Je veux savoir à propos de…

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 129 / Friday, July 9, 2021 / Rules and Regulations agencies be combined into one DoDwide ECMRA system.
Response: The use of ECMRA is no longer necessary. The proposed rule for DFARS Case 2018D063 requires contractors to enter information in SAM.
Comment: Two respondents suggested that the rule is duplicative of existing DoD reporting requirements, such as: 1
The Armys contractor manpower reporting requirement; and 2 the Secretary of Defense Memorandum entitled Enterprise-wide Contractor Manpower Reporting Application, dated November 2012, that requires all new contracts for services to include a contract line item for contractor manpower reporting and a requirement in the performance work statement for contractor manpower reporting.
Response: This rule will replace, not duplicate, the existing Army contract manpower reporting requirement and the requirements in the November 2012
Memorandum from the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics and the Acting Principal Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness.
Comment: Two respondents suggested that the rule exceeds the scope of congressional intent, because DoD is already using its internal records and systems to achieve the statutory objective of the inventory of contracts for services.
Response: The rule does not exceed the scope of congressional intent, because existing systems and reports do not fully capture all of the data required by 10 U.S.C. 2330a.

jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES

D. Flow Down to Subcontracts Comment: Two respondents suggested that the requirement for subcontract reporting be changed. One respondent suggested that the prime contractor be required only to flow down the clause to subcontractors and relieved of the responsibility of reporting for subcontractors. The other respondent suggested that subcontractor data not be reported at all, as this is inconsistent with commercial practice.
Response: The proposed rule for DFARS Case 2018D063 does not contain a requirement to flow down a clause. Instead, the proposed rule requires contractors to include its subcontractor labor hours in the total number of labor hours the contractor reports annually to SAM. The proposed rule leaves the process for collecting subcontractor data up to the discretion of each contractor.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

15:58 Jul 08, 2021

Jkt 253001

E. Need for Additional Resources Comment: One respondent suggested that more resources be provided to the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness workforce that administers and coordinates the inventory of contracts for services.
Response: This suggestion is beyond the scope of the rule.
F. ECMRA Process Comment: One respondent noted that the ECMRA interface for the Fourth Estate other DoD agencies and field activities is not yet fully operational, in contrast to what is stated in the proposed rule. For example, there is no operational help desk support for Fourth Estate activities. The respondent suggests that the final rule should be delayed until ECMRA is consolidated into a common portal for all DoD
agencies, or until the ECMRA instance for Fourth Estate activities is fully resourced.
Response: The use of ECMRA is no longer necessary. The proposed rule for DFARS Case 2018D063 requires contractors to enter information in SAM.
Comment: One respondent questioned how the Government validates data provided by contractors in ECMRA. The respondent suggested that ECMRA be linked to Wide Area WorkFlow and that the contracting officer or the contracting officers representative be allowed to inspect payroll data in order to validate contractor data entered into ECMRA.
Response: Agencies are responsible for ensuring the contractor submits information in SAM that is reasonable and consistent with available contract information. Agencies may use any contract data available, as appropriate and necessary, to meet this responsibility.
Comment: One respondent suggested that the rule be clearer about how the ECMRA will protect nonpublic data, such as direct labor hours and cost data.
Response: The use of ECMRA is no longer necessary.
Comment: One respondent requested clarification on the procedures to follow when the services under one contract support two or more DoD services or agencies.
Response: The proposed rule for DFARS Case 2018D063 requires contractors to enter information in SAM, which is a single system able to collect all requisite data under this rule.
Comment: One respondent suggested that ECMRA should have a built-in capability for an overall point of contact at each agency level who can gather and manage the ECMRA information and
PO 00000

Frm 00039

Fmt 4700

Sfmt 4700

36231

that data be gathered at a centralized location.
Response: The use of ECMRA is no longer necessary. The proposed rule for DFARS Case 2018D063 requires contractors to enter information in SAM, which is a Governmentwide system.
Comment: One respondent noted that it is unduly restrictive to allow only one contractor user per contract to view the data for that contract in ECMRA.
Response: The use of ECMRA is no longer necessary. The proposed rule for DFARS case 2018D063 requires contractors to enter information in SAM.
Comment: One respondent suggested that the rule should clarify the contractors responsibilities in the event that the Government-populated information in ECMRA is incorrect.
Response: The use of ECMRA is no longer necessary. The proposed rule for DFARS Case 2018D063 requires contractors to enter information in SAM. Contractors may contact the SAM
Helpdesk or the contracting officer in the event that data needs to be updated in SAM.
Comment: One respondent suggested that the requiring activity, and not the contracting officer, be responsible for verifying the contractors ECMRA
compliance is documented.
Response: In accordance with FAR
1.6022, the contracting officer is responsible for ensuring compliance with the terms of the contract.
Comment: A respondent suggested that a DD Form 1423, Contract Data Requirements List, be included as a requirement in the rule.
Response: The proposed DFARS
clauses convey the requirement for contractor reporting to SAM; therefore, a DD Form 1423 is not necessary.
G. Proposed Clause Changes Comment: One respondent requested clarification regarding the prescription for the clause at DFARS 252.23770XX
with regard to indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity contracts. The respondent asked whether the clause must be included only if the expected dollar value of the individual task or delivery orders will exceed the SAT or if the total dollar value of all the task or delivery orders issued under the contract will exceed the SAT.
Response: The rule requires information reporting on each task order that meets the criteria and threshold for service contract reporting. The proposed rule for DFARS Case 2018D063 does not require reporting at the contract level for indefinite-delivery contracts.
The rule proposes a basic clause that
E:FRFM09JYR1.SGM

09JYR1