[Federal Register: April 21, 2000 (Volume 65, Number 78)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 21367-21371]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr21ap00-22]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
48 CFR Parts 919 and 952
RIN 1991-AB45
Acquisition Regulations: Mentor-Protege Program
AGENCY: Department of Energy.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Department of Energy (DOE) is amending its acquisition
regulations to encourage DOE prime contractors to assist small
disadvantaged firms certified by the Small Business Administration
under Section 8(a) of the Small Business Act (8(a)), other small
disadvantaged businesses, Historically Black Colleges and Universities
and other minority institutions of higher learning, women-owned small
businesses and small business concerns owned and controlled by service
disabled veterans in enhancing their capabilities to perform contracts
and subcontracts for DOE and other Federal agencies. The program seeks
to foster long-term business relationships between DOE prime
contractors and these small business entities and minority institutions
of higher learning and to increase the overall number of these small
business entities and minority institutions that receive DOE contract
and subcontract awards.
EFFECTIVE DATE: This rule will take effect May 22, 2000.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Eugene Tates, Mentor-Protege Program,
U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Small and Disadvantaged Business
Utilization, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20585, (202)
586-4556; or Robert M. Webb, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of
Procurement and Assistance Management, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW,
Washington, DC 20585, (202) 586-8264.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
II. Resolution of Comments
III. Procedural Requirements
A. Review Under Executive Order 12866
B. Review Under Executive Order 12988
C. Review Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act
D. Review Under the Paperwork Reduction Act
E. Review Under the National Environmental Policy Act
F. Review Under Executive Order 13132
G. Review Under the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
H. Treasury and General Government Appropriation Act, 1999
I. Congressional Notification
I. Background
On June 9, 1995, DOE published final guidelines for its Mentor-
Protege Pilot Initiative (60 FR 30529). The purpose of the Initiative
was to develop a program that encouraged DOE prime contractors to help
energy-related small disadvantaged, 8(a), and women-owned small
businesses in enhancing their business and technical capabilities to
ensure full participation in the mission of DOE. In addition, the
Initiative sought to foster the establishment of long term business
relationships between these small business entities and DOE prime
contractors and to increase the overall number of these small business
entities eligible to receive DOE contract and subcontract awards. In
order to achieve the goal of the Initiative, DOE prime contractors
entered into formal agreements with qualified small businesses to
provide developmental assistance. In many cases, this assistance has
enabled small businesses to benefit from the vast wealth of knowledge
acquired by large, successful firms doing business with DOE.
The success of the DOE business mentoring relationships and the
continuing need to develop small disadvantaged business, 8(a) firms and
women-owned small businesses capabilities to perform contracts and
subcontracts for DOE led DOE to propose the creation of a permanent DOE
Mentor-Protege Program. DOE published a notice of proposed rulemaking
on December 6, 1999 (64 FR 68072), which proposed a program having the
same goals and objectives as the original DOE Mentor-Protege Pilot
Initiative. Some refinements were proposed to provide additional
incentives for prime contractor participation in the Mentor-Protege
Program. After carefully considering the public comments received on
the notice of proposed rulemaking, DOE today publishes a final rule.
II. Resolution of Comments
Fourteen comments were received in response to the proposed rule.
The comments and DOE's responses are as follows:
Comment: It is unclear whether or not DOE would reimburse Mentors
for costs incurred by providing developmental assistance to Protege
firms.
Response: The Mentor-Protege rule is clear on this issue. DOE has
stated throughout the rule that developmental assistance costs are
allowable if they are incurred by the Mentor in the performance of a
DOE contract spelled out in the Mentor-Protege Agreement and are
otherwise allowable in accordance with the cost principles applicable
to that contract.
Comment: Do existing Mentor-Protege Agreements developed under the
DOE Mentor-Protege Pilot Initiative have to be amended when this rule
becomes effective?
Response: Existing agreements do not have to be amended. The new
rule applies only to new agreements.
Comment: The rule does not cover small business concerns owned and
controlled by service disabled veterans.
Response: DOE has revised the rule to include small business
concerns owned and controlled by service disabled veterans, as defined
in the Veterans Entrepreneurship and Small Business Development Act of
1999, Pub. L. No. 106-50.
Comment: Which small disadvantaged businesses, other than 8(a)
firms, are eligible to participate in the Program?
