Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement: Inflation Adjustment of Acquisition-Related Thresholds (DFARS Case 2014-D025), 65912-65917 [2014-26266]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
65912
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 215 / Thursday, November 6, 2014 / Proposed Rules
apply the Rules of Practice to
adjudicatory proceedings for the
assessment of civil penalties by the EPA
under its Act to Prevent Pollution from
Ships authority, and will revise the
mailing and hand delivery address for
the EAB to reflect the Board’s
relocation. Thus, Executive Order 13132
does not apply to this action.
F. Executive Order 13175 Consultation
and Coordination With Indian Tribal
Governments
This action does not have tribal
implications, as specified in Executive
Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9,
2000). This action will apply the Rules
of Practice to adjudicatory proceedings
for the assessment of civil penalties by
the EPA under its Act to Prevent
Pollution from Ships authority, and will
revise the mailing and hand delivery
address for the EAB to reflect the
Board’s relocation. Thus, Executive
Order 13175 does not apply to this
action.
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of
Children From Environmental Health
and Safety Risks
The EPA interprets EO 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997) as applying only
to those regulatory actions that concern
health or safety risks, such that the
analysis required under section 5–501 of
the EO has the potential to influence the
regulation. This action is not subject to
EO 13045 because it does not establish
an environmental standard intended to
mitigate health or safety risks.
rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use
This action is not subject to Executive
Order 13211 (66 FR 28355 (May 22,
2001)), because it is not a significant
regulatory action under Executive Order
12866.
I. National Technology Transfer
Advancement Act
Section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (‘‘NTTAA’’), Public Law
104–113, 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note)
directs the EPA to use voluntary
consensus standards in its regulatory
activities unless to do so would be
inconsistent with applicable law or
otherwise impractical. Voluntary
consensus standards are technical
standards (e.g., materials specifications,
test methods, sampling procedures, and
business practices) that are developed or
adopted by voluntary consensus
standards bodies. NTTAA directs the
EPA to provide Congress, through OMB,
explanations when the Agency decides
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:28 Nov 05, 2014
Jkt 235001
not to use available and applicable
voluntary consensus standards.
This action does not involve technical
standards. Therefore, the EPA did not
consider the use of any voluntary
consensus standards.
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal
Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and
Low-Income Populations
Executive Order (EO) 12898 (59 FR
7629 (Feb. 16, 1994)) establishes federal
executive policy on environmental
justice. Its main provision directs
Federal agencies, to the greatest extent
practicable and permitted by law, to
make environmental justice part of their
mission by identifying and addressing,
as appropriate, disproportionately high
and adverse human health or
environmental effects of their programs,
policies, and activities on minority
populations and low-income
populations in the United States.
The EPA has determined that this rule
will not have disproportionately high
and adverse human health or
environmental effects on minority or
low-income populations because it does
not affect the level of protection
provided to human health or the
environment. This action will apply the
Rules of Practice to adjudicatory
proceedings for the assessment of civil
penalties by the EPA under its Act to
Prevent Pollution from Ships authority,
and will revise the mailing and hand
delivery address for the EAB to reflect
the Board’s relocation.
V. Statutory Authority
Statutory authority for this proposed
action comes from sections 1903 and
1908 of the Act to Prevent Pollution
from Ships (APPS) (33 U.S.C. 1901 et
seq.).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 22
Environmental protection,
Administrative practice and procedures,
Air pollution control, Hazardous
substances, Hazardous waste, Penalties,
Pesticides and pests, Poison prevention,
Water pollution control.
Dated: October 23, 2014.
Gina McCarthy,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2014–26318 Filed 11–5–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Defense Acquisition Regulations
System
48 CFR Parts 202, 203, 205, 207, 211,
212, 215, 217, 218, 219, 225, 228, 234,
236, 237, 250, and 252
RIN 0750–AI43
Defense Federal Acquisition
Regulation Supplement: Inflation
Adjustment of Acquisition-Related
Thresholds (DFARS Case 2014–D025)
Defense Acquisition
Regulations System, Department of
Defense (DoD).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
DoD is proposing to amend
the Defense Federal Acquisition
Regulation Supplement (DFARS) to
further implement the U.S.C. statute on
inflation adjustment of acquisitionrelated dollar thresholds. This statute
requires an adjustment every five years
of acquisition-related thresholds for
inflation using the Consumer Price
Index for all urban consumers, except
for the Construction Wage Rate
Requirements statute (Davis-Bacon Act),
Service Contract Labor Standards
statute, and trade agreements
thresholds. DoD is also proposing to use
the same methodology to adjust some
nonstatutory DFARS acquisition-related
thresholds in 2015.
DATES: Comment Date: Comments on
the proposed rule should be submitted
in writing to the address shown below
on or before January 5, 2015, to be
considered in the formation of the final
rule.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments
identified by DFARS Case 2014–D025,
using any of the following methods:
Æ Regulations.gov: https://
www.regulations.gov. Submit comments
via the Federal eRulemaking portal by
entering ‘‘DFARS Case 2014–D025’’
under the heading ‘‘Enter keyword or
ID’’ and selecting ‘‘Search.’’ Select the
link ‘‘Submit a Comment’’ that
corresponds with ‘‘DFARS Case 2014–
D025.’’ Follow the instructions provided
at the ‘‘Submit a Comment’’ screen.
Please include your name, company
name (if any), and ‘‘DFARS Case 2014–
D025’’ on your attached document.
Æ Email: osd.dfars@mail.mil. Include
DFARS Case 2014–D025 in the subject
line of the message.
Æ Fax: 571–372–6094.
Æ Mail: Defense Acquisition
Regulations System, Attn: Ms. Amy G.
Williams, OUSD (AT&L) DPAP/DARS,
Room 3B941, 3060 Defense Pentagon,
Washington, DC 20301–3060.
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\06NOP1.SGM
06NOP1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 215 / Thursday, November 6, 2014 / Proposed Rules
Comments received generally will be
posted without change to https://
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided. To
confirm receipt of your comment(s),
please check www.regulations.gov,
approximately two to three days after
submission to verify posting (except
allow 30 days for posting of comments
submitted by mail).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms.
Amy G. Williams, Defense Acquisition
Regulations System, OUSD (AT&L)
DPAP/DARS, Room 3B941, 3060
Defense Pentagon, Washington, DC
20301–3060. Telephone 571–372–6106.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
This rule proposes to amend multiple
DFARS parts to further implement 41
U.S.C. 1908. Section 1908 requires an
adjustment every five years (on October
1 of each year evenly divisible by five)
of statutory acquisition-related
thresholds for inflation, using the
Consumer Price Index (CPI) for all urban
consumers, except for the Construction
Wage Rate Requirements statute (DavisBacon Act), Service Contract Labor
Standards statute, and trade agreements
thresholds (see FAR 1.109). As a matter
of policy, DoD is also proposing to use
the same methodology to adjust some
nonstatutory DFARS acquisition-related
thresholds. All proposed threshold
adjustments would become effective on
October 1, 2015.
FAR case 2014–022 proposes
comparable changes to acquisitionrelated thresholds in the FAR.
This is the third review of DFARS
acquisition-related thresholds since the
statute was enacted on October 28, 2004
(section 807 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year (FY)
2004). The last review was conducted
under DFARS case 2009–D003. The
final rule was published under that case
in the Federal Register on August 2,
2010 (75 FR 45072), effective October 1,
2010.
rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
II. Analysis
A. What is an acquisition-related
threshold?
This case builds on the review of
DFARS thresholds in 2005 and 2010,
using the same interpretation of an
acquisition-related threshold. 41 U.S.C.
1908 is applicable to ‘‘a dollar threshold
that is specified in law as a factor in
defining the scope of the applicability of
a policy, procedure, requirement, or
restriction provided in that law to the
procurement of property or services by
an Executive agency, as the [FAR]
Council determines.’’
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:28 Nov 05, 2014
Jkt 235001
There are other thresholds in the
DFARS that, while not specified in law,
nevertheless meet all the other criteria.
These thresholds may have their origin
in Executive order or regulation.
Therefore, as used in this case,
‘‘acquisition-related threshold’’ has a
broader meaning, i.e., a threshold that is
specified in law, Executive order, or
regulation as a factor in defining the
scope of the applicability of a policy,
procedure, requirement, or restriction
provided in that law, Executive order, or
regulation to the procurement of
property or services by an Executive
agency, as determined by the FAR
Council. Acquisition-related thresholds
are generally tied to the value of a
contract, subcontract, or modification.
Examples of thresholds that are not
‘‘acquisition-related,’’ as defined in this
case, are thresholds relating to claims,
penalties, withholding, payments,
required levels of insurance, small
business size standards, liquidated
damages, etc. This report does not
address thresholds that are not
acquisition-related.
B. What acquisition-related thresholds
are not subject to escalation adjustment
under this case?
41 U.S.C. 1908 does not permit
escalation of acquisition-related
thresholds established by the
Construction Wage Rate Requirements
statute (Davis Bacon Act), the Service
Contract Labor Standards statute, or the
United States Trade Representative
pursuant to the authority of the Trade
Agreements Act of 1979.
Also, the statute does not authorize
DoD to escalate thresholds originating in
Executive order or the implementing
agency (such as the Department of Labor
or the Small Business Administration),
unless the Executive order or agency
regulations are first amended.
C. How does DoD analyze escalation of
a statutory acquisition-related
threshold?
If an acquisition-related threshold is
based on statute, the matrix at https://
www.acq.osd.mil/dpap/dars/pgi/docs/
2014-D025_(p)_TAB_E_matrix_Sep_12_
14.xls identifies the statute, and the
statutory threshold, including the
original threshold and any subsequent
revisions to it.
With the exception of thresholds set
by the Construction Wage Rate
Requirements statute (Davis Bacon Act),
the Service Contract Labor Standards
statute, and trade agreements, 41 U.S.C.
1908 requires adjustment of the
acquisition-related thresholds for
inflation using the Consumer Price
Index (CPI) for all-urban consumers.
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
65913
Acquisition-related thresholds in
statutes that were in effect on October
1, 2000, are only subject to escalation
from that date forward. Acquisitionrelated thresholds in statutes that took
effect after October 1, 2000, are
escalated from the date that they took
effect. For purposes of this proposed
rule, the matrix includes calculation of
escalation based on the estimated CPI
value for March 2015 (currently
estimated at 243.0) divided by the CPI
for the date of enactment of the statute
or regulation (October 2000, for statutes
enacted prior to October 1, 2000). DoD
will subsequently adjust as necessary
before issuance of the final rule.
Once the escalation factor is applied
to the acquisition-related threshold,
then statutory thresholds must be
rounded as follows:
< $10,000—Nearest $500
$10,000–<$100,000—Nearest $5,000
$100,000–<$1,000,000—Nearest $50,000
$1,000,000 or more—Nearest $500,000
The calculations in this proposed rule
are all based on the base year amount,
because escalated amounts in the 2005
rule were subject to rounding and using
those amounts as the base would distort
future calculations.
In 2010, some thresholds (e.g.,
$3,000), although subject to inflation
calculation, did not actually change,
because the inflation in 2010 was
insufficient to overcome the rounding
requirements—i.e., the escalation factor,
when applied, did not cause the
escalated values to be high enough to
round to the next higher value.
However, in FY 2015, thresholds that
did not escalate in 2010 will now
escalate because of five additional years
of inflation. Likewise, some thresholds
that were escalated in 2010 (e.g.,
$150,000) will not escalate in 2015.
This rule proposes to remove the
major defense acquisition program
thresholds (expressed in FY 1990
constant dollars) from the definition of
‘‘major weapon system’’ at DFARS
234.7001. The current major defense
acquisition program thresholds in FY
2014 constant dollars are set forth in
DoD Instruction 5000.02, established in
accordance with the authority in 10
U.S.C. 2430(b), which allows the
Secretary of Defense to adjust the
amounts (and the base fiscal year)
provided in subsection (a)(2) on the
basis of DoD escalation rates (rather
than the CPI for all urban consumers).
The most recent thresholds were
calculated by the DoD Comptroller, and
coordinated with the Cost Assessment
and Program Evaluation (CAPE) Office
and the DoD General Counsel. In
accordance with 10 U.S.C. 2430(b),
E:\FR\FM\06NOP1.SGM
06NOP1
65914
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 215 / Thursday, November 6, 2014 / Proposed Rules
these thresholds were reported to
Congress in December 2013. There is no
need to provide these thresholds in the
DFARS. The term ‘‘major defense
acquisition program’’ is already defined
in DFARS 202.1 and used in multiple
DFARS parts (e.g., 204, 209, 215, and
216).
This proposed rule has been
coordinated with the Small Business
Administration in areas of the
regulation for which they are the lead
agency.
D. How does DoD analyze a
nonstatutory acquisition-related
threshold?
No statutory authorization is required
to escalate thresholds that were set as
policy within the DFARS. Escalation of
the DoD policy acquisition-related
thresholds is generally recommended
using the same formula applied to the
statutory thresholds, unless a reason has
been provided for not doing so.
Escalation is calculated using the same
procedures as were explained for the
statutory thresholds, to provide
consistency.
However, nonstatutory thresholds that
exceed $10 million may be rounded as
follows:
$10 million–<$100 million—Nearest $5
million
$100 million–<$1 billion—Nearest $50
million
$1 billion or more—Nearest $500
million
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 does not expect this rule to have
a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities
within the meaning of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601, et seq.,
because the rule maintains the status
quo by adjusting thresholds for actual
inflationary increases in the CPI.
However, an Initial Regulatory
Flexibility Analysis has been performed
and is summarized as follows:
This rule proposes to amend the
Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation
Supplement (DFARS) to implement 41
U.S.C. 1908 and to amend other
acquisition-related dollar thresholds
that are based on policy rather than
statute in order to adjust for the
changing value of the dollar. 41 U.S.C.
1908 requires adjustment every five
years of statutory acquisition-related
dollar thresholds, except for
Construction Wage Rate Requirements
statute (Davis-Bacon Act), Service
Contract Labor Standards statute, and
trade agreements thresholds. While
reviewing all statutory acquisitionrelated thresholds, this case presented
an opportunity to also review all
nonstatutory acquisition-related
thresholds in the DFARS that are based
on policy.
The objective of the case is to
maintain the status quo, by adjusting
acquisition-related thresholds for
inflation. The legal basis is 41 U.S.C.
1908. The statute does not authorize the
DFARS to escalate thresholds
originating in Executive orders or the
implementing agency (such as the
Department of Labor or the Small
Business Administration), unless the
Executive order or agency regulations
are first amended.
This rule will likely affect to some
extent all small business concerns that
submit offers or are awarded contracts
by the Federal Government. However,
most of the threshold changes proposed
in this rule are not expected to have any
significant economic impact on small
business concerns because any
threshold changes are intended to
maintain the status quo by adjusting for
changes in the value of the dollar. Often
any impact will be beneficial, by
preventing burdensome requirements
from applying to more and more
acquisitions, as the dollar loses value.
The rule does not impose any new
reporting, recordkeeping, or compliance
requirements. Changes in thresholds for
approved information collection
requirements are intended to maintain
the status quo and prevent those
requirements from increasing over time.
The rule does not duplicate, overlap,
or conflict with any other Federal rules.
There are no practical alternatives
that will accomplish the objectives of
the statute.
DoD invites comments from small
business concerns and other interested
parties on the expected impact of this
rule on small entities.
DoD will also consider comments
from small entities concerning the
existing regulations in subparts affected
by the rule in accordance with 5 U.S.C.
610. Interested parties must submit such
comments separately and should cite 5
U.S.C. 610 (DFARS Case 2014–D025), in
correspondence.
V. Paperwork Reduction Act
The Paperwork Reduction Act does
apply. The proposed changes to the FAR
do not impose new information
collection requirements that require the
approval of the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB) under 44 U.S.C.
3501, et seq. By adjusting the thresholds
for inflation, the status quo for the
current information collection
requirements are maintained under the
following OMB clearance numbers:
OMB control No.
Title
0704–0187 ........
0704–0229 ........
Information Collection in Support of the DOD Acquisition Process (Solicitation Phase) ....................
Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement Part 225, Foreign Acquisition, and related
clauses.
Defense FAR Supplement (DFARS) Part 205, Publicizing Contract Actions, and DFARS 252–205–
7000, Provision of Information to Cooperative Agreement Holders.
Organizational Conflicts of Interest in Major Defense Acquisition Programs ......................................
rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
0704–0286 ........
0704–0477 ........
However, the rule contains one
information collection requirement that
requires the approval of the Office of
Management and Budget under the
Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:28 Nov 05, 2014
Jkt 235001
DFARS part
chapter 35). Accordingly, DoD has
submitted to the Office of Management
and Budget a request for approval of a
new information collection requirement
entitled ‘‘DFARS Part 249, Termination
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
208, 209, 226, 235
225
205
209.5
of Contracts, and Associated DFARS
Clauses at 252.249.’’
A. Public reporting burden for this
collection of information is estimated to
average approximately .75 hours per
E:\FR\FM\06NOP1.SGM
06NOP1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 215 / Thursday, November 6, 2014 / Proposed Rules
response, including the time for
reviewing instructions, searching
existing data sources, gathering and
maintaining the data needed, and
completing and reviewing the collection
of information.
The annual reporting burden
estimated as follows:
Respondents: 42.
Responses per respondent:
Approximately 6.
Total annual responses: 260.
Preparation hours per response:
Approximately .75 hours
Total response Burden Hours: 193.
rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
B. Request for Comments Regarding
Paperwork Burden
Written comments and
recommendations on the proposed
information collection, including
suggestions for reducing this burden,
should be sent to Ms. Jasmeet Seehra at
the Office of Management and Budget,
Desk Officer for DoD, Room 10236, New
Executive Office Building, Washington,
DC 20503, or email Jasmeet_K._Seehra@
omb.eop.gov, with a copy to the Defense
Acquisition Regulations System, Attn:
Ms. Amy G. Williams,
OUSD(AT&L)DPAP/DARS, Room
3B941, 3060 Defense Pentagon,
Washington, DC 20301–3060.
Comments can be received from 30 to 60
days after the date of this notice, but
comments to OMB will be most useful
if received by OMB within 30 days after
the date of this notice.
Public comments are particularly
invited on: Whether this collection of
information is necessary for the proper
performance of functions of the DFARS,
and will have practical utility; whether
our estimate of the public burden of this
collection of information is accurate,
and based on valid assumptions and
methodology; ways to enhance the
quality, utility, and clarity of the
information to be collected; and ways in
which we can minimize the burden of
the collection of information on those
who are to respond, through the use of
appropriate technological collection
techniques or other forms of information
technology.
To request more information on this
proposed information collection or to
obtain a copy of the proposal and
associated collection instruments,
please write to the Defense Acquisition
Regulations System, Attn: Ms. Amy G.
Williams, OUSD(AT&L)DPAP/DARS,
Room 3B941, 3060 Defense Pentagon,
Washington, DC 20301–3060, or email
osd.dfars@mail.mil. Include DFARS
Case 2014–D025 in the subject line of
the message.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:28 Nov 05, 2014
Jkt 235001
List of Subjects in 48 CFR Parts 202,
203, 205, 207, 211, 212, 215, 217, 218,
219, 225, 228, 234, 236, 237, 250, and
252
Government Procurement.
Manuel Quinones,
Editor, Defense Acquisition Regulations
System.
Therefore, 48 CFR parts 202, 203, 205,
207, 211, 212, 215, 217, 218, 219, 225,
228, 234, 236, 237, 250, and 252 are
proposed to be amended as follows:
■ 1. The authority citation for 48 CFR
parts 202, 203, 205, 212, 215, 217, 225,
234, 237, and 252 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 41 U.S.C. 1303 and 48 CFR
chapter 1.
PART 202—DEFINITIONS OF WORDS
AND TERMS
202.101
[Amended]
[Amended]
7. Amend section 207.170–3 in
paragraph (a) introductory text by
removing ‘‘$6 million’’ and adding
‘‘$6.5 million’’ in its place.
■
PART 211—DESCRIBING AGENCY
NEEDS
8. The authority citation for part 211
is revised to read as follows:
■
Authority: 41 U.S.C. 1303 and 48 CFR
chapter 1.
211.503
[Amended]
9. Amend section 211.503 in
paragraph (b) by removing ‘‘$650,000’’
and adding ‘‘$700,000’’ in its place in
two places.
■
PART 212—ACQUISITION OF
COMMERCIAL ITEMS
212.7102–1
[Amended]
10. Amend section 212.7102–1 in
paragraph (c) by removing ‘‘$50
million’’ and adding ‘‘$55 million’’ in
its place.
■
2. Amend section 202.101 by—
■ a. Designating the definition of
‘‘Simplified acquisition threshold’’ in
alphabetical order in the list of
definitions; and
■ b. In the definition of ‘‘Simplified
acquisition threshold’’, removing
‘‘$300,000’’ and adding $400,000’’ in its
place.
■
PART 203—IMPROPER BUSINESS
PRACTICES AND PERSONAL
CONFLICTS OF INTEREST
203.1004
207.170–3
65915
[Amended]
3. Amend section 203.1004 in
paragraph (b)(2)(ii) by removing ‘‘$5
million’’ and adding ‘‘$5.5 million’’ in
its place.
■
PART 215—CONTRACTING BY
NEGOTIATION
215.403–1
[Amended]
11. Amend section 215.403–1 in
paragraphs (c)(3)(B) and (c)(4)(B) by
removing ‘‘$15,000,000’’ and adding
‘‘$20 million’’ in its place.
■
PART 217—SPECIAL CONTRACTING
METHODS
PART 205—PUBLICIZING CONTRACT
ACTIONS
12. Amend section 217.170 by—
a. Revising paragraph (e)(1)(iv); and
■ b. In paragraph (e)(5) by removing
‘‘$100 million’’ and adding ‘‘$139.5
million’’ in its place.
The revision reads as follows:
205.303
217.170
[Amended]
■
■
4. Amend section 205.303 by
removing ‘‘$6.5 million’’ and adding
‘‘$7 million’’ in its place for the
following—
■ a. In paragraph (a)(i) introductory text,
in two places;
■ b. In paragraph (a)(i)(A); and
■ c. In paragraph (a)(i)(B), in two places.
205.470
217.171
General.
*
■
[Amended]
5. Amend section 205.470 by
removing ‘‘$1,000,000’’ and adding
‘‘$1.5 million’’ in its place.
■
PART 207—ACQUISITION PLANNING
6. The authority citation for part 207
is revised to read as follows:
■
Authority: 41 U.S.C. 1303 and 48 CFR
chapter 1.
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
*
*
*
*
(e) * * *
(1) * * *
(iv) Include a cancellation ceiling in
excess of $139.5 million (see 10 U.S.C.
2306c(d)(4) and 10 U.S.C. 2306b(g)).
*
*
*
*
*
[Amended]
13. Amend section 217.171 in
paragraph (d) by removing ‘‘$625.5
million’’ and adding ‘‘$698.5 million’’
in its place.
■
217.172
[Amended]
14. Amend section 217.172 in
paragraphs (c), (e)(1), and (e)(2) by
removing ‘‘$500 million’’ and adding
‘‘$698.5 million’’ in its place.
■
E:\FR\FM\06NOP1.SGM
06NOP1
65916
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 215 / Thursday, November 6, 2014 / Proposed Rules
PART 218—EMERGENCY
ACQUISITIONS
15. The authority citation for part 218
is revised to read as follows:
■
Authority: 41 U.S.C. 1303 and 48 CFR
chapter 1.
234.7001
■
218.270
16. Amend section 218.270 by
removing ‘‘$300,000’’ and adding
‘‘$400,000’’ in its place.
■
[Amended]
33. Amend section 252.209–7009 by—
a. Removing the clause date ‘‘DEC
2012’’ and adding ‘‘DATE’’ in its place;
and
■ b. In paragraph (a)(ii), removing ‘‘$50
million’’ and adding ‘‘$55 million’’ in
its place.
■
252.225–7003
[Amended]
26. Amend section 236.601 in
paragraph (1) by removing ‘‘$1,000,000’’
and adding ‘‘$1.5 million’’ in its place.
34. Amend section 252.225–7003 by—
■ a. Removing the clause date ‘‘OCT
2010’’ and adding ‘‘DATE’’ in its place;
■ b. In paragraph (b)(1), removing
‘‘$12.5 million’’ and adding ‘‘$14
million’’ in its place; and
■ c. In paragraph (b)(2)(i), removing
‘‘$650,000’’ and adding ‘‘$700,000’’ in
its place.
PART 237—SERVICE CONTRACTING
252.225–7004
237.170–2
■
25. The authority citation for part 236
is revised to read as follows:
■
17. The authority citation for part 219
is revised to read as follows:
■
Authority: 41 U.S.C. 1303 and 48 CFR
chapter 1.
Authority: 41 U.S.C. 1303 and 48 CFR
chapter 1.
236.601
[Amended]
[Amended]
■
18. Amend section 219.502–1 in
paragraph (2) by removing ‘‘$350,000’’
and adding ‘‘$400,000’’ in its place in
both places.
■
219.502–2
252.209–7009
■
Definition.
PART 236—CONSTRUCTION AND
ARCHITECT-ENGINEER CONTRACTS
PART 219—SMALL BUSINESS
PROGRAMS
219.502–1
24. Revise section 234.7001 to read as
follows:
Major weapon system, as used in this
subpart, means a weapon system
acquired pursuant to a major defense
acquisition program.
[Amended]
b. In paragraph (a), removing
‘‘$30,000’’ and adding ‘‘$35,000’’ in its
place.
■
PART 234—MAJOR SYSTEM
ACQUISITION
[Amended]
[Amended]
27. Amend section 237.170–2 in
paragraphs (a)(1) and (2) by removing
‘‘$85.5 million’’ and adding ‘‘$95.5
million’’ in its place in both places.
19. Amend section 219.502–2 by—
a. In paragraph (a)(i), removing ‘‘$2.5
million’’ and adding ‘‘$3 million’’ in its
place; and
■ b. In paragraph (a)(iii), removing
‘‘$350,000’’ and adding ‘‘$400,000’’ in
its place.
■
PART 225—FOREIGN ACQUISITION
■
■
■
PART 250—EXTRAORDINARY
CONTRACTUAL ACTIONS AND THE
SAFETY ACT
■
[Amended]
35. Amend section 252.225–7004 by—
a. Removing the clause date ‘‘OCT
2010’’ and adding ‘‘DATE’’ in its place;
and
■ b. In paragraph (b)(1), removing
‘‘$650,000’’ and adding ‘‘$700,000’’ in
its place.
■
252.225–7006
[Amended]
36. Amend section 252.225–7006 by—
a. Removing the clause date ‘‘OCT
2010’’ and adding ‘‘DATE’’ in its place;
and
■ b. In paragraph (f)(1), removing
‘‘$650,000’’ and adding ‘‘$700,000’’ in
its place.
■
225.7204
28. The authority citation for part 250
is revised to read as follows:
[Amended]
20. Amend section 225.7204 by—
■ a. In paragraphs (a) and (b), removing
‘‘$12.5 million’’ and adding ‘‘$14
million’’ it its place in both places; and
■ b. In paragraph (c), removing
‘‘$650,000’’ and adding ‘‘$700,000’’ in
its place.
■
225.7703–2
[Amended]
21. Amend section 225.7703–2 in
paragraph (b)(2)(ii) by removing ‘‘$85.5
million’’ and adding ‘‘$95.5 million’’ in
its place.
PART 228—BONDS AND INSURANCE
22. The authority citation for part 228
is revised to read as follows:
■
Authority: 41 U.S.C. 1303 and 48 CFR
chapter 1.
rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
[Amended]
23. Amend section 228.102–1 by—
■ a. In the introductory text and
paragraph (1), removing ‘‘$30,000’’ and
adding ‘‘$35,000’’ in its place in both
places; and
■ b. In paragraph (2) introductory text,
removing ‘‘$100,000’’ and adding
‘‘$150,000’’ in its place.
■
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:28 Nov 05, 2014
250.102–1
[Amended]
29. Amend section 250.102–1 in
paragraph (b) by removing ‘‘$65,000’’
and adding ‘‘$70,000’’ in its place.
■
250.102–1–70
[Amended]
30. Amend section 250.102–1–70 in
paragraph (b)(1) by removing ‘‘$65,000’’
and adding ‘‘$70,000’’ in its place.
■
■
228.102–1
Authority: 41 U.S.C. 1303 and 48 CFR
chapter 1.
Jkt 235001
PART 252—SOLICITATION
PROVISIONS AND CONTRACT
CLAUSES
■
252.225–7017
[Amended]
37. Amend section 252.225–7017 by—
■ a. Removing the clause date ‘‘JAN
2014’’ and adding ‘‘DATE’’ in its place;
and
■ b. In paragraph (c)(1), removing
‘‘$3,000’’ and adding ‘‘$3,500’’ in its
place.
■
252.225–7018
[Amended]
31. Amend section 252.203–7004 by—
■ a. Removing the clause date ‘‘DEC
2012’’ and adding ‘‘DATE’’ in its place;
and
■ b. In paragraph (c) introductory text,
removing ‘‘$5 million’’ and adding
‘‘$5.5 million’’ in its place.
38. Amend section 252.225–7018 by—
■ a. Removing the clause date ‘‘JAN
2014’’ and adding ‘‘DATE’’ in its place;
■ b. In paragraph (b)(1), removing
‘‘$3,000’’ and adding ‘‘$3,500’’ in its
place; and
■ c. In paragraphs (d)(1) and (2),
removing ‘‘$3,000’’ and adding ‘‘$3,500’’
in both places.
252.209–7004
252.249–7002
252.203–7004
[Amended]
■
[Amended]
32. Amend section 252.209–7004 by—
a. Removing the clause date ‘‘MAR
2014’’ and adding ‘‘DATE’’ in its place;
and
■
■
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
■
[Amended]
39. Amend section 252.249–7002 by—
■ a. Removing the clause date ‘‘OCT
2010’’ and adding ‘‘DATE’’ in its place;
and
■
E:\FR\FM\06NOP1.SGM
06NOP1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 215 / Thursday, November 6, 2014 / Proposed Rules
please check www.regulations.gov,
approximately two to three days after
submission to verify posting (except
allow 30 days for posting of comments
submitted by mail).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms.
Lee Renna, Defense Acquisition
Regulations System,
OUSD(AT&L)DPAP/DARS, Room
3B941, 3060 Defense Pentagon,
Washington, DC 20301–3060.
Telephone 571–372–6095.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
b. In paragraph (d)(1), removing
‘‘$650,000’’ and adding ‘‘$700,000’’ in
its place.
■
[FR Doc. 2014–26266 Filed 11–5–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001–06–P
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Defense Acquisition Regulations
System
48 CFR Parts 212, 219, and 252
RIN 0750–AI42
I. Background
Defense Federal Acquisition
Regulation Supplement: Advancing
Small Business Growth (DFARS Case
2014–D009)
DoD is proposing to revise the DFARS
to implement policy to ensure a small
business contractor is made aware that
entering into a covered contract conveys
its acknowledgement that doing so may
cause it to eventually exceed the small
business size standard of the North
American Industry Classification
System (NAICS) code identified in the
solicitation and contract. This
clarification is required by section 1611
of the National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2014, (10 U.S.C.
2419).
A ‘‘covered’’ contract within the
context of this rule means a contract
that was awarded to a qualified small
business concern, as defined in section
3(a) of the Small Business Act, Public
Law 85–536 as amended, (15 U.S.C.
632(a)), with an estimated annual dollar
value that—
• Will exceed the small business size
standard (if expressed in dollars) for the
North American Industry System
(NAICS) code assigned by the
contracting officer; or
• Will exceed $70,000,000, if the
small business standard is expressed in
number of employees, for the NAICS
code assigned by the contracting officer.
Should this occur, the company will
no longer qualify as a small business in
that and other similar NAICS codes.
Section 1611 further stipulates that
new language shall be added to the
DFARS to encourage these companies to
develop the capabilities and
characteristics typically sought by DoD
from contractors that are competitive as
other than small businesses. To this
end, small business contractors may
seek out the training and counseling
services available from the Procurement
Technical Assistance Program (PTAP).
The PTAP, through its network of over
300 Procurement Technical Assistance
Centers located across the United States
as well as the territories of Puerto Rico
and Guam, offers a wide range of
Government contracting assistance. The
PTAP is administered by the Defense
Logistics Agency and funded through
Defense Acquisition
Regulations System, Department of
Defense (DoD).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
DoD is proposing to amend
the Defense Federal Acquisition
Regulation Supplement (DFARS) to
clarify that entering into a contract
award may cause a small business to
eventually exceed the applicable small
business size standard.
DATES: Comment Date: Comments on
the proposed rule should be submitted
in writing to the address shown below
on or before January 5, 2015, to be
considered in the formation of a final
rule.
SUMMARY:
Submit comments
identified by DFARS Case 2014–D009,
using any of the following methods:
Æ Regulations.gov: https://
www.regulations.gov. Submit comments
via the Federal eRulemaking portal by
entering ‘‘DFARS Case 2014–D009’’
under the heading ‘‘Enter keyword or
ID’’ and selecting ‘‘Search.’’ Select the
link ‘‘Submit a Comment’’ that
corresponds with ‘‘DFARS Case 2014–
D009.’’ Follow the instructions provided
at the ‘‘Submit a Comment’’ screen.
Please include your name, company
name (if any), and ‘‘DFARS Case 2014–
D009’’ on your attached document.
Æ Email: osd.dfars@mail.mil. Include
DFARS Case 2014–D009 in the subject
line of the message.
Æ Fax: 571–372–6094.
Æ Mail: Defense Acquisition
Regulations System, Attn: Ms. Lee
Renna, OUSD(AT&L)DPAP/DARS,
Room 3B941, 3060 Defense Pentagon,
Washington, DC 20301–3060.
Comments received generally will be
posted without change to https://
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided. To
confirm receipt of your comment(s),
rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
ADDRESSES:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:28 Nov 05, 2014
Jkt 235001
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
65917
cooperative agreements between DoD
and state and local non-profit entities.
To incorporate this guidance, the rule
proposes to revise 212.301(f); add a new
section 219.309 entitled Solicitation
provisions and contract clauses; and
add a new solicitation provision at
252.219.
II. 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 a significant
regulatory action and, therefore, was
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.
III. Regulatory Flexibility Act
DoD does not expect this rule to have
a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities
within the meaning of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601, et seq.,
because it does not create or alleviate
any financial burden on small entities.
The purpose of the rule is to advise
small businesses that by entering into a
DoD contract, they may eventually
cause the company to exceed the size
standard associated with the NAICS
code identified in the contract. The rule
further encourages these contractors to
develop the competencies typically
desired of other than small businesses.
Therefore, an initial regulatory
flexibility analysis has not been
performed.
DoD invites comments from small
business concerns and other interested
parties on the expected impact of this
rule on small entities.
DoD will also consider comments
from small entities concerning the
existing regulations in subparts affected
by this rule in accordance with 5 U.S.C.
610. Interested parties must submit such
comments separately and should cite 5
U.S.C. 610 (DFARS Case 2014–D009), in
correspondence.
IV. 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
E:\FR\FM\06NOP1.SGM
06NOP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 215 (Thursday, November 6, 2014)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 65912-65917]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-26266]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Defense Acquisition Regulations System
48 CFR Parts 202, 203, 205, 207, 211, 212, 215, 217, 218, 219, 225,
228, 234, 236, 237, 250, and 252
RIN 0750-AI43
Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement: Inflation
Adjustment of Acquisition-Related Thresholds (DFARS Case 2014-D025)
AGENCY: Defense Acquisition Regulations System, Department of Defense
(DoD).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: DoD is proposing to amend the Defense Federal Acquisition
Regulation Supplement (DFARS) to further implement the U.S.C. statute
on inflation adjustment of acquisition-related dollar thresholds. This
statute requires an adjustment every five years of acquisition-related
thresholds for inflation using the Consumer Price Index for all urban
consumers, except for the Construction Wage Rate Requirements statute
(Davis-Bacon Act), Service Contract Labor Standards statute, and trade
agreements thresholds. DoD is also proposing to use the same
methodology to adjust some nonstatutory DFARS acquisition-related
thresholds in 2015.
DATES: Comment Date: Comments on the proposed rule should be submitted
in writing to the address shown below on or before January 5, 2015, to
be considered in the formation of the final rule.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments identified by DFARS Case 2014-D025, using
any of the following methods:
[cir] Regulations.gov: https://www.regulations.gov. Submit comments
via the Federal eRulemaking portal by entering ``DFARS Case 2014-D025''
under the heading ``Enter keyword or ID'' and selecting ``Search.''
Select the link ``Submit a Comment'' that corresponds with ``DFARS Case
2014-D025.'' Follow the instructions provided at the ``Submit a
Comment'' screen. Please include your name, company name (if any), and
``DFARS Case 2014-D025'' on your attached document.
[cir] Email: osd.dfars@mail.mil. Include DFARS Case 2014-D025 in
the subject line of the message.
[cir] Fax: 571-372-6094.
[cir] Mail: Defense Acquisition Regulations System, Attn: Ms. Amy
G. Williams, OUSD (AT&L) DPAP/DARS, Room 3B941, 3060 Defense Pentagon,
Washington, DC 20301-3060.
