may choose not to include price
must submit such comments separately solicitation states that the Government or cost as an evaluation factor for the
and should cite 5 U.S.C. 610 (FAR Case intends to make an award to each and contract award (10 U.S.C. 2305(a)(3));
2017–010) in correspondence. all qualifying offerors, the contracting (B) Whether or not cost or price is
officer may choose not to include price evaluated at contract award, the
VIII. Paperwork Reduction Act
or cost as an evaluation factor for the contracting officer shall consider price
This proposed rule does not contain contract award (10 U.S.C. 2305(a)(3)); or cost as one of the factors in the
any information collection requirements (B) Whether or not cost or price is selection decision for each order (see
that require the approval of the Office of evaluated at contract award, the 16.505);
Management and Budget under the contracting officer shall consider price (C) A qualifying offeror is an offeror
Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. or cost as one of the factors in the that is determined to be a responsible
chapter 35). selection decision for each order (see source, submits a technically acceptable
List of Subjects in 48 CFR Parts 13, 15, 16.505); proposal that conforms to the
(C) A qualifying offeror is an offeror requirements of the solicitation, and the
and 16
that is determined to be a responsible contracting officer has no reason to
Government procurement. source, submits a technically acceptable believe would be likely to offer other
Dated: September 18, 2018. proposal that conforms to the than fair and reasonable pricing (10
William F. Clark, requirements of the solicitation, and the U.S.C. 2305(a)(3)); and
Director, Office of Government-wide contracting officer has no reason to (D) The exception in paragraph
Acquisition Policy, Office of Acquisition believe would be likely to offer other (c)(1)(ii)(A) of this section shall not
Policy, Office of Government-wide Policy. than fair and reasonable pricing (10 apply to solicitations for multiple-award
U.S.C. 2305(a)(3)); and contracts that provide for sole source
Therefore, DoD, GSA, and NASA are (D) The exception at 13.106–
proposing to amend 48 CFR parts 13, 15, orders pursuant to section 8(a) of the
1(a)(2)(iv)(A) shall not apply to
and 16 as set forth below: Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 637(a));
solicitations for multiple-award
■ 1. The authority citation for 48 CFR contracts that provide for sole source * * * * *
parts 13, 15, and 16 continues to read orders pursuant to section 8(a) of the (e) Unless the exception at
as follows: Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 637(a)). 15.304(c)(1)(ii)(A) of this section
Authority: 40 U.S.C. 121(c); 10 U.S.C. applies, the solicitation shall also state,
chapter 137; and 51 U.S.C. 20113. PART 15—CONTRACTING BY at a minimum, whether all evaluation
NEGOTIATION factors other than cost or price, when
PART 13—SIMPLIFIED ACQUISITION combined, are—
PROCEDURES ■ 3. Amend 15.304 by revising
paragraph (c)(1) and paragraph (e) * * * * *
■ 2. Amend 13.106–1 by revising introductory text to read as follows: PART 16—TYPES OF CONTRACTS
paragraph (a)(2) to read as follows:
15.304 Evaluation factors and significant
13.106–1 Soliciting competition. subfactors. ■ 4. Amend 16.505 by adding paragraph
(b)(2)(i)(G) to read as follows:
(a) * * * * * * * *
(2)(i) When soliciting quotations or (c) * * * 16.505 Ordering.
offers, the contracting officer shall (1)(i) Price or cost to the Government * * * * *
notify potential quoters or offerors of the shall be evaluated in every source (b) * * *
basis on which award will be made selection (10 U.S.C. 2305(a)(3)(A)(ii) and
(2) * * *
(price alone or price and other factors, 41 U.S.C. 3306(c)(1)(B)) (also see part 36
for architect-engineer contracts), subject (i) * * *
e.g., past performance and quality).
(ii) Contracting officers are to the exception listed in paragraph (G) For DoD, NASA, and the Coast
encouraged to use best value. (c)(1)(ii) of this section for use by DoD, Guard, the order satisfies one of the
(iii) Solicitations are not required to NASA, and the Coast Guard. exceptions permitting the use of other
state the relative importance assigned to (ii) For DoD, NASA, and the Coast than full and open competition listed in
each evaluation factor and subfactor, Guard— 6.302 (10 U.S.C. 2304c(b)(5)). The
nor are they required to include (A) When issuing a solicitation valued public interest exception shall not be
subfactors. above the simplified acquisition used unless Congress is notified in
(iv) For DoD, NASA, and the Coast threshold for a multiple-award contract accordance with 10 U.S.C. 2304(c)(7).
Guard— for the same or similar services and the * * * * *
(A) When issuing a solicitation valued solicitation states that the Government [FR Doc. 2018–20669 Filed 9–21–18; 8:45 am]
above the simplified acquisition intends to make an award to each and BILLING CODE 6820–EP–P
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:58 Sep 21, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\24SEP1.SGM 24SEP1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/83_FR_48456/page/3.svg)
Document Created: 2018-09-22 00:33:16
Document Modified: 2018-09-22 00:33:16
| Category | Regulatory Information | |
| Collection | Federal Register | |
| sudoc Class | AE 2.7: GS 4.107: AE 2.106: | |
| Publisher | Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration | |
| Section | Proposed Rules | |
| Action | Proposed rule. | |
| Dates | Interested parties should submit comments to the Regulatory | |
| Contact | For clarification of content, contact Mr. Michael O. Jackson, Procurement Analyst, at 202-208-4949. For information pertaining to status or publication schedules, contact the Regulatory Secretariat Division at 202-501-4755. Please cite ``FAR Case 2017-010.'' | |
| FR Citation | 83 FR 48271 | |
| RIN Number | 9000-AN54 | |
| CFR Citation | 48
CFR
13 48 CFR 15 48 CFR 16 |
2024 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR