Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement: Limitation on Use of Cost-Reimbursement Line Items (DFARS Case 2013-D016), 58693-58694 [2014-22858]

Download as PDF 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