[[Page 65913]]
Comments received generally will be posted without change to https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided. To
confirm receipt of your comment(s), please check www.regulations.gov,
approximately two to three days after submission to verify posting
(except allow 30 days for posting of comments submitted by mail).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Amy G. Williams, Defense
Acquisition Regulations System, OUSD (AT&L) DPAP/DARS, Room 3B941, 3060
Defense Pentagon, Washington, DC 20301-3060. Telephone 571-372-6106.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
This rule proposes to amend multiple DFARS parts to further
implement 41 U.S.C. 1908. Section 1908 requires an adjustment every
five years (on October 1 of each year evenly divisible by five) of
statutory acquisition-related thresholds for inflation, using the
Consumer Price Index (CPI) for all urban consumers, except for the
Construction Wage Rate Requirements statute (Davis-Bacon Act), Service
Contract Labor Standards statute, and trade agreements thresholds (see
FAR 1.109). As a matter of policy, DoD is also proposing to use the
same methodology to adjust some nonstatutory DFARS acquisition-related
thresholds. All proposed threshold adjustments would become effective
on October 1, 2015.
FAR case 2014-022 proposes comparable changes to acquisition-
related thresholds in the FAR.
This is the third review of DFARS acquisition-related thresholds
since the statute was enacted on October 28, 2004 (section 807 of the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year (FY) 2004). The last
review was conducted under DFARS case 2009-D003. The final rule was
published under that case in the Federal Register on August 2, 2010 (75
FR 45072), effective October 1, 2010.
II. Analysis
A. What is an acquisition-related threshold?
This case builds on the review of DFARS thresholds in 2005 and
2010, using the same interpretation of an acquisition-related
threshold. 41 U.S.C. 1908 is applicable to ``a dollar threshold that is
specified in law as a factor in defining the scope of the applicability
of a policy, procedure, requirement, or restriction provided in that
law to the procurement of property or services by an Executive agency,
as the [FAR] Council determines.''
There are other thresholds in the DFARS that, while not specified
in law, nevertheless meet all the other criteria. These thresholds may
have their origin in Executive order or regulation.
Therefore, as used in this case, ``acquisition-related threshold''
has a broader meaning, i.e., a threshold that is specified in law,
Executive order, or regulation as a factor in defining the scope of the
applicability of a policy, procedure, requirement, or restriction
provided in that law, Executive order, or regulation to the procurement
of property or services by an Executive agency, as determined by the
FAR Council. Acquisition-related thresholds are generally tied to the
value of a contract, subcontract, or modification.
Examples of thresholds that are not ``acquisition-related,'' as
defined in this case, are thresholds relating to claims, penalties,
withholding, payments, required levels of insurance, small business
size standards, liquidated damages, etc. This report does not address
thresholds that are not acquisition-related.
B. What acquisition-related thresholds are not subject to escalation
adjustment under this case?
41 U.S.C. 1908 does not permit escalation of acquisition-related
thresholds established by the Construction Wage Rate Requirements
statute (Davis Bacon Act), the Service Contract Labor Standards
statute, or the United States Trade Representative pursuant to the
authority of the Trade Agreements Act of 1979.
Also, the statute does not authorize DoD to escalate thresholds
originating in Executive order or the implementing agency (such as the
Department of Labor or the Small Business Administration), unless the
Executive order or agency regulations are first amended.
C. How does DoD analyze escalation of a statutory acquisition-related
threshold?
If an acquisition-related threshold is based on statute, the matrix
at https://www.acq.osd.mil/dpap/dars/pgi/docs/2014-D025_(p)_TAB_E_matrix_Sep_12_14.xls identifies the statute, and the
statutory threshold, including the original threshold and any
subsequent revisions to it.
With the exception of thresholds set by the Construction Wage Rate
Requirements statute (Davis Bacon Act), the Service Contract Labor
Standards statute, and trade agreements, 41 U.S.C. 1908 requires
adjustment of the acquisition-related thresholds for inflation using
the Consumer Price Index (CPI) for all-urban consumers. Acquisition-
related thresholds in statutes that were in effect on October 1, 2000,
are only subject to escalation from that date forward. Acquisition-
related thresholds in statutes that took effect after October 1, 2000,
are escalated from the date that they took effect. For purposes of this
proposed rule, the matrix includes calculation of escalation based on
the estimated CPI value for March 2015 (currently estimated at 243.0)
divided by the CPI for the date of enactment of the statute or
regulation (October 2000, for statutes enacted prior to October 1,
2000). DoD will subsequently adjust as necessary before issuance of the
final rule.
Once the escalation factor is applied to the acquisition-related
threshold, then statutory thresholds must be rounded as follows:
< $10,000--Nearest $500
$10,000-<$100,000--Nearest $5,000
$100,000-<$1,000,000--Nearest $50,000
$1,000,000 or more--Nearest $500,000
The calculations in this proposed rule are all based on the base
year amount, because escalated amounts in the 2005 rule were subject to
rounding and using those amounts as the base would distort future
calculations.
In 2010, some thresholds (e.g., $3,000), although subject to
inflation calculation, did not actually change, because the inflation
in 2010 was insufficient to overcome the rounding requirements--i.e.,
the escalation factor, when applied, did not cause the escalated values
to be high enough to round to the next higher value. However, in FY
2015, thresholds that did not escalate in 2010 will now escalate
because of five additional years of inflation. Likewise, some
thresholds that were escalated in 2010 (e.g., $150,000) will not
escalate in 2015.
This rule proposes to remove the major defense acquisition program
thresholds (expressed in FY 1990 constant dollars) from the definition
of ``major weapon system'' at DFARS 234.7001. The current major defense
acquisition program thresholds in FY 2014 constant dollars are set
forth in DoD Instruction 5000.02, established in accordance with the
authority in 10 U.S.C. 2430(b), which allows the Secretary of Defense
to adjust the amounts (and the base fiscal year) provided in subsection
(a)(2) on the basis of DoD escalation rates (rather than the CPI for
all urban consumers). The most recent thresholds were calculated by the
DoD Comptroller, and coordinated with the Cost Assessment and Program
Evaluation (CAPE) Office and the DoD General Counsel. In accordance
with 10 U.S.C. 2430(b),
[[Page 65914]]
these thresholds were reported to Congress in December 2013. There is
no need to provide these thresholds in the DFARS. The term ``major
defense acquisition program'' is already defined in DFARS 202.1 and
used in multiple DFARS parts (e.g., 204, 209, 215, and 216).
This proposed rule has been coordinated with the Small Business
Administration in areas of the regulation for which they are the lead
agency.
D. How does DoD analyze a nonstatutory acquisition-related threshold?
No statutory authorization is required to escalate thresholds that
were set as policy within the DFARS. Escalation of the DoD policy
acquisition-related thresholds is generally recommended using the same
formula applied to the statutory thresholds, unless a reason has been
provided for not doing so. Escalation is calculated using the same
procedures as were explained for the statutory thresholds, to provide
consistency.
However, nonstatutory thresholds that exceed $10 million may be
rounded as follows:
$10 million-<$100 million--Nearest $5 million
$100 million-<$1 billion--Nearest $50 million
$1 billion or more--Nearest $500 million
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 does not expect this rule to have a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities within the meaning of the
Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601, et seq., because the rule
maintains the status quo by adjusting thresholds for actual
inflationary increases in the CPI. However, an Initial Regulatory
Flexibility Analysis has been performed and is summarized as follows:
This rule proposes to amend the Defense Federal Acquisition
Regulation Supplement (DFARS) to implement 41 U.S.C. 1908 and to amend
other acquisition-related dollar thresholds that are based on policy
rather than statute in order to adjust for the changing value of the
dollar. 41 U.S.C. 1908 requires adjustment every five years of
statutory acquisition-related dollar thresholds, except for
Construction Wage Rate Requirements statute (Davis-Bacon Act), Service
Contract Labor Standards statute, and trade agreements thresholds.
