Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement: Limitation on Use of Cost-Reimbursement Line Items (DFARS Case 2013-D016), 58693-58694 [2014-22858]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
58693
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 189 / Tuesday, September 30, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
States prior to publication of the rule in
the Federal Register. A Major rule
cannot take effect until 60 days after it
is published in the Federal Register.
This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as
defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). This rule
will be effective September 30, 2014.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 372
Environmental protection,
Community right-to-know, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements, and
Toxic chemicals.
Dated: September 23, 2014.
Gina McCarthy,
Administrator.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 11023 and 11048.
2. In § 372.65, paragraph (c) is
amended by adding in the table the
entry for ‘‘Nonylphenol’’ in alphabetical
order to read as follows:
■
Therefore, 40 CFR part 372 is
amended as follows:
PART 372—TOXIC CHEMICAL
RELEASE REPORTING: COMMUNITY
RIGHT-TO-KNOW
1. The authority citation for part 372
continues to read as follows:
§ 372.65 Chemicals and chemical
categories to which this part applies.
*
*
*
(c) * * *
*
*
■
Category name
*
Nonylphenol (This
104–40–5
11066–49–2
25154–52–3
26543–97–5
84852–15–3
90481–04–2
*
*
*
*
*
category includes only those chemicals listed below) ..........................................................................................
4-Nonylphenol.
Isononylphenol.
Nonylphenol.
4-Isononylphenol.
4-Nonylphenol, branched.
Nonylphenol, branched.
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
The Coast
Guard published a final rule in the
Federal Register on September 22, 2014
(79 FR 56491), which when it becomes
effective on October 22, 2014, will
remove references to type codes in
regulations on the carriage and labeling
of Coast Guard-approved personal
flotation devices. In the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section of the
document, two characters, ‘‘–2’’ were
erroneously inserted between the area
code and last seven digits of the phone
number. This document corrects the
phone number to read ‘‘202–372–1394.’’
Coast Guard
33 CFR Parts 175 and 181
46 CFR Parts 160 and 169
[Docket No. USCG–2013–0263]
RIN 1625–AC02
Personal Flotation Devices Labeling
and Standards
Correction
Coast Guard, DHS.
ACTION: Final rule; correction.
AGENCY:
The Coast Guard published a
final rule in the Federal Register on
September 22, 2014, which removes
references to type codes in its
regulations on the carriage and labeling
of Coast Guard-approved personal
flotation devices. Two extra characters
were included in the phone number for
the Coast Guard person to contact for
more information about that rule. This
document corrects that phone number.
DATES: This correction is effective
September 30, 2014.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
information about this document call or
email Ms. Brandi Baldwin, Lifesaving
and Fire Safety Division, Coast Guard;
SUMMARY:
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
*
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
16:10 Sep 29, 2014
*
telephone 202–372–1394, email
brandi.a.baldwin@uscg.mil.
*
[FR Doc. 2014–23255 Filed 9–29–14; 8:45 am]
VerDate Sep<11>2014
Effective date
Jkt 232001
Dated: September 24, 2014.
Katia Cervoni,
Chief, Office of Regulations and
Administrative Law, U.S. Coast Guard.
[FR Doc. 2014–23187 Filed 9–29–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110–04–P
Frm 00039
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
1/1/15
*
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Defense Acquisition Regulations
System
48 CFR Parts 202, 207, 209, 216, and
234
RIN 0750–AI16
Defense Federal Acquisition
Regulation Supplement: Limitation on
Use of Cost-Reimbursement Line Items
(DFARS Case 2013–D016)
Defense Acquisition
Regulations System, Department of
Defense (DoD).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
DoD has adopted as final,
with changes, an interim rule amending
the Defense Federal Acquisition
Regulation Supplement (DFARS) to
implement section 811 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2013, which prohibits DoD from
entering into cost-type contracts for
production of major defense acquisition
programs (MDAPs). In implementing
section 811 of the NDAA for FY 2013,
DoD further defined the prohibition on
entering into cost-type contracts to
explicitly state the prohibition also
applies to entering into costreimbursement line items for the
production of MDAPs.
