Leasing versus Renting, 42524-42525 [2013-16920]

Download as PDF 42524 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 136 / Tuesday, July 16, 2013 / Notices Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, July 10, 2013. Michael J. Lewandowski, Associate Secretary of the Board. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE [FR Doc. 2013–16921 Filed 7–15–13; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6210–01–P NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM [Notice-MVC–2013–02; Docket 2013–0081; Sequence 2] emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with NOTICES Notice of Proposals To Engage in or To Acquire Companies Engaged in Permissible Nonbanking Activities The companies listed in this notice have given notice under section 4 of the Bank Holding Company Act (12 U.S.C. 1843) (BHC Act) and Regulation Y, (12 CFR part 225) to engage de novo, or to acquire or control voting securities or assets of a company, including the companies listed below, that engages either directly or through a subsidiary or other company, in a nonbanking activity that is listed in § 225.28 of Regulation Y (12 CFR 225.28) or that the Board has determined by Order to be closely related to banking and permissible for bank holding companies. Unless otherwise noted, these activities will be conducted throughout the United States. Each notice is available for inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank indicated. The notice also will be available for inspection at the offices of the Board of Governors. Interested persons may express their views in writing on the question whether the proposal complies with the standards of section 4 of the BHC Act. Unless otherwise noted, comments regarding the applications must be received at the Reserve Bank indicated or the offices of the Board of Governors not later than August 9, 2013. A. Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago (Colette A. Fried, Assistant Vice President) 230 South LaSalle Street, Chicago, Illinois 60690–1414: 1. First Merchants Corporation, Muncie, Indiana, to merge with CFS Bancorp, Inc., Munster, Indiana, and thereby indirectly acquire control of Citizens Financial Bank, Munster, Indiana, a federal savings bank, pursuant to sections 225.28(b)(4) of Regulation Y. Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, July 11, 2013. Margaret McCloskey Shanks, Deputy Secretary of the Board. [FR Doc. 2013–16979 Filed 7–15–13; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6210–01–P VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:49 Jul 15, 2013 Jkt 229001 GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION Leasing versus Renting Department of Defense (DoD), General Services Administration (GSA), and National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). ACTION: Request for information. AGENCIES: The Civilian Agency Acquisition Council and the Defense Acquisition Regulations Council (Councils) are seeking information that will assist in determining if there is a distinction between leasing and renting that is useful for the purposes stated in the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR). This Request for Information (RFI) does not address real property or its leasing. DATES: Interested parties should submit written comments to the Regulatory Secretariat at the address shown below on or before September 16, 2013. ADDRESSES: Submit comments by any of the following methods: • Regulations.gov: http:// www.regulations.gov. Submit comments via the Federal eRulemaking portal by searching for ‘‘Notice-MVC–2013–02’’. Select the link ‘‘Summit a Comment’’ that corresponds with ‘‘Notice-MVC–2013–02’’. Follow the instructions provided at the ‘‘Submit a Comment’’ screen. Please include your name, company name (if any), and ‘‘Notice-MVC–2013–02; Leasing versus Renting’’ on your attached document. • Fax: 202–501–4067. • Mail: General Services Administration, Regulatory Secretariat Division (MVCB), ATTN: Hada Flowers, 1800 F Street NW., 2nd Floor, Washington, DC 20405. Instructions: Please submit comments only in all correspondence related to this request. All comments received will be posted without change to http:// www.regulations.gov, including any personal and/or business confidential information provided. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Michael O. Jackson, Procurement Analyst, at 202–208–4949 for clarification of content. The Regulatory Secretariat at 202–501–4755 for information pertaining to status or publication schedules. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Councils are seeking public input on SUMMARY: PO 00000 Frm 00039 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 whether there is a distinction between renting and leasing that would be useful in performing the analysis required at FAR subpart 7.4 to determine the most cost effective approach, all factors considered. This RFI does not address real property or its leasing. ‘‘Real property’’ is defined in the Federal Management Regulation (FMR) at 41 CFR 102–71.20, and generally describes buildings and land. Some have suggested that there is no legal distinction between leasing and renting per the Uniform Commercial Code and that any distinctions in practice are irrelevant to FAR subpart 7.4, which is seeking the most cost effective method. Others have suggested there are distinctions in the terms and conditions that would be useful to recognize. We note that the FMR at 41 CFR Part 102–34 ‘‘Motor Vehicle Management’’ provides brief definitions of commercial vehicle rentals and leases at 41 CFR 102–34.35, with the only difference being that a rental is for less than 120 continuous days while a lease is 120 continuous days or more. We also note that at FAR subpart 8.11, Leasing of Motor Vehicles, the definition of ‘‘leasing’’ of motor vehicles uses ‘‘hire’’ and ‘‘rent’’ as synonyms for leasing. The Councils are also seeking any additional information to improve the guidance at FAR subpart 7.4. The Government Accountability Office (GAO) issued a report dated February 7, 2012, entitled ‘‘Air Force and Interior Can Benefit from Additional Guidance When Deciding Whether to Lease or Purchase Equipment’’ (GAO–12–281R). The GAO report noted that during fiscal years 2006 through 2010, Federal agencies spent more than $200 billion annually, on average, to purchase or lease equipment, with purchases accounting for 99 percent of this spending. GAO stated that this suggests that agencies may overlook the potential for savings by almost always purchasing when equipment is needed on a temporary basis. The GAO report focused on the lease versus purchase analysis, which they generally found inadequate in their selected sampling. While the only GAO recommendation for the FAR was that subpart 7.4 be revised to update the GSA contact information, some contracting officers suggested to GAO that they were uncertain about how and when to perform the analysis required in FAR subpart 7.4. The FAR Council welcomes all suggestions for revisions to FAR subpart 7.4 and, in particular, seeks input on the following questions: • Is there a distinction between rental agreements and leases (not related to real property)? E:\FR\FM\16JYN1.SGM 16JYN1 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 136 / Tuesday, July 16, 2013 / Notices Æ Are there uniform and recognized differences in the lengths of rental and leasing agreements? Do these lead to special funding considerations for the government? Æ Are there specific differences in other terms and conditions, such as maintenance, warranty, insurance, taxes, storage, and transportation? What are the specific distinctions? • FAR 7.402(a) and (b) provide circumstances indicating when the purchase or lease method is appropriate. Should rent be added as a third method? If so, when is renting a more appropriate method than purchasing or leasing and in what way would it impact the determination of most effective procurement approach (e.g., cost savings and efficiencies)? • Does short-term rental offer cost savings and efficiencies unavailable through leasing? • What additional guidance might be provided at FAR subpart 7.4 to clarify when and how to perform the required analysis? Dated: July 9, 2013. William Clark, Acting Director, Federal Acquisition Policy Division, Office of Governmentwide Acquisition Policy, Office of Acquisition Policy, Office of Governmentwide Policy. [FR Doc. 2013–16920 Filed 7–15–13; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6820–14–P DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Meeting; Subcommittee for Dose Reconstruction Reviews, Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health (ABRWH or the Advisory Board), National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with NOTICES In accordance with section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92–463), the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), announces the following meeting for the aforementioned subcommittee: Time and Date: 10:00 a.m.–5:00 p.m., Eastern Time, August 7, 2013. Place: Audio Conference Call via FTS Conferencing. The USA toll-free, dial-in number is 1–866–659–0537, and the pass code is 9933701. Status: Open to the public, but without an oral public comment period. Background: The Advisory Board was established under the Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act of 2000, to advise the President on a variety of policy and technical functions required to implement and effectively VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:49 Jul 15, 2013 Jkt 229001 manage the new compensation program. Key functions of the Advisory Board include providing advice on the development of probability of causation guidelines that have been promulgated by the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) as a final rule; advice on methods of dose reconstruction, which have also been promulgated by HHS as a final rule; advice on the scientific validity and quality of dose estimation and reconstruction