[Federal Register Volume 67, Number 50 (Thursday, March 14, 2002)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 11439-11442]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 02-5743]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

48 CFR Parts 1515, 1533 and 1552

[FRL-7155-7]


Acquisition Regulation: Administrative Changes and Technical 
Amendments

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Direct final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is issuing this rule 
to amend the EPA Acquisition Regulation (EPAAR) to eliminate two EPAAR 
requirements in order to streamline the EPA contracting process. The 
first requirement relates to the detail required in the EPA contracting 
officer's source selection decision. The second requirement relates to 
EPA contracting officer duties if there is a contractor appeal of a 
final decision of the contracting officer. In addition, technical 
amendments are being made to the EPAAR solicitation provision entitled 
``Procedures for Participation in the EPA Mentor-Protege Program.''

DATES: This rule is effective on June 12, 2002 without further notice, 
unless EPA receives adverse comments by April 15, 2002. If we receive 
adverse comments, we will, before the rule's effective date, publish a 
timely withdrawal in the Federal Register informing the public that 
this rule will not take effect.

ADDRESSES: Comments may be submitted to Larry Wyborski, US 
Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Acquisition Management 
(3802R), 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20004, or 
electronically at: [email protected].

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Larry Wyborski, U.S. Environmental 
Protection Agency, Office of Acquisition Management, Mail Code 3802R, 
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, Ariel Rios Building, Washington, DC 
20004, (202) 564-4369, [email protected]

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

A. Background

    EPA's Office of Acquisition Management established a Procurement 
Guidance Work Group to assess EPA acquisition policies and recommend 
changes where appropriate. Among the recommendations were two changes 
to the EPAAR to eliminate requirements which either: (1) Duplicate 
other Federal Regulations, or (2) outline unnecessary procedural 
requirements for EPA contracting officers. Specifically, EPAAR 
1515.308-71 provides procedural requirements for documentation in 
source selection decisions over and above those required by Federal 
Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 15.308. The EPA Procurement Guidance Work 
Group determined these additional procedural requirements are not 
necessary, and therefore should be removed from the EPAAR. The 
Procurement Guidance Work Group also determined that EPAAR 1533.212, 
Contracting Officer's duties upon appeal, essentially duplicate 
procedures set forth in 43 CFR part 4 (Department of Interior Board of 
Contract Appeals Regulations) and should therefore be removed from the 
EPAAR.
    In addition, technical amendments are being made to the 
solicitation provision at EPAAR 1552.219-71, Procedures for 
Participation in the Mentor-Protege Program, in order to bring the 
provision into compliance with statutory language. Specifically, since 
Pub. L. 102-389 (EPA's 1993 Appropriations Act) did not require certain 
restrictions on the mentor-protege program previously specified in the 
provision, these restrictions have been eliminated.

[[Page 11440]]

B. Executive Order 12866

    This is not a significant regulatory action for the purposes of 
Executive Order 12866; therefore, no review is required by the Office 
of Information and Regulatory Affairs, within the Office of Management 
and Budget (OMB).

C. Paperwork Reduction Act

    The Paperwork Reduction Act does not apply because this rule does 
not contain information collection requirements that require the 
approval of OMB under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980 (44 U.S.C. 
3501 et seq.).

D. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), as amended by the Small 
Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (SBREFA), 5 
U.S.C. 601 et seq.

    The RFA generally requires an agency to prepare a regulatory 
flexibility analysis of any rule subject to notice and comment 
rulemaking requirements under the Administrative Procedure Act or any 
other statute unless the agency certifies that the rule will not have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. 
Small entities include small businesses, small organizations, and small 
governmental jurisdictions.
    For purposes of assessing the impact of today's rule on small 
entities, small entity is defined as: (1) A small business that meets 
the definition of a small business found in the Small Business Act and 
codified at 13 CFR 121.201; (2) a small governmental jurisdiction that 
is a government of a city, county, town, school district or special 
district with a population of less than 50,000; or (3) a small 
organization that is any not-for-profit enterprise which is 
independently owned and operated and is not dominant in its field.
    After considering the economic impacts of today's rule on small 
entities, I certify that this action will not have a significant 
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. In 
determining whether a rule has a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities, the impact of concern is any 
significant adverse economic impact on small entities, since the 
primary purpose of the regulatory flexibility analyses is to identify 
and address regulatory alternatives ``which minimize any significant 
economic impact of the proposed rule on small entities.'' 5 U.S.C. 603 
and 604. Thus, an agency may certify that a rule will not have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities 
if the rule relieves regulatory burden, or otherwise has a positive 
economic effect on all of the small entities subject to the rule. This 
rule streamlines agency internal operating procedures and will 
therefore not have a significant economic impact on small entities.