DATES: Effective September 30, 2014.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms.
Janetta Brewer, telephone 571–372–
6104.
SUMMARY:
In rule FR Doc. 2014–22373,
published on September 22, 2014, (79
FR 56491), make the following
correction:
On page 56491, in the second column,
fourth line from the bottom, remove
‘‘–2’’.
PO 00000
*
*
E:\FR\FM\30SER1.SGM
30SER1
58694
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 189 / Tuesday, September 30, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
I. Background
DoD published an interim rule at 79
FR 4631 on January 29, 2014, to
implement section 811 of the National
Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for
Fiscal Year (FY) 2013 (Pub. L. 112–239),
which was enacted January 2, 2013.
Two comments were submitted on the
interim rule.
Section 811(a) instructs DoD to
modify the acquisition regulations to
prohibit DoD from entering into costtype contracts for the production of
major defense acquisition programs
(MDAPs) for contracts entered into on or
after October 1, 2014, with one
exception in section 811(b). Under
section 811(b), the Under Secretary of
Defense for Acquisition, Technology,
and Logistics may submit to the
congressional defense committees: (1) A
written certification that the particular
cost-type contract is needed to provide
a required capability in a timely, costeffective manner; and (2) An
explanation of the steps taken to ensure
that the use of cost-type pricing is
limited to only those line items or
portions of the contract where such
pricing is needed to achieve the purpose
of the exception. In implementing
section 811 of the NDAA for FY 2013,
DoD further defined the prohibition on
entering into cost-type contracts to
explicitly state the prohibition also
applies to entering into costreimbursement line items for the
production of MDAPs.
II. Discussion and Analysis
DoD reviewed the public comments in
the development of the final rule. A
discussion of the comments and the
changes made to the rule as a result of
those comments is provided as follows:
Comment: The respondent stated that
the term ‘‘cost-type reimbursement
contract’’ at DFARS 234.004(2)(i)(C) was
ambiguous and recommended that the
term ‘‘cost-reimbursement contract’’ be
used instead to maintain consistency
with other references within the
acquisition regulations.
Response: The text at DFARS
234.004(2)(i)(C) has been revised to
replace the term ‘‘cost-type
reimbursement contract’’ with ‘‘costreimbursement type contract.’’
Comment: The respondent stated that
the reference to DFARS 201.101 within
Section II, Discussion and Analysis, of
the Federal Register Notice published
for the proposed rule should be DFARS
202.101.
Response: The respondent is correct.
However, the comment did not
necessitate changes to the interim rule
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:10 Sep 29, 2014
Jkt 232001
as the rule itself cited DFARS 202.101
accurately.
would meet the requirements of the
statute.
III. Executive Orders 12866 and 13563
Executive Orders (E.O.s) 12866 and
13563 direct agencies to assess all costs
and benefits of available regulatory
alternatives and, if regulation is
necessary, to select regulatory
approaches that maximize net benefits
(including potential economic,
environmental, public health and safety
effects, distributive impacts, and
equity). E.O. 13563 emphasizes the
importance of quantifying both costs
and benefits, of reducing costs, of
harmonizing rules, and of promoting
flexibility. This is not a significant
regulatory action and, therefore, was not
subject to review under Section 6(b) of
E.O. 12866, Regulatory Planning and
Review, dated September 30, 1993. This
rule is not a major rule under 5 U.S.C.
804.
V. Paperwork Reduction Act
IV. Regulatory Flexibility Act
DoD has prepared a Final Regulatory
Flexibility Analysis (FRFA) consistent
with the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5
U.S.C. 601, et seq. The FRFA is
summarized as follows:
This rule amends the DFARS to
implement section 811 of the NDAA for
FY 2013, which prohibits the DoD from
entering into cost-type contracts for the
production of major defense acquisition
programs (MDAPs) unless the Under
Secretary of Defense for Acquisition,
Technology, and Logistics submits an
exception to the congressional defense
committees. In implementing section
811 of the NDAA for FY 2013, DoD
further defined the prohibition on
entering into cost-type contracts to
explicitly state the prohibition also
applies to entering into costreimbursement line items for the
production of MDAPs.
