Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement: Enhancing the Effectiveness of Independent Research and Development (DFARS Case 2016-D002), 7721-7723 [2016-03039]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 30 / Tuesday, February 16, 2016 / Proposed Rules
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R07–OAR–2015–0840; FRL–9942–38–
Region 7]
Approval of Iowa’s Air State
Implementation Plan (SIP); Electronic
Reporting Consistent With the Cross
Media Electronic Reporting Rule
(CROMERR)
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve a
SIP revision submitted by the State of
Iowa. The revision pertains to the
approval of Iowa’s CROMERR
submission which was published in the
Federal Register on December 9, 2015,
and will revise the Iowa SIP to provide
for electronic submittal of emission
inventory data.
DATES: Comments on this proposed
action must be received in writing by
March 17, 2016.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R07–
OAR–2015–0840, to https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
Once submitted, comments cannot be
edited or removed from Regulations.gov.
The EPA may publish any comment
received to its public docket. Do not
submit electronically any information
you consider to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Multimedia
submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be
accompanied by a written comment.
The written comment is considered the
official comment and should include
discussion of all points you wish to
make. The EPA will generally not
consider comments or comment
contents located outside of the primary
submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or
other file sharing system). For
additional submission methods, the full
EPA public comment policy,
information about CBI or multimedia
submissions, and general guidance on
making effective comments, please visit
https://www2.epa.gov/dockets/
commenting-epa-dockets.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Heather Hamilton, Environmental
Protection Agency, Air Planning and
Development Branch, 11201 Renner
Boulevard, Lenexa, Kansas 66219 at
913–551–7039, or by email at
Hamilton.heather@epa.gov.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:46 Feb 12, 2016
Jkt 238001
In the
final rules section of this Federal
Register, EPA is approving the state’s
SIP revision as a direct final rule
without prior proposal because the
Agency views this as a noncontroversial
revision amendment and anticipates no
relevant adverse comments to this
action. A detailed rationale for the
approval is set forth in the direct final
rule. If no relevant adverse comments
are received in response to this action,
no further activity is contemplated in
relation to this action. If EPA receives
relevant adverse comments, the direct
final rule will be withdrawn and all
public comments received will be
addressed in a subsequent final rule
based on this proposed action. EPA will
not institute a second comment period
on this action. Any parties interested in
commenting on this action should do so
at this time. Please note that if EPA
receives adverse comment on part of
this rule and if that part can be severed
from the remainder of the rule, EPA may
adopt as final those parts of the rule that
are not the subject of an adverse
comment. For additional information,
see the direct final rule which is located
in the rules section of this Federal
Register.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by reference,
Intergovernmental relations, Lead,
Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate
matter, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile
organic compounds.
Dated: February 1, 2016.
Mark Hague,
Regional Administrator, Region 7.
[FR Doc. 2016–02958 Filed 2–12–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Defense Acquisition Regulations
System
48 CFR Parts 231
[Docket DARS–2015–0070]
RIN 0750–AI81
Defense Federal Acquisition
Regulation Supplement: Enhancing the
Effectiveness of Independent Research
and Development (DFARS Case 2016–
D002)
Defense Acquisition
Regulations System, Department of
Defense (DoD).
AGENCY:
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
ACTION:
7721
Proposed rule.
DoD is proposing to amend
the Defense Federal Acquisition
Regulation Supplement (DFARS) to
improve the effectiveness of
independent research and development
investments by the defense industrial
base that are reimbursed as allowable
costs.
DATES: Comments on the proposed rule
should be submitted in writing to the
address shown below on or before April
18, 2016, to be considered in the
formation of a final rule.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments
identified by DFARS Case 2016–D002,
using any of the following methods:
• Regulations.gov: https://
www.regulations.gov. Submit comments
via the Federal eRulemaking portal by
entering ‘‘DFARS Case 2016–D002’’
under the heading ‘‘Enter keyword or
ID’’ and selecting ‘‘Search.’’ Select the
link ‘‘Submit a Comment’’ that
corresponds with ‘‘DFARS Case 2016–
D002.’’ Follow the instructions provided
at the ‘‘Submit a Comment’’ screen.
Please include your name, company
name (if any), and ‘‘DFARS Case 2016–
D002’’ on your attached document.
• Email: osd.dfars@mail.mil. Include
DFARS Case 2016–D002 in the subject
line of the message.
• Fax: 571–372–6094.
• Mail: Defense Acquisition
Regulations System, Attn: Mr. Mark
Gomersall, 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),
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: Mr.
Mark Gomersall, telephone 571–372–
6099.
SUMMARY:
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
Better Buying Power (BBP) is the
implementation of best practices to
strengthen DoD’s buying power,
improve industry productivity, and
provide an affordable, value-added
military capability to the warfighter (see
https://bbp.dau.mil/.) Launched in 2010,
BBP encompasses a set of fundamental
acquisition principles to achieve greater
efficiencies through affordability, cost
control, elimination of unproductive
processes and bureaucracy, and
E:\FR\FM\16FEP1.SGM
16FEP1
7722
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 30 / Tuesday, February 16, 2016 / Proposed Rules
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
promotion of competition. BBP
initiatives also incentivize productivity
and innovation in industry and
Government, and improve tradecraft in
the acquisition of services.
The Independent Research and
Development (IR&D) initiative outlined
in BBP 3.0 is intended to improve the
effectiveness of IR&D investments by the
defense industrial base that are
reimbursed as allowable costs. As stated
in the Under Secretary of Defense for
Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics
BBP 3.0 Implementation Memorandum,
dated April 9, 2015 (see https://
bbp.dau.mil/references.html), IR&D
investments need to meet the
complementary goals of providing
defense companies an opportunity to
exercise independent judgement on
investments in promising technologies
that will provide a competitive
advantage, including the creation of
intellectual property, while at the same
time pursuing technologies that may
improve the military capability of the
United States. To achieve this goal, both
DoD and the industrial base need to
work together to ensure that DoD has
visibility into the opportunity created
by Government-reimbursed IR&D efforts
performed by defense contractors.
In accordance with 10 U.S.C. 2372(f),
contractor IR&D investments are not
directed by the Government—they are
identified by individual companies and
are intended to advance a particular
company’s ability to develop and
deliver superior and more competitive
products to the warfighter. However,
these efforts can have the best payoff,
both for DoD and for individual
performing companies, when the
Government is well informed of the
investments that companies are making,
and when companies are well informed
about related investments being made
elsewhere in the Government’s research
and development portfolios and about
Government plans for potential future
acquisitions where this IR&D may be
relevant.
II. Discussion and Analysis
DoD is proposing to revise DFARS
231.205–18, Independent Research and
Development and Bid and Proposal
Costs, to require that proposed new
IR&D efforts be communicated to
appropriate DoD personnel prior to the
initiation of these investments, and that
results from these investments should
also be shared with appropriate DoD
personnel. The intent of such
engagement is not to reduce the
independence of IR&D investment
selection, nor to establish a bureaucratic
requirement for Government approval
prior to initiating an IR&D project.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:46 Feb 12, 2016
Jkt 238001
Instead, the objective of this engagement
is to ensure that both IR&D performers
and their potential DoD customers have
sufficient awareness of each other’s
efforts and to provide industry with
some feedback on the relevance of
proposed and completed IR&D work.
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 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.
IV. Regulatory Flexibility Act
DoD does not expect this proposed
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. However, an initial regulatory
flexibility analysis has been prepared
and is summarized as follows:
DoD is proposing to amend the
Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation
Supplement (DFARS) to improve the
effectiveness of independent research
and development (IR&D) investments by
the defense industrial base that are
reimbursed as allowable costs in
accordance with Federal Acquisition
Regulation 31.205–18(c). The IR&D
initiative outlined in Better Buying
Power 3.0 is intended to improve the
effectiveness of IR&D investments by the
defense industrial base that are
reimbursed as allowable costs. To
achieve this goal, both DoD and the
industrial base need to work together to
ensure the Department has visibility
into the opportunity created by
Government-reimbursed IR&D efforts
performed by defense contractors. The
rule proposes to revise DFARS 231.205–
18, Independent Research and
Development and Bid and Proposal
Costs, to require that proposed new
IR&D efforts be communicated to
appropriate DoD personnel prior to the
initiation of these investments, and that
results from these investments should
also be shared with appropriate DoD
personnel.
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
At this time DoD is unable to estimate
the number of small entities to which
this rule will apply. However, DoD does
not expect the rule to have a significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities, because
DFARS 231.205–18(c)(iii) applies only
to major contractors, which are defined
as those whose covered segments
allocated a total of more than
$11,000,000 in independent research
and development and bid and proposal
costs to covered contracts during the
preceding fiscal year.
There is no change to reporting and
recordkeeping as a result of this rule.
The recordkeeping is limited to that
required to properly record and report
IR&D projects to the Defense Technical
Information Center (DTIC) using DTIC’s
online IR&D database.