While reviewing all statutory acquisition-related thresholds, this case
presented an opportunity to also review all nonstatutory acquisition-
related thresholds in the DFARS that are based on policy.
The objective of the case is to maintain the status quo, by
adjusting acquisition-related thresholds for inflation. The legal basis
is 41 U.S.C. 1908. The statute does not authorize the DFARS to escalate
thresholds originating in Executive orders or the implementing agency
(such as the Department of Labor or the Small Business Administration),
unless the Executive order or agency regulations are first amended.
This rule will likely affect to some extent all small business
concerns that submit offers or are awarded contracts by the Federal
Government. However, most of the threshold changes proposed in this
rule are not expected to have any significant economic impact on small
business concerns because any threshold changes are intended to
maintain the status quo by adjusting for changes in the value of the
dollar. Often any impact will be beneficial, by preventing burdensome
requirements from applying to more and more acquisitions, as the dollar
loses value.
The rule does not impose any new reporting, recordkeeping, or
compliance requirements. Changes in thresholds for approved information
collection requirements are intended to maintain the status quo and
prevent those requirements from increasing over time.
The rule does not duplicate, overlap, or conflict with any other
Federal rules.
There are no practical alternatives that will accomplish the
objectives of the statute.
DoD invites comments from small business concerns and other
interested parties on the expected impact of this rule on small
entities.
DoD will also consider comments from small entities concerning the
existing regulations in subparts affected by the rule in accordance
with 5 U.S.C. 610. Interested parties must submit such comments
separately and should cite 5 U.S.C. 610 (DFARS Case 2014-D025), in
correspondence.
V. Paperwork Reduction Act
The Paperwork Reduction Act does apply. The proposed changes to the
FAR do not impose new information collection requirements that require
the approval of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under 44
U.S.C. 3501, et seq. By adjusting the thresholds for inflation, the
status quo for the current information collection requirements are
maintained under the following OMB clearance numbers:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
OMB control No. Title DFARS part
------------------------------------------------------------------------
0704-0187.............. Information Collection 208, 209, 226, 235
in Support of the DOD
Acquisition Process
(Solicitation Phase).
0704-0229.............. Defense Federal 225
Acquisition
Regulation Supplement
Part 225, Foreign
Acquisition, and
related clauses.
0704-0286.............. Defense FAR Supplement 205
(DFARS) Part 205,
Publicizing Contract
Actions, and DFARS
252-205-7000,
Provision of
Information to
Cooperative Agreement
Holders.
0704-0477.............. Organizational 209.5
Conflicts of Interest
in Major Defense
Acquisition Programs.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
However, the rule contains one information collection requirement
that requires the approval of the Office of Management and Budget under
the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. chapter 35). Accordingly, DoD
has submitted to the Office of Management and Budget a request for
approval of a new information collection requirement entitled ``DFARS
Part 249, Termination of Contracts, and Associated DFARS Clauses at
252.249.''
A. Public reporting burden for this collection of information is
estimated to average approximately .75 hours per
[[Page 65915]]
response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching
existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and
completing and reviewing the collection of information.
The annual reporting burden estimated as follows:
Respondents: 42.
Responses per respondent: Approximately 6.
Total annual responses: 260.
Preparation hours per response: Approximately .75 hours
Total response Burden Hours: 193.
B. Request for Comments Regarding Paperwork Burden
Written comments and recommendations on the proposed information
collection, including suggestions for reducing this burden, should be
sent to Ms. Jasmeet Seehra at the Office of Management and Budget, Desk
Officer for DoD, Room 10236, New Executive Office Building, Washington,
DC 20503, or email Jasmeet_K._Seehra@omb.eop.gov, with a copy to the
Defense Acquisition Regulations System, Attn: Ms. Amy G. Williams,
OUSD(AT&L)DPAP/DARS, Room 3B941, 3060 Defense Pentagon, Washington, DC
20301-3060. Comments can be received from 30 to 60 days after the date
of this notice, but comments to OMB will be most useful if received by
OMB within 30 days after the date of this notice.
Public comments are particularly invited on: Whether this
collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of
functions of the DFARS, and will have practical utility; whether our
estimate of the public burden of this collection of information is
accurate, and based on valid assumptions and methodology; ways to
enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be
collected; and ways in which we can minimize the burden of the
collection of information on those who are to respond, through the use
of appropriate technological collection techniques or other forms of
information technology.
To request more information on this proposed information collection
or to obtain a copy of the proposal and associated collection
instruments, please write to the Defense Acquisition Regulations
System, Attn: Ms. Amy G. Williams, OUSD(AT&L)DPAP/DARS, Room 3B941,
3060 Defense Pentagon, Washington, DC 20301-3060, or email
osd.dfars@mail.mil. Include DFARS Case 2014-D025 in the subject line of
the message.
List of Subjects in 48 CFR Parts 202, 203, 205, 207, 211, 212, 215,
217, 218, 219, 225, 228, 234, 236, 237, 250, and 252
Government Procurement.
Manuel Quinones,
Editor, Defense Acquisition Regulations System.
Therefore, 48 CFR parts 202, 203, 205, 207, 211, 212, 215, 217,
218, 219, 225, 228, 234, 236, 237, 250, and 252 are proposed to be
amended as follows:
0
1. The authority citation for 48 CFR parts 202, 203, 205, 212, 215,
217, 225, 234, 237, and 252 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 41 U.S.C. 1303 and 48 CFR chapter 1.
PART 202--DEFINITIONS OF WORDS AND TERMS
202.101 [Amended]
0
2. Amend section 202.101 by--
0
a. Designating the definition of ``Simplified acquisition threshold''
in alphabetical order in the list of definitions; and
0
b. In the definition of ``Simplified acquisition threshold'', removing
``$300,000'' and adding $400,000'' in its place.
PART 203--IMPROPER BUSINESS PRACTICES AND PERSONAL CONFLICTS OF
INTEREST
203.1004 [Amended]
0
3. Amend section 203.1004 in paragraph (b)(2)(ii) by removing ``$5
million'' and adding ``$5.5 million'' in its place.
PART 205--PUBLICIZING CONTRACT ACTIONS
205.303 [Amended]
0
4. Amend section 205.303 by removing ``$6.5 million'' and adding ``$7
million'' in its place for the following--
0
a. In paragraph (a)(i) introductory text, in two places;
0
b. In paragraph (a)(i)(A); and
0
c. In paragraph (a)(i)(B), in two places.
205.470 [Amended]
0
5. Amend section 205.470 by removing ``$1,000,000'' and adding ``$1.5
million'' in its place.
PART 207--ACQUISITION PLANNING
0
6. The authority citation for part 207 is revised to read as follows:
Authority: 41 U.S.C. 1303 and 48 CFR chapter 1.
207.170-3 [Amended]
0
7. Amend section 207.170-3 in paragraph (a) introductory text by
removing ``$6 million'' and adding ``$6.5 million'' in its place.
PART 211--DESCRIBING AGENCY NEEDS
0
8. The authority citation for part 211 is revised to read as follows:
Authority: 41 U.S.C. 1303 and 48 CFR chapter 1.
211.503 [Amended]
0
9. Amend section 211.503 in paragraph (b) by removing ``$650,000'' and
adding ``$700,000'' in its place in two places.