Small entities do not have or are
exempt from having the complex,
expensive business and management
systems required to manage the
complex, higher risk, and expensive
major defense acquisition programs
(MDAPs). Small entities do play a
significant role in performing as
subcontractors and component
manufacturers for MDAPs, but this rule
does not apply to subcontractors and
component manufacturers.
No comments were received from the
public in response to the initial
regulatory flexibility analysis.
This rule does not impose new
recordkeeping or reporting requirements
and does not duplicate, overlap, or
conflict with any other Federal rules.
There are no known significant
alternative approaches to the rule that
PO 00000
Frm 00040
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
The rule does not contain any
information collection requirements that
require the approval of the Office of
Management and Budget under the
Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C.
chapter 35).
List of Subjects in 48 CFR Parts 202,
207, 209, 216, and 234
Government procurement.
Manuel Quinones,
Editor, Defense Acquisition Regulations
System.
Therefore, DoD adopts as final the
interim rule published at 79 FR 4631 on
January 29, 2014, with the following
changes:
PART 234—MAJOR SYSTEM
ACQUISITION
1. The authority citation for part 234
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 41 U.S.C. 1303 and 48 CFR
Chapter 1.
234.004
[Amended]
2. Section 234.004(2)(i)(C)
introductory text is amended by
removing ‘‘cost-type reimbursement
contact’’ and adding ‘‘costreimbursement type contract’’ in its
place.
■
[FR Doc. 2014–22858 Filed 9–29–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001–06–P
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Defense Acquisition Regulations
System
48 CFR Parts 212, 225, 232, and 252
RIN 0750–AI14
Defense Federal Acquisition
Regulation Supplement; Payment in
Local Currency (Afghanistan) (DFARS
Case 2013–D029)
Defense Acquisition
Regulations System, Department of
Defense (DoD).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
DoD is issuing a final rule
amending the Defense Federal
Acquisition Regulation Supplement
(DFARS) to incorporate into the DFARS
policies and procedures concerning
payment for contracts for performance
in Afghanistan.
DATES: Effective September 30, 2014.
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\30SER1.SGM
30SER1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 189 (Tuesday, September 30, 2014)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 58693-58694]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-22858]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Defense Acquisition Regulations System
48 CFR Parts 202, 207, 209, 216, and 234
RIN 0750-AI16
Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement: Limitation on
Use of Cost-Reimbursement Line Items (DFARS Case 2013-D016)
AGENCY: Defense Acquisition Regulations System, Department of Defense
(DoD).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: DoD has adopted as final, with changes, an interim rule
amending the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS)
to implement section 811 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2013, which prohibits DoD from entering into cost-type
contracts for production of major defense acquisition programs (MDAPs).
In implementing section 811 of the NDAA for FY 2013, DoD further
defined the prohibition on entering into cost-type contracts to
explicitly state the prohibition also applies to entering into cost-
reimbursement line items for the production of MDAPs.
DATES: Effective September 30, 2014.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Janetta Brewer, telephone 571-372-
6104.
[[Page 58694]]
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
DoD published an interim rule at 79 FR 4631 on January 29, 2014, to
implement section 811 of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA)
for Fiscal Year (FY) 2013 (Pub. L. 112-239), which was enacted January
2, 2013. Two comments were submitted on the interim rule.