Response: All small disadvantaged businesses that meet the
eligibility requirements in paragraphs (a)(2)-(4) of Sec. 919.7007 are
eligible to participate.
Comment: Why, under Sec. 919.7008(d) of the rule, does DOE only
permit protests regarding the small business size of a firm, and not a
firm's status as a small disadvantaged business, etc.?
Response: Small disadvantaged business status cannot be protested
under this rule because the DOE Mentor-Protege Program is not limited
to small disadvantaged businesses. Even if a firm is not a small
disadvantaged business, it could still qualify as a small business.
Comment: A prospective Mentor should be required under
Sec. 919.7005 to provide evidence that the business is currently
performing a DOE contract which contains a subcontracting plan.
Response: DOE can identify its current contractors, so there is no
need for such a requirement.
[[Page 21368]]
Comment: DOE should allow designees of the chief executive officers
of Mentor and Protege firms to execute the Mentor-Protege Agreements.
Response: DOE agrees that delegation is appropriate for larger,
Mentor firms, but it would not be necessary for smaller, Proteges.
Therefore, in Sec. 919.7009, DOE allows the Mentor firm's chief
executive officer to designate another company official to execute the
Mentor-Protege Agreement.
Comment: DOE should delete the procedure in proposed
Sec. 919.7010(f) for completing performance in the case of withdrawal
or termination by either party to the Agreement.
Response: DOE has deleted the procedure for completing performance
because the terms of awarded subcontracts will still be binding in the
event of Agreement termination.
Comment: DOE's request for a description of developmental
assistance to be provided to Protege firms under proposed
Sec. 919.7010(c) is duplicated by DOE's request for an explanation of
how the developmental assistance will increase subcontracting
opportunities for the Protege under proposed Sec. 919.7010(j).
Response: DOE disagrees with this comment. The mere description of
the planned developmental assistance required by paragraph (c) does not
explain how such assistance is expected to increase subcontracting
opportunities of the Protege firm. These are separate provisions that
need to be discussed separately in the Agreement.
Comment: Under what specific conditions could DOE terminate its
recognition of a Mentor-Protege Agreement?
Response: DOE does not attempt to specify in this rule the
conditions or situations that would warrant termination of DOE's
recognition of an approved DOE Mentor-Protege agreement. That is left
for case-by-case decision.
Comment: Which contracting officer is responsible for oversight if
the Mentor has more than one DOE contract?
Response: The contracting officer for each contract identified in
the Mentor-Protege Agreement, under Sec. 919.7010(k), is the official
responsible for oversight of the contract under his/her responsibility.
Comment: DOE should delete the word ``field'' as used in
Sec. 919.7013 in the term ``field technical program manager'' because
technical program managers could be located in either the field or DOE
headquarters.
Response: DOE agrees and deletes the word ``field'' from
Sec. 919.7013 and Sec. 919.7010(j).
Comment: The proposed rule would add an unnecessary layer of
requirements, administered from DOE Headquarters, on contractors who
already have programs that accomplish the goals of improving
relationships with small, small disadvantaged, women-owned, and
minority institutions.
Response: DOE disagrees and thinks the program established by these
regulations provides additional incentives for its contractors to
provide assistance to the potential Protege firms. The program's
reporting requirements in Sec. 919.7013 are necessary for proper
program evaluation.
Comment: DOE should change the Protege eligibility requirement in
Sec. 919.7007(a)(3) that a firm must have been in business for at least
two years to no more than one year. In today's high-tech economy, a
one-year old company is considered ``established.''
Response: The highly technical nature of DOE's global mission
requires that a Protege have at least two years of business experience.
III. Procedural Requirements
A. Review Under Executive Order 12866
Today's regulatory action has been determined not to be a
``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866,
``Regulatory Planning and Review,'' (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993).
Accordingly, this rule was not subject to review under that Executive
Order by the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs of the Office
of Management and Budget (OMB).
B. Review Under Executive Order 12988
With respect to the review of existing regulations and the
promulgation of new regulations, section 3(a) of Executive Order 12988,
``Civil Justice Reform,'' 61 FR 4729 (February 7, 1996), imposes on
Executive agencies the general duty to adhere to the following
requirements: (1) Eliminate drafting errors and ambiguity; (2) write
regulations to minimize litigation; and (3) provide a clear legal
standard for affected conduct rather than a general standard and
promote simplification and burden reduction.