PART 212--ACQUISITION OF COMMERCIAL ITEMS
212.7102-1 [Amended]
0
10. Amend section 212.7102-1 in paragraph (c) by removing ``$50
million'' and adding ``$55 million'' in its place.
PART 215--CONTRACTING BY NEGOTIATION
215.403-1 [Amended]
0
11. Amend section 215.403-1 in paragraphs (c)(3)(B) and (c)(4)(B) by
removing ``$15,000,000'' and adding ``$20 million'' in its place.
PART 217--SPECIAL CONTRACTING METHODS
0
12. Amend section 217.170 by--
0
a. Revising paragraph (e)(1)(iv); and
0
b. In paragraph (e)(5) by removing ``$100 million'' and adding ``$139.5
million'' in its place.
The revision reads as follows:
217.170 General.
* * * * *
(e) * * *
(1) * * *
(iv) Include a cancellation ceiling in excess of $139.5 million
(see 10 U.S.C. 2306c(d)(4) and 10 U.S.C. 2306b(g)).
* * * * *
217.171 [Amended]
0
13. Amend section 217.171 in paragraph (d) by removing ``$625.5
million'' and adding ``$698.5 million'' in its place.
217.172 [Amended]
0
14. Amend section 217.172 in paragraphs (c), (e)(1), and (e)(2) by
removing ``$500 million'' and adding ``$698.5 million'' in its place.
[[Page 65916]]
PART 218--EMERGENCY ACQUISITIONS
0
15. The authority citation for part 218 is revised to read as follows:
Authority: 41 U.S.C. 1303 and 48 CFR chapter 1.
218.270 [Amended]
0
16. Amend section 218.270 by removing ``$300,000'' and adding
``$400,000'' in its place.
PART 219--SMALL BUSINESS PROGRAMS
0
17. The authority citation for part 219 is revised to read as follows:
Authority: 41 U.S.C. 1303 and 48 CFR chapter 1.
219.502-1 [Amended]
0
18. Amend section 219.502-1 in paragraph (2) by removing ``$350,000''
and adding ``$400,000'' in its place in both places.
219.502-2 [Amended]
0
19. Amend section 219.502-2 by--
0
a. In paragraph (a)(i), removing ``$2.5 million'' and adding ``$3
million'' in its place; and
0
b. In paragraph (a)(iii), removing ``$350,000'' and adding ``$400,000''
in its place.
PART 225--FOREIGN ACQUISITION
225.7204 [Amended]
0
20. Amend section 225.7204 by--
0
a. In paragraphs (a) and (b), removing ``$12.5 million'' and adding
``$14 million'' it its place in both places; and
0
b. In paragraph (c), removing ``$650,000'' and adding ``$700,000'' in
its place.
225.7703-2 [Amended]
0
21. Amend section 225.7703-2 in paragraph (b)(2)(ii) by removing
``$85.5 million'' and adding ``$95.5 million'' in its place.
PART 228--BONDS AND INSURANCE
0
22. The authority citation for part 228 is revised to read as follows:
Authority: 41 U.S.C. 1303 and 48 CFR chapter 1.
228.102-1 [Amended]
0
23. Amend section 228.102-1 by--
0
a. In the introductory text and paragraph (1), removing ``$30,000'' and
adding ``$35,000'' in its place in both places; and
0
b. In paragraph (2) introductory text, removing ``$100,000'' and adding
``$150,000'' in its place.
PART 234--MAJOR SYSTEM ACQUISITION
0
24. Revise section 234.7001 to read as follows:
234.7001 Definition.
Major weapon system, as used in this subpart, means a weapon system
acquired pursuant to a major defense acquisition program.
PART 236--CONSTRUCTION AND ARCHITECT-ENGINEER CONTRACTS
0
25. The authority citation for part 236 is revised to read as follows:
Authority: 41 U.S.C. 1303 and 48 CFR chapter 1.
236.601 [Amended]
0
26. Amend section 236.601 in paragraph (1) by removing ``$1,000,000''
and adding ``$1.5 million'' in its place.
PART 237--SERVICE CONTRACTING
237.170-2 [Amended]
0
27. Amend section 237.170-2 in paragraphs (a)(1) and (2) by removing
``$85.5 million'' and adding ``$95.5 million'' in its place in both
places.
PART 250--EXTRAORDINARY CONTRACTUAL ACTIONS AND THE SAFETY ACT
0
28. The authority citation for part 250 is revised to read as follows:
Authority: 41 U.S.C. 1303 and 48 CFR chapter 1.
250.102-1 [Amended]
0
29. Amend section 250.102-1 in paragraph (b) by removing ``$65,000''
and adding ``$70,000'' in its place.
250.102-1-70 [Amended]
0
30. Amend section 250.102-1-70 in paragraph (b)(1) by removing
``$65,000'' and adding ``$70,000'' in its place.
PART 252--SOLICITATION PROVISIONS AND CONTRACT CLAUSES
252.203-7004 [Amended]
0
31. Amend section 252.203-7004 by--
0
a. Removing the clause date ``DEC 2012'' and adding ``DATE'' in its
place; and
0
b. In paragraph (c) introductory text, removing ``$5 million'' and
adding ``$5.5 million'' in its place.
252.209-7004 [Amended]
0
32. Amend section 252.209-7004 by--
0
a. Removing the clause date ``MAR 2014'' and adding ``DATE'' in its
place; and
0
b. In paragraph (a), removing ``$30,000'' and adding ``$35,000'' in its
place.
252.209-7009 [Amended]
0
33. Amend section 252.209-7009 by--
0
a. Removing the clause date ``DEC 2012'' and adding ``DATE'' in its
place; and
0
b. In paragraph (a)(ii), removing ``$50 million'' and adding ``$55
million'' in its place.
252.225-7003 [Amended]
0
34. Amend section 252.225-7003 by--
0
a. Removing the clause date ``OCT 2010'' and adding ``DATE'' in its
place;
0
b. In paragraph (b)(1), removing ``$12.5 million'' and adding ``$14
million'' in its place; and
0
c. In paragraph (b)(2)(i), removing ``$650,000'' and adding
``$700,000'' in its place.
252.225-7004 [Amended]
0
35. Amend section 252.225-7004 by--
0
a. Removing the clause date ``OCT 2010'' and adding ``DATE'' in its
place; and
0
b. In paragraph (b)(1), removing ``$650,000'' and adding ``$700,000''
in its place.
252.225-7006 [Amended]
0
36. Amend section 252.225-7006 by--
0
a. Removing the clause date ``OCT 2010'' and adding ``DATE'' in its
place; and
0
b. In paragraph (f)(1), removing ``$650,000'' and adding ``$700,000''
in its place.
252.225-7017 [Amended]
0
37. Amend section 252.225-7017 by--
0
a. Removing the clause date ``JAN 2014'' and adding ``DATE'' in its
place; and
0
b. In paragraph (c)(1), removing ``$3,000'' and adding ``$3,500'' in
its place.
252.225-7018 [Amended]
0
38. Amend section 252.225-7018 by--
0
a. Removing the clause date ``JAN 2014'' and adding ``DATE'' in its
place;
0
b. In paragraph (b)(1), removing ``$3,000'' and adding ``$3,500'' in
its place; and
0
c. In paragraphs (d)(1) and (2), removing ``$3,000'' and adding
``$3,500'' in both places.
252.249-7002 [Amended]
0
39. Amend section 252.249-7002 by--
0
a. Removing the clause date ``OCT 2010'' and adding ``DATE'' in its
place; and
[[Page 65917]]
0
b. In paragraph (d)(1), removing ``$650,000'' and adding ``$700,000''
in its place.
[FR Doc. 2014-26266 Filed 11-5-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001-06-P