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public 
Law 104-4, establishes requirements for Federal agencies to assess 
their regulatory actions on State, local, and Tribal governments, and 
the private sector. This rule does not contain a Federal mandate that 
may result in expenditures of $100 million or more for State, local, 
and Tribal governments, in the aggregate, or the private sector in one 
year. Any private sector costs for this action relate to paperwork 
requirements and associated expenditures that are far below the level 
established for UMRA applicability. Thus, the rule is not subject to 
the requirements of sections 202 and 205 of the UMRA.

F. Executive Order 13045

    Executive Order 13045, Protection of Children from Environmental 
Health Risks and Safety Risks (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), applies to 
any rule that: (1) Is determined to be economically significant as 
defined under Executive Order 12866, and (2) concerns an environmental 
health or safety risk that EPA has reason to believe may have a 
disproportionate effect on children. If the regulatory action meets 
both criteria, the Agency must evaluate the environmental health or 
safety effects of the planned rule on children, and explain why the 
planned regulation is preferable to other potentially effective and 
reasonably feasible alternatives considered by the Agency.
    This rule is not subject to Executive Order 13045 because it is not 
an economically significant rule as defined by Executive Order 12866, 
and because it does not involve decisions on environmental health or 
safety risk.

G. Executive Order 13132

    Executive Order 13132 entitled ``Federalism'' (64 FR 43255, August 
10, 1999) requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure 
``meaningful and timely input by State and local officials in the 
development of regulatory policies that have federalism implications.'' 
``Policies that have federalism implications'' are defined in the 
Executive Order to include regulations that have ``substantial direct 
effects on the States, on the relationship between the national 
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and 
responsibilities among the various levels of government.''
    Under Section 6 of Executive Order 13132, EPA may not issue a 
regulation that has federalism implications, that imposes substantial 
direct compliance costs, and that is not required by statute, unless 
the Federal government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct 
compliance costs incurred by State and local governments, or EPA 
consults with State and local officials early in the process of 
developing the proposed regulation. EPA also may not issue a regulation 
that has federalism implications and that preempts State law, unless 
the Agency consults with State and local officials early in the process 
of developing the proposed regulation.
    This rule does not have federalism implications. It will not have 
substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between 
the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power 
and responsibilities among the various levels of government, as 
specified in Executive Order 13132. Thus, the requirements of section 6 
of the Executive Order do not apply to this rule.

H. Executive Order 13175

    Executive Order 13175, entitled ``Consultation and Coordination 
with Indian Tribal Governments'' (65 FR 67249, November 6, 2000), 
requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful 
and tribal input by tribal officials in the development of regulatory 
policies that have tribal implications.'' ``Policies that have tribal 
implications'' is defined in the Executive Order to include regulations 
that have ``substantial direct effects on one or more Indian tribes, on 
the relationship between the Federal government and the Indian tribes, 
or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the 
Federal government and Indian tribes.''
    This direct final rule does not have tribal implications. It will 
not have substantial direct effects on tribal governments, on the 
relationship between the Federal government and Indian tribes, as 
specified in Executive Order 13175. The rule in an acquisition 
regulation that is technical and administrative in nature. Thus, 
Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this rule.

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995

    EPA will use voluntary consensus standards, as directed by section 
12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and

[[Page 11441]]

Advancement Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law 104-113, section 12(d) (15 
U.S.C. 272 note), in its procurement activities when applicable. The 
NTTAA directs EPA to use voluntary consensus standards in its 
regulatory activities unless to do so would be inconsistent with 
applicable law or otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards 
are technical standards (e.g., materials specifications, test methods, 
sampling procedures, and business practices) that are developed or 
adopted by voluntary consensus standards bodies. The NTTAA directs EPA 
to provide Congress, through OMB, explanations when the Agency decides 
not to use available and applicable voluntary consensus standards.
    This rulemaking does not involve technical standards. Therefore, 
EPA is not considering use of any voluntary consensus standards. EPA 
welcomes comments on this aspect of the rule making, and, specifically, 
invites the public to identify potentially applicable voluntary 
consensus standards and to explain why such standards should be used in 
this regulation.