With regard to the review required by section 3(a), section 3(b) of
Executive Order 12988 specifically requires that Executive agencies
make every reasonable effort to ensure that the regulation: (1) Clearly
specifies the subject law's preemptive effect, if any; (2) clearly
specifies any effect on existing Federal law or regulation; (3)
provides a clear legal standard for affected conduct while promoting
simplification and burden reduction; (4) specifies the retroactive
effect, if any; (5) adequately defines key terms; and (6) addresses
other important issues affecting clarity and general draftsmanship
under any guidelines issued by the Attorney General. Section 3(c) of
Executive Order 12988 requires Executive agencies to review regulations
in light of applicable standards in section 3(a) and section 3(b) to
determine whether they are met or it is unreasonable to meet one or
more of them. DOE has completed the required review and determined that
this final rule meets the relevant standards of Executive Order 12988.
C. Review Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.,
requires preparation of an initial regulatory flexibility analysis for
any rule that must be proposed for public comment and that is likely to
have significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities. However, the analysis requirement does not apply if the
agency certifies that the rule, if promulgated, will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
The entities to which this rulemaking would apply are large business
and small business firms that receive a form of incentive for assuming
the role of Mentor to 8(a) firms, other small disadvantaged businesses,
small women-owned businesses, Historically Black Universities and
Colleges, and other minority institutions of higher learning, and small
business concerns owned and controlled by disabled veterans. It is
expected that under this rule the protege entities would directly
benefit from the forms of mentoring provided for in the rule. There
would not be an adverse economic impact on contractors or
subcontractors. Accordingly, DOE certifies that this rule would not
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities, and therefore, no regulatory flexibility analysis has been
prepared.
D. Review Under the Paperwork Reduction Act
This rule would require DOE contractors serving as mentors to
submit semi-annual progress reports to the DOE Mentor-Protege Program
Manager at DOE Headquarters (see Sec. 919.7013). The information in the
progress reports is necessary to determine if the schedules and
developmental assistance levels contained in Mentor-Protege Agreements
are being met. Performance under the Agreements is the basis for
[[Page 21369]]
awarding incentive fees to mentor firms. DOE submitted the proposed
collection of information to the Office of Management and Budget for
review and approval under the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501,
et seq. The Office of Management and Budget has not yet approved the
collection of information in this rule. An agency may not conduct or
sponsor and a person is not required to respond to a collection of
information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number (5
CFR 1320.5(b)).
E. Review Under the National Environmental Policy Act
DOE has concluded that this rule falls into a class of actions
which would not individually or cumulatively have significant impact on
the human environment, as determined by DOE's regulations (10 CFR part
1021, subpart D) implementing the National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA) of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.). Specifically, this rule is
categorically excluded from NEPA review because the amendments to the
DEAR would be strictly procedural (categorical exclusion A6).
Therefore, this rule does not require an environmental impact statement
or environmental assessment pursuant to NEPA.
F. Review Under Executive Order 13132
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 4, 1999) imposes certain
requirements on agencies formulating and implementing policies or
regulations that preempt State law or that have other federalism
implications. Agencies are required to examine the constitutional and
statutory authority supporting any action that would limit the
policymaking discretion of the States and carefully assess the
necessity for such actions. DOE has examined today's rule and has
determined that it does not have a substantial direct effect 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. No further action is required by
Executive Order 13132.
G. Review Under the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4) generally
requires a Federal agency to perform a detailed assessment of costs and
benefits of any rule imposing a federal mandate with costs to State,
local or tribal governments, or to the private sector of $100 million
or more. This rulemaking would only affect private sector entities, and
the impact is less than $100 million.
H. Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act, 1999
Section 654 of the Treasury and General Government Appropriation,
1999 (Pub. L. 105-277) requires Federal Agencies to issue a Family
Policymaking Assessment for any proposed rule that may affect family
well being. Today's rule would not have any impact on the autonomy or
integrity of the family as an institution. Accordingly, DOE concluded
that it is not necessary to prepare a Family Policymaking Assessment.
I. Congressional Notification
As required by 5 U.S.C. 801, DOE will submit to Congress a report
regarding the issuance of today's final rule. The report will state
that it has been determined that the rule is not a ``major rule,'' as
defined by 5 U.S.C. 804.
