124 STAT. 3768 PUBLIC LAW 111–350—JAN. 4, 2011 information that contracting officers may require under subsection (a): (1) REASONABLE LIMITATIONS.—Reasonable limitations on requests for sales data relating to commercial items. (2) LIMITATION ON SCOPE OF REQUEST.—A requirement that a contracting officer limit, to the maximum extent practicable, the scope of any request for information relating to commercial items from an offeror to only that information that is in the form regularly maintained by the offeror in commercial oper- ations. (3) INFORMATION NOT TO BE DISCLOSED.—A statement that any information received relating to commercial items that is exempt from disclosure under section 552(b) of title 5 shall not be disclosed by the Federal Government. § 3506. Price reductions for defective cost or pricing data (a) PROVISION REQUIRING ADJUSTMENT.— (1) IN GENERAL.—A prime contract (or change or modification to a prime contract) under which a certificate under section 3502(b) of this title is required shall contain a provision that the price of the contract to the Federal Government, including profit or fee, shall be adjusted to exclude any significant amount by which it may be determined by the head of the executive agency that the price was increased because the contractor (or any subcontractor required to make the certificate available) submitted defective cost or pricing data. (2) WHAT CONSTITUTES DEFECTIVE COST OR PRICING DATA.— For the purposes of this chapter, defective cost or pricing data are cost or pricing data that, as of the date of agreement on the price of the contract (or another date agreed on between the parties), were inaccurate, incomplete, or noncurrent. If for purposes of the preceding sentence the parties agree on a date other than the date of agreement on the price of the contract, the date agreed on by the parties shall be as close to the date of agreement on the price of the contract as is practicable. (b) VALID DEFENSE.—In determining for purposes of a contract price adjustment under a contract provision required by subsection (a) whether, and to what extent, a contract price was increased because the contractor (or a subcontractor) submitted defective cost or pricing data, it is a defense that the Federal Government did not rely on the defective data submitted by the contractor or subcon- tractor. (c) INVALID DEFENSES.—It is not a defense to an adjustment of the price of a contract under a contract provision required by subsection (a) that— (1) the price of the contract would not have been modified even if accurate, complete, and current cost or pricing data had been submitted by the contractor or subcontractor because the contractor or subcontractor— (A) was the sole source of the property or services pro- cured; or (B) otherwise was in a superior bargaining position with respect to the property or services procured; (2) the contracting officer should have known that the cost or pricing data in issue were defective even though the con- tractor or subcontractor took no affirmative action to bring