J. Executive Order 13211

    This rule is not subject to Executive Order 13211, ``Actions 
Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 
Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355 (May 22, 2001) because it is not a 
significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.

K. Submission to Congress and the General Accounting Office

    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the 
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally 
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating 
the rule must submit a rules report, which includes a copy of the rule, 
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the 
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other 
required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of 
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior 
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot 
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal 
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 
804(2).

List of Subjects in 48 CFR Parts 1515, 1533 and 1552

    Government procurement.
    Therefore, 48 CFR chapter 15 is amended as set forth below:

    1. The authority citation for parts 1515, 1533 and 1552 is revised 
to read as follows:

    Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301; Sec. 205(c), 63 Stat. 390, as amended, 
40 U.S.C. 486(c); and 41 U.S.C. 418b.


1515.308-71  [Removed]

    2. 1515.308-71 is removed.


1553.212  [Removed]

    3. Section 1533.212 is removed.

    4. Section 1552.219-71 is revised to read as follows:


1552.219-71  Procedures for Participation in the EPA Mentor-Protege 
Program.

    As prescribed in 1519.203(b), insert the following provision:

Procedures for Participation in the EPA Mentor-Protege Program (Oct 
2000)

    (a) This provision sets forth the procedures for participation 
in the EPA Mentor-Protege Program (hereafter referred to as the 
Program). The purpose of the Program is to increase the 
participation of concerns owned and/or controlled by socially and 
economically disadvantaged individuals as subcontractors, suppliers, 
and ultimately as prime contractors; to establish a mutually 
beneficial relationship between these concerns and EPA's large 
business prime contractors (although small businesses may 
participate as Mentors); to develop the technical and corporate 
administrative expertise of these concerns, which will ultimately 
lead to greater success in competition for contract opportunities; 
to promote the economic stability of these concerns; and to aid in 
the achievement of goals for the use of these concerns in 
subcontracting activities under EPA contracts. If the successful 
offeror is accepted into the Program they shall serve as a Mentor to 
a Protege firm(s), providing developmental assistance in accordance 
with an agreement with the Protege firm(s).
    (b) To participate as a Mentor, the offeror must receive 
approval in accordance with paragraph (h) of this section.
    (c) A Protege must be a concern owned and/or controlled by 
socially and economically disadvantaged individuals within the 
meaning of section 8(a)(5) and (6) of the Small Business Act (15 
U.S.C. 673(a)(5) and (6)), including historically black colleges and 
universities. Further, in accordance with Public Law 102-389 (the 
1993 Appropriation Act), for EPA's contracting purposes, 
economically and socially disadvantaged individuals shall be deemed 
to include women.
    (d) Where there may be a concern regarding the Protege firm's 
eligibility to participate in the program, the protege's eligibility 
will be determined by the contracting officer after the SBA has 
completed any formal determinations.
    (e) The offeror shall submit an application in accordance with 
paragraph (k) of this section as part of its proposal which shall 
include as a minimum the following information.
    (1) A statement and supporting documentation that the offeror is 
currently performing under at least one active Federal contract with 
an approved subcontracting plan and is eligible for the award of 
Federal contracts;
    (2) A summary of the offeror's historical and recent activities 
and accomplishments under any disadvantaged subcontracting programs. 
The offeror is encouraged to include any initiatives or outreach 
information believed pertinent to approval as a Mentor firm;
    (3) The total dollar amount (including the value of all option 
periods or quantities) of EPA contracts and subcontracts received by 
the offeror during its two preceding fiscal years. (Show prime 
contracts and subcontracts separately per year);
    (4) The total dollar amount and percentage of subcontract awards 
made to all concerns owned and/or controlled by disadvantaged 
individuals under EPA contracts during its two preceding fiscal 
years. If recently required to submit a SF 295, provide copies of 
the two preceding year's reports;
    (5) The number and total dollar amount of subcontract awards 
made to the identified Protege firm(s) during the two preceding 
fiscal years (if any).
    (f) In addition to the information required by paragraph (e) of 
this section, the offeror shall submit as a part of the application 
the following information for each proposed Mentor-Protege 
relationship:
    (1) Information on the offeror's ability to provide 
developmental assistance to the identified Protege firm and how the 
assistance will potentially increase contracting and subcontracting 
opportunities for the Protege firm.
    (2) A letter of intent indicating that both the Mentor firm and 
the Protege firm intend to enter into a contractual relationship 
under which the Protege will perform as a subcontractor under the 
contract resulting from this solicitation and that the firms will 
negotiate a Mentor-Protege agreement. The letter of intent must be 
signed by both parties and contain the following information:
    (i) The name, address and phone number of both parties;
    (ii) The Protege firm's business classification, based upon the 
NAICS code(s) which represents the contemplated supplies or services 
to be provided by the Protege firm to the Mentor firm;
    (iii) A statement that the Protege firm meets the eligibility 
criteria;
    (iv) A preliminary assessment of the developmental needs of the 
Protege firm and the proposed developmental assistance the Mentor 
firm envisions providing the Protege. The offeror shall address 
those needs and how their assistance will enhance the Protege. The 
offeror shall develop a schedule to assess the needs of the Protege 
and establish criteria to evaluate the success in the Program;
    (v) A statement that if the offeror or Protege firm is suspended 
or debarred while performing under an approved Mentor-Protege 
agreement the offeror shall promptly give notice of the suspension 
or debarment to the EPA Office of Small Disadvantaged Business 
Utilization (OSDBU) and the