List of Subjects in 48 CFR Parts 919 and 952
Government procurement.
Issued in Washington, DC on April 17, 2000.
Richard H. Hopf,
Director, Office of Procurement and Assistance Management.
For the reasons set out in the preamble, Chapter 9 of Title 48 of
the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as set forth below.
PART 919--SMALL BUSINESS PROGRAMS
1. The authority citation for Parts 919 and 952 is revised to read
as follows:
Authority: 40 U.S.C. 486 (c); 42 U.S.C. 7101, et seq.; 42 U.S.C.
2201; 50 U.S.C. 2401, et seq.
2. A new subpart 919.70 is added in Subchapter D to read as
follows:
Subpart 919.70--The Department of Energy Mentor-Protege Program
Sec.
919.7001 Scope of subpart.
919.7002 Definitions.
919.7003 General policy.
919.7004 General prohibitions.
919.7005 Eligibility to be a Mentor.
919.7006 Incentives for DOE contractor participation.
919.7007 Eligibility to be a Protege.
919.7008 Selection of Proteges.
919.7009 Process for participation in the program.
919.7010 Contents of Mentor-Protege Agreement.
919.7011 Developmental assistance.
919.7012 Review and approval process of agreement by OSDBU.
919.7013 Reports.
919.7014 Solicitation provision.
Subpart 919.70--The Department of Energy Mentor-Protege Program
919.7001 Scope of subpart.
The Department of Energy (DOE) Mentor-Protege Program is designed
to encourage DOE prime contractors to assist small disadvantaged firms
certified by the Small Business Administration (SBA) under Section 8(a)
of the Small Business Act (8(a)), other small disadvantaged businesses,
women-owned small businesses, Historically Black Colleges and
Universities, and other minority institutions of higher learning, and
small business concerns owned and controlled by service disabled
veterans in enhancing their capabilities to perform contracts and
subcontracts for DOE and other Federal agencies. The program seeks to
foster long-term business relationships between these small business
entities and DOE prime contractors, and to increase the overall number
of these small business entities that receive DOE contract and
subcontract awards.
919.7002 Definitions.
Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs) means an
institution determined by the Secretary of Education to meet the
requirements of 34 CFR 608.2.
Other minority institutions of higher learning means an institution
determined by the Secretary of Education to meet the requirements of 20
U.S.C. 1067k.
Small business concern owned and controlled by service-disabled
veterans means a small business concern as defined in Public Law 106-
50, Veterans Entrepreneurship and Small Business Development Act of
1999.
Small disadvantaged business means a small business concern owned
and controlled by socially and economically disadvantaged individuals
that meets the requirements of 13 CFR part 124, subpart B.
Women-owned small business means a small business concern that
meets the requirements of 15 U.S.C. 637(d)(3)(D).
919.7003 General policy.
(a) DOE contractors eligible under 48 CFR 919.7005 may enter into
agreements with businesses certified by the SBA in the 8(a) Program,
other small disadvantaged businesses, women-owned small businesses,
HBCUs, other minority institutions of higher learning, and small
business concerns owned and controlled by service disabled veterans to
provide those firms appropriate
[[Page 21370]]
developmental assistance to enhance the capabilities of Proteges.
(b) Costs incurred by a Mentor to provide developmental assistance,
as described in 919.7011, are allowable only to the extent that they
are incurred in performance of a contract identified in the Mentor-
Protege Agreement and are otherwise allowable in accordance with the
cost principles applicable to that contract.
(c) Headquarters Office of Small and Disadvantaged Business
Utilization (OSDBU) is the DOE Program Manager for the Mentor-Protege
Program.
919.7004 General prohibitions.
DOE will not reimburse the costs of a Mentor in providing any form
of developmental assistance to a Protege except as provided in
919.7003(b).
919.7005 Eligibility to be a Mentor.
To be eligible for recognition by DOE as a Mentor, an entity must
be performing at least one contract for DOE.
