[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 10 (Thursday, January 15, 2009)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 2740-2741]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-549]
[[Page 2740]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION
NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION
48 CFR Parts 11, 23, 39, and 52
[FAC 2005-30; FAR Case 2006-030; Item VI; Docket 2007-0001, Sequence 9]
RIN 9000-AK85
Federal Acquisition Regulation; FAR Case 2006-030, Electronic
Products Environmental Assessment Tool (EPEAT)
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 agreed to adopt as
final, without change, the interim rule published in the Federal
Register at 72 FR 73215 on December 26, 2007. The interim rule amended
the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) to provide regulations for
purchasing environmentally preferable products and services when
acquiring personal computer products such as desktops, notebooks (also
known as laptops), and monitors with use of Electronic Products
Environmental Assessment Tool (EPEAT) pursuant to the Energy Policy Act
of 2005 and Executive Order 13423, ``Strengthening Federal
Environmental, Energy, and Transportation Management.''
DATES: Effective Date: February 17, 2009.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. William Clark, Procurement
Analyst, at (202) 219-1813 for clarification of content. For
information pertaining to status or publication schedules, contact the
FAR Secretariat at (202) 501-4755. Please cite FAC 2005-30, FAR case
2006-030.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
A. Background
The EPEAT is a system to help purchasers in the public and private
sectors evaluate, compare, and select desktop computers, notebooks and
monitors based on their environmental attributes. The EPEAT also
provides a clear and consistent set of performance criteria for the
design of products, and provides an opportunity for manufacturers to
secure market recognition for efforts to reduce the environmental
impact of their products.
This case was opened to amend the FAR to require the use of the
EPEAT Product Registry and the IEEE (Institute of Electrical and
Electronics Engineers) 1680 Standard for the Environmental Assessment
of Personal Computer Products in all solicitations and contracts for
personal computer desktops, laptops, and monitors. On January 24, 2007,
President Bush issued Executive Order 13423, Strengthening Federal
Environmental, Energy, and Transportation Management. Section 2(h)
states that the head of each Agency shall ``ensure that the agency (i)
when acquiring an electronic product to meet its requirements, meets at
least 95 percent of those requirements with an Electronic Product
Environmental Assessment Tool (EPEAT)-registered electronic product,
unless there is no EPEAT standard for such product[hellip]''.
The Councils published an interim rule on December 26, 2007 (72 FR
73215). Two respondents submitted comments.
1. One respondent fully supports the interim rule. As a taxpayer,
he considers that EPEAT is a critical step in facilitating sound
purchasing policy.
Response: None required.
2. The same respondent encourages DoD to expand the use of EPEAT in
all COTS purchases of related equipment, even computers that are
ruggedized for operational use.
Response: DoD implementation of this rule is outside the scope of
this case.
3. Another respondent considers the goals of the regulation
laudable, but objects to the process by which the Development Team
initiated the development of EPEAT standards. The respondent objects
that the Development Team was not rightly identified as a Federal
Advisory Committee at its formation, and that neither the requirements
of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), nor even its spirit, were
met in the development of EPEAT. The respondent considers that their
industry was deprived of the proper and necessary notice of the
development of the EPEAT and any associated policies regarding
implementation.
Response: The development of the EPEAT is not an issue in this
rulemaking. Although the Councils were not involved in the development
of the standards, they have reviewed these issues with the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB). The EPA has demonstrated to the satisfaction of the
Councils that the Development Team was not subject to FACA, and
appropriate procedures were followed for development of voluntary
consensus standards. The Councils have forwarded the respondent's
concerns to EPA. If the respondent has further questions with regard to
the EPEAT, key EPEAT points of contact are provided on the EPEAT
Website at http://www.epeat.net/faq.aspx#21.
4. The same respondent expresses particular concern because this
rule takes a non-governmental program that was to be used voluntarily
by purchasers and now mandates its use by all Federal Government
agencies. The respondent also questions the urgency for issuance of an
interim rule rather than a proposed rule.
Response: With regard to mandating the use of the EPEAT for
Government purchases, the rule implements the Executive Order 13423,
Strengthening Federal Environmental, Energy, and Transportation
Management. Section 2(h) states that the head of each Agency shall
``ensure that the agency (i) when acquiring an electronic product to
meet its requirements, meets at least 95 percent of those requirements
with an Electronic Product Environmental Assessment Tool (EPEAT)-
registered electronic product, unless there is no EPEAT standard for
such product''.
The rule was issued as an interim rule because the Executive Order
mandating use of the EPEAT standards was already in effect. Rules that
implement a statute or Executive Order are generally issued as interim
rules.
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 rule 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., because it mandates standards
in orders for personal computer products that will be offered for sale
to the Government. A Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (FRFA) has
been prepared and is summarized as follows:
This final rule was initiated to implement Executive Order
13423, Strengthening Federal Environmental, Energy, and
Transportation Management, Section 2(h) and the IEEE (Institute of
Electrical and Electronics Engineers) 1680 Standard for the
Environmental Assessment of Personal Computers, for Federal use in
meeting green purchasing requirements when acquiring personal
computer products.
[[Page 2741]]
There were no significant issues raised by the public comments
in response to the initial regulatory flexibility analysis.
As of June 2008, seven of the twenty-seven vendors who have
registered products on the EPEAT Product Registry reported that they
are small businesses. Data are not available on how many small
businesses are reselling personal computer products to the
Government, but according to the EPA's Office of Small Disadvantaged
Business Utilization, at the time of publication of the interim
rule, there were approximately 613 Service Disabled Veteran Owned
Small Businesses (SDVOSBs) selling IT hardware to the Federal
Government. These small businesses were not manufacturers of IT
hardware, but resold IT hardware manufactured by other companies to
the Federal Government. Many of the products these resellers sold
could meet the IEEE 1680 Standard, and the manufacturers of these
products had the option of getting these products EPEAT registered
to verify that they do meet this standard.
Because manufacturers are the parties responsible for
determining if their products meet the IEEE 1680 Standard or not,
there will be little to no impact on small businesses selling IT
products to the Federal Government, who are selling EPEAT-registered
products. In addition, the EPEAT Product Registry has been designed
to encourage small business manufacturer participation. There is a
sliding scale for the annual EPEAT registration fee vendors pay to
have their products EPEAT registered based on the annual revenue of
the vendor.
The rule does not duplicate, overlap, or conflict with any other
Federal rules.
The FAR Secretariat has submitted a copy of the FRFA to the Chief
Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration. A copy of
the FRFA may be obtained from the FAR Secretariat. The Councils will
consider comments from small entities concerning the affected FAR Parts
11, 23, 39, and 52 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. (FAR case 2006-030), 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.
List of Subjects in 48 CFR Parts 11, 23, 39, and 52
Government procurement.
Dated: December 24, 2008
Edward Loeb,
Acting Director, Office of Acquisition Policy.
Interim Rule Adopted as Final Without Change
Accordingly, the interim rule amending 48 CFR parts 11, 23, 39, and
52 which was published in the Federal Register at 72 FR 73215 on
December 26, 2007, is adopted as a final rule without change.
[FR Doc. E9-549 Filed 1-14-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6820-EP-S