[[Page 11442]]

contracting officer. The statement shall require the Protege firm to 
notify the Contractor if it is suspended or debarred.
    (g) The application will be evaluated on the extent to which the 
offeror's proposal addresses the items listed in paragraphs (e) and 
(f) of this section. To the maximum extent possible, the application 
should be limited to not more than 10 single pages, double spaced. 
The offeror may identify more than one Protege in its application.
    (h) If the offeror is determined to be in the competitive range, 
or is awarded a contract without discussions, the offeror will be 
advised by the contracting officer whether their application is 
approved or rejected. The contracting officer, if necessary, may 
request additional information in connection with the offeror's 
submission of its revised or best and final offer. If the successful 
offeror has submitted an approved application, they shall comply 
with the clause titled ``Mentor-Protege Program.''
    (i) Subcontracts of $1,000,000 or less awarded to firms approved 
as Proteges under the Program are exempt from the requirements for 
competition set forth in FAR 44.202-2(a)(5), and 52.244-5(b). 
However, price reasonableness must still be determined and the 
requirements in FAR 44.202-2(a)(8) for cost and price analysis 
continue to apply.
    (j) Costs incurred by the offeror in fulfilling their 
agreement(s) with a Protege firm(s) are not reimbursable as a direct 
cost under the contract. Unless EPA is the responsible audit agency 
under FAR 42.703-1, offerors are encouraged to enter into an advance 
agreement with their responsible audit agency on the treatment of 
such costs when determining indirect cost rates. Where EPA is the 
responsible audit agency, these costs will be considered in 
determining indirect cost rates.
    (k) Submission of Application and Questions Concerning the 
Program.
    The application for the Program for Headquarters and Regional 
procurements shall be submitted to the contracting officer, and to 
the EPA OSDBU at the following address: Socioeconomic Business 
Program Officer, Office of Small and Disadvantaged Business 
Utilization, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Ariel Rios 
Building (1230A), 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 
20460, Telephone: (202) 564-4322, Fax: (202) 565-2473.
    The application for the Program for RTP procurements shall be 
submitted to the contracting officer, and to the Small Business 
Specialist at the following address: Small Business Program Officer, 
RTP Procurement Operations Division (E105-02), U.S. Environmental 
Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, Telephone: 
(919) 541-2249, Fax: (919) 541-5539.
    The application for the Program for Cincinnati procurements 
shall be submitted to the contracting officer, and to the Small 
Business Specialist at the following address: Small and 
Disadvantaged Business Utilization Officer, Cincinnati Procurement 
Operations Division (CPOD-Norwood), U.S. Environmental Protection 
Agency, 26 West Martin Luther King Drive, Cincinnati, OH 45268, 
Telephone: (513) 487-2024 Fax: (513) 487-2004.

(End of provision)

    Dated: February 28, 2002.
Judy S. Davis,
Director, Office of Acquisition Management.
[FR Doc. 02-5743 Filed 3-13-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P