919.7006 Incentives for DOE contractor participation.
(a) Under cost-plus-award fee contracts, approved Mentor firms may
earn award fees associated with their performance as a Mentor. The
award fee plan may include provision for the evaluation of the
contractor's utilization of 8(a) firms, other small disadvantaged
businesses, women-owned small businesses, HBCUs, other minority
institutions of higher learning and small business concerns owned and
controlled by service disabled veterans. DOE may evaluate the Mentor's
performance in the DOE Mentor-Protege Program under any Mentor-Protege
Agreement(s) as a separate element of the award fee plan.
(b) Mentors shall receive credit for subcontracts awarded pursuant
to their Mentor-Protege Agreements toward subcontracting goals
contained in their subcontracting plan.
919.7007 Eligibility to be a Protege.
(a) To be eligible for selection as a Protege, a firm must:
(1) Be a small business certified under Section 8(a) of the Small
Business Act by SBA, other small disadvantaged business, a women-owned
small business, HBCU, or any other minority institution of higher
learning, or a small business concern owned and controlled by service
disabled veterans;
(2) Be eligible for receipt of government contracts;
(3) Have been in business for at least two (2) years prior to
application for enrollment into the Mentor-Protege Program; and
(4) Be able to certify as a small business according to the
Standard Industrial Code for the services or supplies to be provided by
the Protege under its subcontract with the Mentor.
(b) A prospective Mentor may rely in good faith on written
representations by a prospective Protege that the Protege meets the
requirements in paragraph (a) of this section.
919.7008 Selection of Proteges.
(a) A Mentor firm is solely responsible for selecting one or more
Protege entities from firms eligible under 48 CFR 919.7007.
(b) A Mentor may have more than one Protege; however, a Protege may
have only one Mentor.
(c) The selection of Protege firms by Mentor firms may not be
protested, except as provided in paragraph (d) of this section.
(d) Only protests regarding the small business size status of a
firm to be a Protege will be considered and shall be submitted to the
DOE Office of Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization for
resolution. If that office is unable to resolve a protest, it will
refer the matter to the Small Business Administration for resolution in
accordance with 13 CFR part 121.
919.7009 Process for participation in the program.
A prospective Mentor must submit the following to the DOE Mentor-
Protege Program Manager.
(a) A statement that it is eligible, as of the date of application,
for the award of Federal contracts;
(b) A statement that it is currently performing at least one
contract for DOE;
(c) The DOE contract number, type of contract, period of
performance (including options), title of technical program effort,
name of DOE technical program manager (including contact information)
and the DOE contracting activity; and
(d) An original and two copies of the Mentor-Protege Agreement
signed by the chief executive officer or designee of the Mentor firm
and the chief executive officer of the Protege firm.
919.7010 Contents of Mentor-Protege Agreement.
The proposed Mentor-Protege Agreement must contain:
(a) Names, addresses and telephone numbers of Mentor and Protege
firms and a point of contact within each firm who will oversee the
Agreement;
(b) Requirements for the Mentor firm or the Protege firm to notify
the other entity, DOE Headquarters OSDBU, and the contracting officer
in writing at least 30 days in advance of the Mentor firm's or the
Protege firm's intent to voluntarily terminate or withdraw from the
Mentor-Protege Agreement (such termination would not terminate any
existing subcontract between the Mentor and the Protege);
(c) A description of the form of developmental assistance program
that will be provided by the Mentor to the Protege firm, including a
description of any subcontract work, and a schedule for providing the
assistance and the criteria for evaluation of the Protege's
developmental success (48 CFR 919.7011);
(d) A listing of the number and types and estimated amount of
subcontracts to be awarded to the Protege firm;
(e) Term of the Agreement;
(f) Procedures to be invoked should DOE terminate its recognition
of the Agreement for good cause (such termination of DOE recognition
would not constitute a termination of the subcontract between the
Mentor and the Protege);
(g) Provision for the Mentor firm to submit to the DOE Mentor-
Protege Program Manager a ``lessons learned'' evaluation developed by
the Mentor at the conclusion of the Mentor-Protege Agreement;
(h) Provision for the submission by the Protege firm of a ``lessons
learned'' evaluation to the DOE Mentor-Protege Program Manager at the
conclusion of the Mentor-Protege Agreement;
(i) Description of how the development assistance will potentially
increase subcontracting opportunities for the Protege firm;
(j) Provision for the Mentor firm to brief the DOE Mentor-Protege
Program Manager, the technical program manager(s), and the contracting
officer at the conclusion of each year in the Mentor-Protege Program
regarding program accomplishments as pertains to the approved Agreement
(where possible, this review may be incorporated into the normal
program review for the Mentor's contract);
(k) Recognition that costs incurred by a Mentor to provide
developmental assistance, as described in 48 CFR 919.7011, are
allowable only to the extent that they are incurred in performance of a
contract identified in the Mentor-Protege Agreement and are otherwise
allowable in accordance with the cost principles applicable to that
contract (the DOE Mentor-Protege Program has no appropriation for
paying for developmental assistance); and
(l) Other terms and conditions, as appropriate.
