July 11, 2003

Defense Acquisition Regulations Council
Attn: Ms. Susan Schneider
OUSD (AT&L) DPAP (DAR)
IMD 3C132
3062 Defense Pentagon
Washington, DC 20301-3062

Re: DFARS Case 2002-D003
Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement; Competition Requirements for Purchases from a Required Source

Dear Ms. Schneider:

The Management Association for Private Photogrammetric Surveyors (MAPPS), a national association of mapping and geographic information firms, appreciates this opportunity to comment on the proposed DFARS rule implementing Section 811 of the Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2002 and Section 819 of the Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2003, as published in the Federal Register on May 15, 2003 (68 Fed. Reg. 26265).

The proposed rule implements legislation enacted by Congress to reform purchases from Federal Prison Industries (FPI) by the Department of Defense (DoD).

Section 811 and 819 require DoD to conduct market research before purchasing a product listed in the Federal Prison Industries (FPI) catalog, to determine whether the FPI product is comparable in price, quality, and time of delivery to products available from the private sector. If the FPI product is not comparable to products available from the private sector, DoD must use competitive procedures to acquire the product. Section 819 also addresses limitations on the use of FPI as a subcontractor and on an inmate's access to classified or sensitive information. MAPPS is pleased the proposed rule adequately reflects Congressional intent to clarify particular concerns and addresses potential ambiguities to ensure full implementation of Sections 811 and 819.

MAPPS is particularly delighted that the proposed rule reflects Congressional intent by including language prohibiting inmate workers from having access to classified data, critical infrastructure data, and personal or financial data under any DoD contracts. Simply yet adequately stated, sensitive information of this nature should not be in the hands of convicted criminals. This provision would effectively prohibit FPI from providing any mapping or geographic information services to DoD agencies, including the National Imagery and Mapping Agency (NIMA). We strongly support this provision in the final rule.

MAPPS also support the provision in the proposed rule that protects Federal prime contractors and subcontractors at any tier from being required or encouraged to use products or services furnished by FPI. Under Sections 811 and 819, FPI can no longer be forced upon Defense Department contractors as a mandatory source for products or specified as a mandatory source on Defense contracts. In order to implement the spirit and intent of sections 811 and 819, and to prevent FPI from delegating or subcontracting the mandatory source status it no longer enjoys under these provisions of law, we would urge that the rule also prohibit a Federal contractor from being required to "specify" FPI products or services in the designs, specifications or standards it develops for DoD. For example, a DoD contact for architect/engineer services should not require the A/E to specify FPI modular furniture in its building designs and specifications. This point was made by Senator Thomas of Wyoming, on the floor of the Senate, as reflected in the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, upon approval of the Conference report on the Defense Authorization bill.

We appreciate the opportunity to comment on the proposed rule and appreciate the consideration of our views.

Sincerely,

G. Michael Ritchie
MAPPS President