Section 811(a) instructs DoD to modify the acquisition regulations
to prohibit DoD from entering into cost-type contracts for the
production of major defense acquisition programs (MDAPs) for contracts
entered into on or after October 1, 2014, with one exception in section
811(b). Under section 811(b), the Under Secretary of Defense for
Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics may submit to the congressional
defense committees: (1) A written certification that the particular
cost-type contract is needed to provide a required capability in a
timely, cost-effective manner; and (2) An explanation of the steps
taken to ensure that the use of cost-type pricing is limited to only
those line items or portions of the contract where such pricing is
needed to achieve the purpose of the exception. In implementing section
811 of the NDAA for FY 2013, DoD further defined the prohibition on
entering into cost-type contracts to explicitly state the prohibition
also applies to entering into cost-reimbursement line items for the
production of MDAPs.
II. Discussion and Analysis
DoD reviewed the public comments in the development of the final
rule. A discussion of the comments and the changes made to the rule as
a result of those comments is provided as follows:
Comment: The respondent stated that the term ``cost-type
reimbursement contract'' at DFARS 234.004(2)(i)(C) was ambiguous and
recommended that the term ``cost-reimbursement contract'' be used
instead to maintain consistency with other references within the
acquisition regulations.
Response: The text at DFARS 234.004(2)(i)(C) has been revised to
replace the term ``cost-type reimbursement contract'' with ``cost-
reimbursement type contract.''
Comment: The respondent stated that the reference to DFARS 201.101
within Section II, Discussion and Analysis, of the Federal Register
Notice published for the proposed rule should be DFARS 202.101.
Response: The respondent is correct. However, the comment did not
necessitate changes to the interim rule as the rule itself cited DFARS
202.101 accurately.
III. Executive Orders 12866 and 13563
Executive Orders (E.O.s) 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess
all costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public
health and safety effects, distributive impacts, and equity). E.O.
13563 emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and benefits,
of reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, and of promoting flexibility.
This is not a significant regulatory action and, therefore, was not
subject to review under Section 6(b) of E.O. 12866, Regulatory Planning
and Review, dated September 30, 1993. This rule is not a major rule
under 5 U.S.C. 804.
IV. Regulatory Flexibility Act
DoD has prepared a Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (FRFA)
consistent with the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601, et seq.
The FRFA is summarized as follows:
This rule amends the DFARS to implement section 811 of the NDAA for
FY 2013, which prohibits the DoD from entering into cost-type contracts
for the production of major defense acquisition programs (MDAPs) unless
the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and
Logistics submits an exception to the congressional defense committees.
In implementing section 811 of the NDAA for FY 2013, DoD further
defined the prohibition on entering into cost-type contracts to
explicitly state the prohibition also applies to entering into cost-
reimbursement line items for the production of MDAPs.
Small entities do not have or are exempt from having the complex,
expensive business and management systems required to manage the
complex, higher risk, and expensive major defense acquisition programs
(MDAPs). Small entities do play a significant role in performing as
subcontractors and component manufacturers for MDAPs, but this rule
does not apply to subcontractors and component manufacturers.
No comments were received from the public in response to the
initial regulatory flexibility analysis.
This rule does not impose new recordkeeping or reporting
requirements and does not duplicate, overlap, or conflict with any
other Federal rules. There are no known significant alternative
approaches to the rule that would meet the requirements of the statute.
V. Paperwork Reduction Act
The rule does not contain any information collection requirements
that require the approval of the Office of Management and Budget under
the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. chapter 35).
List of Subjects in 48 CFR Parts 202, 207, 209, 216, and 234
Government procurement.
Manuel Quinones,
Editor, Defense Acquisition Regulations System.
Therefore, DoD adopts as final the interim rule published at 79 FR
4631 on January 29, 2014, with the following changes:
PART 234--MAJOR SYSTEM ACQUISITION
0
1. The authority citation for part 234 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 41 U.S.C. 1303 and 48 CFR Chapter 1.
234.004 [Amended]
0
2. Section 234.004(2)(i)(C) introductory text is amended by removing
``cost-type reimbursement contact'' and adding ``cost-reimbursement
type contract'' in its place.
[FR Doc. 2014-22858 Filed 9-29-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001-06-P