efforts being performed for purposes of the compensation program; and advice on petitions to add classes of workers to the Special Exposure Cohort. In December 2000, the President delegated responsibility for funding, staffing, and operating the Advisory Board to HHS, which subsequently delegated this authority to CDC. NIOSH implements this responsibility for CDC. The charter was issued on August 3, 2001, renewed at appropriate intervals, and will expire on August 3, 2013. Purpose: The Advisory Board is charged with (a) providing advice to the Secretary, HHS, on the development of guidelines under Executive Order 13179; (b) providing advice to the Secretary, HHS, on the scientific validity and quality of dose reconstruction efforts performed for this program; and (c) upon request by the Secretary, HHS, advise the Secretary on whether there is a class of employees at any Department of Energy facility who were exposed to radiation but for whom it is not feasible to estimate their radiation dose, and on whether there is reasonable likelihood that such radiation doses may have endangered the health of members of this class. The Subcommittee for Dose Reconstruction Reviews was established to aid the Advisory Board in carrying out its duty to advise the Secretary, HHS, on dose reconstruction. Matters To Be Discussed: The agenda for the Subcommittee meeting includes: dose reconstruction program quality management and assurance activities, including current findings from NIOSH internal dose reconstruction blind reviews; and discussion of dose reconstruction cases under review (sets 8–9, and Savannah River Site, Rocky Flats Plant, and Los Alamos National Laboratory cases from sets 10–13). The agenda is subject to change as priorities dictate. In the event an individual cannot attend, written comments may be submitted. Any written comments received will be provided at the meeting and should be submitted to the contact person below well in advance of the meeting. Contact Person for More Information: Theodore Katz, Designated Federal Official, NIOSH, CDC, 1600 Clifton Road, Mailstop E– 20, Atlanta, Georgia 30333, Telephone: (513) 533–6800, Toll Free 1 (800) CDC–INFO, Email: ocas@cdc.gov. The Director, Management Analysis and Services Office, has been delegated the authority to sign Federal Register notices pertaining to announcements of meetings and other committee management activities, for both the Centers for Disease Control and PO 00000 Frm 00040 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 42525 Prevention and the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. Dana Redford, Acting Director, Management Analysis and Services Office Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. [FR Doc. 2013–16964 Filed 7–15–13; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4163–19–P DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Meeting; State, Tribal, Local and Territorial (STLT) Subcommittee, Advisory Committee to the Director (ACD), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) In accordance with section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92–463), the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) announces the following meeting of the aforementioned subcommittee: Time and Date: 8:30 a.m.–4:00 p.m., EDT, August 9, 2013. Place: CDC, Building 19, Rooms 254 and 255, 1600 Clifton Road NE., Atlanta, Georgia 30333. Status: Open to the public, limited only by the space available. The meeting rooms accommodate approximately 20 people. The public is welcome to participate during the public comment period, which is tentatively scheduled from 3:15 p.m. to 3:35 p.m. This meeting will also be available by teleconference. Please dial (888) 233–0592 and enter code 33288611. Purpose: The Subcommittee will provide advice to the CDC Director through the ACD on strategies and future needs and challenges faced by State, Tribal, Local and Territorial health agencies, and will provide guidance on opportunities for CDC. Matters To Be Discussed: The STLT Subcommittee members will discuss implementation of ACD-adopted recommendations related to the health department of the future and how CDC can best support STLT health departments. The agenda is subject to change as priorities dictate. Contact Person for More Information: Judy Monroe, M.D., Designated Federal Officer, STLT Subcommittee—ACD, CDC, 1600 Clifton Road, NE., M/S E–70, Atlanta, Georgia 30333, Telephone: (404) 498–0300, Email: OSTLTSDirector@cdc.gov. The Director, Management Analysis and Services Office, has been delegated the authority to sign Federal Register notices pertaining to announcements of meetings and other committee management activities, for both the Centers for Disease Control and E:\FR\FM\16JYN1.SGM 16JYN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 136 (Tuesday, July 16, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 42524-42525]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-16920]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION

NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION

[Notice-MVC-2013-02; Docket 2013-0081; Sequence 2]


Leasing versus Renting

AGENCIES:  Department of Defense (DoD), General Services Administration 
(GSA), and National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA).

ACTION: Request for information.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Civilian Agency Acquisition Council and the Defense 
Acquisition Regulations Council (Councils) are seeking information that 
will assist in determining if there is a distinction between leasing 
and renting that is useful for the purposes stated in the Federal 
Acquisition Regulation (FAR). This Request for Information (RFI) does 
not address real property or its leasing.

DATES: Interested parties should submit written comments to the 
Regulatory Secretariat at the address shown below on or before 
September 16, 2013.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments by any of the following methods:
     Regulations.gov: http://www.regulations.gov.
    Submit comments via the Federal eRulemaking portal by searching for 
``Notice-MVC-2013-02''. Select the link ``Summit a Comment'' that 
corresponds with ``Notice-MVC-2013-02''. Follow the instructions 
provided at the ``Submit a Comment'' screen. Please include your name, 
company name (if any), and ``Notice-MVC-2013-02; Leasing versus 
Renting'' on your attached document.
     Fax: 202-501-4067.
     Mail: General Services Administration, Regulatory 
Secretariat Division (MVCB), ATTN: Hada Flowers, 1800 F Street NW., 2nd 
Floor, Washington, DC 20405.
    Instructions: Please submit comments only in all correspondence 
related to this request. All comments received will be posted without 
change to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal and/or 
business confidential information provided.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Michael O. Jackson, Procurement 
Analyst, at 202-208-4949 for clarification of content. The Regulatory 
Secretariat at 202-501-4755 for information pertaining to status or 
publication schedules.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:  The Councils are seeking public input on 
whether there is a distinction between renting and leasing that would 
be useful in performing the analysis required at FAR subpart 7.4 to 
determine the most cost effective approach, all factors considered. 
This RFI does not address real property or its leasing. ``Real 
property'' is defined in the Federal Management Regulation (FMR) at 41 
CFR 102-71.20, and generally describes buildings and land.
    Some have suggested that there is no legal distinction between 
leasing and renting per the Uniform Commercial Code and that any 
distinctions in practice are irrelevant to FAR subpart 7.4, which is 
seeking the most cost effective method. Others have suggested there are 
distinctions in the terms and conditions that would be useful to 
recognize. We note that the FMR at 41 CFR Part 102-34 ``Motor Vehicle 
Management'' provides brief definitions of commercial vehicle rentals 
and leases at 41 CFR 102-34.35, with the only difference being that a 
rental is for less than 120 continuous days while a lease is 120 
continuous days or more. We also note that at FAR subpart 8.11, Leasing 
of Motor Vehicles, the definition of ``leasing'' of motor vehicles uses 
``hire'' and ``rent'' as synonyms for leasing.
    The Councils are also seeking any additional information to improve 
the guidance at FAR subpart 7.4. The Government Accountability Office 
(GAO) issued a report dated February 7, 2012, entitled ``Air Force and 
Interior Can Benefit from Additional Guidance When Deciding Whether to 
Lease or Purchase Equipment'' (GAO-12-281R). The GAO report noted that 
during fiscal years 2006 through 2010, Federal agencies spent more than 
$200 billion annually, on average, to purchase or lease equipment, with 
purchases accounting for 99 percent of this spending. GAO stated that 
this suggests that agencies may overlook the potential for savings by 
almost always purchasing when equipment is needed on a temporary basis. 
The GAO report focused on the lease versus purchase analysis, which 
they generally found inadequate in their selected sampling. While the 
only GAO recommendation for the FAR was that subpart 7.4 be revised to 
update the GSA contact information, some contracting officers suggested 
to GAO that they were uncertain about how and when to perform the 
analysis required in FAR subpart 7.4. The FAR Council welcomes all 
suggestions for revisions to FAR subpart 7.4 and, in particular, seeks 
input on the following questions:
     Is there a distinction between rental agreements and 
leases (not related to real property)?

[[Page 42525]]

    [cir] Are there uniform and recognized differences in the lengths 
of rental and leasing agreements? Do these lead to special funding 
considerations for the government?
    [cir] Are there specific differences in other terms and conditions, 
such as maintenance, warranty, insurance, taxes, storage, and 
transportation? What are the specific distinctions?
     FAR 7.402(a) and (b) provide circumstances indicating when 
the purchase or lease method is appropriate. Should rent be added as a 
third method? If so, when is renting a more appropriate method than 
purchasing or leasing and in what way would it impact the determination 
of most effective procurement approach (e.g., cost savings and 
efficiencies)?
     Does short-term rental offer cost savings and efficiencies 
unavailable through leasing?
     What additional guidance might be provided at FAR subpart 
7.4 to clarify when and how to perform the required analysis?

    Dated: July 9, 2013.
William Clark,
Acting Director, Federal Acquisition Policy Division, Office of 
Governmentwide Acquisition Policy, Office of Acquisition Policy, Office 
of Governmentwide Policy.
[FR Doc. 2013-16920 Filed 7-15-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6820-14-P