References in Text
Section 3542 of title 44, referred to in subsec. (c)(1)(C), was repealed by Pub. L. 113–283, § 2(a), Dec. 18, 2014, 128 Stat. 3073. See section 3552 of Title 44, Public Printing and Documents.
Section 2445c of title 10, referred to in subsec. (c)(4)(C), was repealed by Pub. L. 114–328, div. A, title VIII, § 846(1), Dec. 23, 2016, 130 Stat. 2292.
The text of section 11331 of this title, referred to in subsec. (d), was generally amended by Pub. L. 117–167, div. B, title II, § 10246(f), Aug. 9, 2022, 136 Stat. 1492, so as to provide for the prescription by the Secretary of Commerce of standards and guidelines pertaining to Federal information systems.
2017—Subsec. (c)(5). Pub. L. 115–88 and Pub. L. 115–91 amended subsec. (c) identically, striking out par. (5) relating to sunset of certain provisions. Text read as follows: “Paragraphs (1), (3), and (4) shall not be in effect on and after the date that is 5 years after the date of the enactment of the Carl Levin and Howard P. ‘Buck’ McKeon National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2015.”
2014—Subsec. (c). Pub. L. 113–291 added pars. (1), (3), (4), and par. (5) relating to sunset of certain provisions and redesignated former pars. (1) and (2) as par. (2) and par. (5) relating to report to Congress, respectively.
2004—Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 108–458, § 8401(1), inserted “security,” after “use,”.
Subsec. (c)(1). Pub. L. 108–458, § 8401(2), inserted “, including information security risks,” after “evaluating the risks” and “costs, benefits, and risks”.
Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries
Change of Name
Committee on Oversight and Government Reform of House of Representatives changed to Committee on Oversight and Reform of House of Representatives by House Resolution No. 6, One Hundred Sixteenth Congress, Jan. 9, 2019.
Management of Software Licenses
Pub. L. 114–210, July 29, 2016, 130 Stat. 824, provided that:
“SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
“This Act may be cited as the ‘Making Electronic Government Accountable By Yielding Tangible Efficiencies Act of 2016’ or the ‘MEGABYTE Act of 2016’.
“SEC. 2. OMB DIRECTIVE ON MANAGEMENT OF SOFTWARE LICENSES.
“(a) Definition.—In this section—
the term ‘Director’ means the Director of the Office of Management and Budget; and
the term ‘executive agency’ has the meaning given that term in section 105 of title 5
, United States Code.
“(b) OMB Directive.—The Director shall issue a directive to require the Chief Information Officer of each executive agency to develop a comprehensive software licensing policy, which shall—
identify clear roles, responsibilities, and central oversight authority within the executive agency for managing enterprise software license agreements and commercial software licenses; and
“(2) require the Chief Information Officer of each executive agency to—
establish a comprehensive inventory, including 80 percent of software license spending and enterprise licenses in the executive agency, by identifying and collecting information about software license agreements using automated discovery and inventory tools;
regularly track and maintain software licenses to assist the executive agency in implementing decisions throughout the software license management life cycle;
analyze software usage and other data to make cost-effective decisions;
provide training relevant to software license management;
establish goals and objectives of the software license management program of the executive agency; and
consider the software license management life cycle phases, including the requisition, reception, deployment and maintenance, retirement, and disposal phases, to implement effective decisionmaking and incorporate existing standards, processes, and metrics.
“(c) Report on Software License Management.—
“(1) In general.—
Beginning in the first fiscal year beginning after the date of enactment of this Act [July 29, 2016], and in each of the following 5 fiscal years, the Chief Information Officer of each executive agency shall submit to the Director a report on the financial savings or avoidance of spending that resulted from improved software license management.
The Director shall make each report submitted under paragraph (1) publically available.”
Appropriate Use of Requirements Regarding Experience and Education of Contractor Personnel in the Procurement of Information Technology Services
Pub. L. 106–398, § 1 [[div. A], title VIII, § 813], Oct. 30, 2000, 114 Stat. 1654, 1654A–214, provided that:
“(a) Amendment of the Federal Acquisition Regulation.—
Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act [Oct. 30, 2000
], the Federal Acquisition Regulation issued in accordance with sections 6 and 25 of the Office of Federal Procurement Policy Act
([former] 41 U.S.C. 405
and 421) [see 41 U.S.C. 1121
, 1303] shall be amended to address the use, in the procurement of information technology services, of requirements regarding the experience and education of contractor personnel.
“(b) Content of Amendment.—The amendment issued pursuant to subsection (a) shall, at a minimum, provide that solicitations for the procurement of information technology services shall not set forth any minimum experience or educational requirement for proposed contractor personnel in order for a bidder to be eligible for award of a contract unless—
the contracting officer first determines that the needs of the executive agency cannot be met without any such requirement; or
the needs of the executive agency require the use of a type of contract other than a performance-based contract.
“(c) GAO Report.—Not later than one year after the date on which the regulations required by subsection (a) are published in the Federal Register, the Comptroller General shall submit to Congress an evaluation of—
executive agency compliance with the regulations; and
conformance of the regulations with existing law, together with any recommendations that the Comptroller General considers appropriate.
“(d) Definitions.—In this section:
The term ‘performance-based’, with respect to a contract, means that the contract includes the use of performance work statements that set forth contract requirements in clear, specific, and objective terms with measurable outcomes.”