[[Page 21371]]
919.7011 Developmental assistance.
(a) The forms of developmental assistance a Mentor may provide to a
Protege include, but are not limited to:
(1) Management guidance relating to:
(i) Financial management,
(ii) Organizational management,
(iii) Overall business management planning,
(iv) Business development, and
(v) Marketing assistance;
(2) Engineering and other technical assistance;
(3) Noncompetitive award of subcontracts under DOE or other Federal
contracts where otherwise authorized;
(4) Award of subcontracts in the Mentor's commercial activities;
(5) Progress payments based on costs;
(6) Rent-free use of facilities and/or equipment owned or leased by
Mentor; and
(7) Temporary assignment of Mentor personnel to the Protege for
purposes of training.
(b) Costs incurred by a Mentor to provide developmental assistance,
as described in paragraph (a) of this section, are allowable only to
the extent provided at 48 CFR 919.7003(b).
919.7012 Review and approval process of agreement by OSDBU.
(a) OSDBU will review the proposed Mentor-Protege Agreement under
48 CFR 919.7010 and will complete its review and assessment no later
than 30 days after receipt. OSDBU will provide a copy of its assessment
to the cognizant DOE technical program manager and contracting officer
for review and concurrence.
(b) If OSDBU approves the Agreement, the Mentor may implement the
developmental assistance program.
(c) Upon finding deficiencies that DOE considers correctable, the
OSDBU will notify the Mentor and request information to be provided
within 30 days that may correct the deficiencies. The Mentor may then
provide additional information for reconsideration. The review of any
supplemental material will be completed within 30 days after receipt by
the OSDBU and the Agreement either approved or disapproved.
919.7013 Reports.
(a) Prior to performing an evaluation of a Mentor's performance
under its Mentor-Protege Agreement for use in award fee evaluations,
the Mentor-Protege Program Manager must consult with the cognizant DOE
technical program manager and must provide a copy of the performance
evaluation comments regarding the technical effort and Mentor-Protege
development to the contracting officer.
(b) The DOE Mentor-Protege Program Manager must submit semi-annual
reports to the cognizant contracting officer regarding the
participating Mentor's performance in the Program for use in the award
fee determination process.
(c) The Mentor firm must submit progress reports to the DOE Mentor-
Protege Program Manager semi-annually.
919.7014 Solicitation provision.
The cognizant contracting officer must insert the provision at
952.219-70, DOE Mentor-Protege Program, in all solicitations with an
estimated value in excess of the simplified acquisition threshold.
PART 952--SOLICITATION PROVISIONS AND CONTRACT CLAUSES
3. A new subsection 952.219-70, DOE Mentor-Protege Program is added
as follows:
952.219-70 DOE Mentor-Protege program.
In accordance with 919.7014 insert the following provision in
applicable solicitations.
DOE Mentor-Protege Program
(May 2000)
The Department of Energy has established a Mentor-Protege
Program to encourage its prime contractors to assist firms certified
under section 8(a) of the Small Business Act by SBA, other small
disadvantaged businesses, women-owned small businesses, Historically
Black Colleges and Universities and Minority Institutions, other
minority institutions of higher learning and small business concerns
owned and controlled by service disabled veterans in enhancing their
business abilities. If the contract resulting from this solicitation
is awarded on a cost-plus-award fee basis, the contractor's
performance as a Mentor may be evaluated as part of the award fee
plan. Mentor and Protege firms will develop and submit ``lessons
learned'' evaluations to DOE at the conclusion of the contract. Any
DOE contractor that is interested in becoming a Mentor should refer
to the applicable regulations at 48 CFR 919.70 and should contact
the Department of Energy's Office of Small and Disadvantaged
Business Utilization.
[FR Doc. 00-9981 Filed 4-20-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P