The rule 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.
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 2016–D002), in
correspondence.
V. Paperwork Reduction Act
The rule affects the information
collection requirements at Defense
Federal Acquisition Regulation
Supplement (DFARS) 231.205–18,
currently approved under the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) Control
Number 0704–0483, entitled,
‘‘Independent Research and
Development Technical Descriptions,’’
in accordance with the Paperwork
Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. chapter 35);
however, the impact of this rule is
negligible. Currently, contractors are
required to (1) report Independent
Research and Development (IR&D)
projects to the Defense Technical
Information Center (DTIC) using the
DTIC’s on-line IR&D database and (2)
update these inputs at least annually
and when the project is completed. This
rule merely changes the web address for
submission of this report and requires
major contractors to include in the
report the name of the Government
employee with which a technical
interchange was held prior to initiation
of the IR&D effort and the date of such
interchange.
E:\FR\FM\16FEP1.SGM
16FEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 30 / Tuesday, February 16, 2016 / Proposed Rules
Government employee and the date the
technical interchange occurred.
*
*
*
*
*
List of Subjects in 48 CFR Parts 231
Government procurement.
Jennifer L. Hawes,
Editor, Defense Acquisition Regulations
System.
[FR Doc. 2016–03039 Filed 2–12–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001–06–P
Therefore, 48 CFR part 231 is
proposed to be amended as follows:
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
PART 231—CONTRACT COST
PRINCIPLES AND PROCEDURES
50 CFR Part 17
1. The authority citation for part 231
continues to read as follows:
■
[Docket No. FWS–R8–ES–2015–0170;
FFXES11130000–156–FF08E00000]
Authority: 41 U.S.C. 1303 and 48 CFR
chapter 1.
RIN 1018–BA71
2. In section 231.205–18, revise
paragraph (c)(iii)(C) to read as follows:
■
231.205–18 Independent research and
development and bid and proposal costs.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
*
*
*
*
*
(c) * * *
(iii) * * *
(C) For annual IR&D costs to be
allowable—
(1) The IR&D projects generating the
costs must be reported to the Defense
Technical Information Center (DTIC)
using the DTIC’s on-line input form and
instructions at https://www.defense
innovationmarketplace.mil/;
(2) The inputs must be updated with
a summary of results at least annually
and when the project is completed;
(3) Copies of the input and updates
must be made available for review by
the cognizant administrative contracting
officer (ACO) and the cognizant Defense
Contract Audit Agency auditor to
support the allowability of the costs;
(4) Contractors that do not meet the
threshold as a major contractor are
encouraged to use the DTIC on-line
input form to report IR&D projects to
provide DoD with visibility into the
technical content of the contractors’
IR&D activities; and
(5) For IR&D projects initiated in the
contractor’s fiscal year 2017 and later, as
a prerequisite for the subsequent
determination of allowability, major
contractors must—
(i) Engage in a technical interchange
with a technical or operational DoD
Government employee before IR&D
costs are generated so that contractor
plans and goals for IR&D projects benefit
from the awareness of and feedback by
a DoD employee who is informed of
related ongoing and future potential
interest opportunities; and
(ii) Use the online input form for IR&D
projects reported to DTIC to document
the technical interchange, which
includes the name of the DoD
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:46 Feb 12, 2016
Jkt 238001
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
and Plants; Removing the San Miguel
Island Fox, Santa Rosa Island Fox, and
Santa Cruz Island Fox From the
Federal List of Endangered and
Threatened Wildlife, and Reclassifying
the Santa Catalina Island Fox From
Endangered to Threatened
Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
ACTION: Proposed rule; availability of
draft post-delisting monitoring plan.
AGENCY:
We, the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (USFWS), propose to
remove the San Miguel Island fox
(Urocyon littoralis littoralis), Santa Rosa
Island fox (U. l. santarosae), and Santa
Cruz Island fox (U. l. santacruzae) from
the Federal List of Endangered and
Threatened Wildlife and to reclassify
the Santa Catalina Island fox (U. l.
catalinae) from an endangered species
to a threatened species. This
determination is based on a thorough
review of the best available scientific
and commercial information, which
indicates that the threats to the San
Miguel Island fox, Santa Rosa Island
fox, and Santa Cruz Island fox have
been eliminated or reduced to the point
that each of the subspecies no longer
meets the definition of an endangered
species or a threatened species under
the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as
amended (Act), and that the threats to
the Santa Catalina Island fox have been
reduced to the point that the subspecies
can be reclassified as a threatened
species. We are seeking information and
comments from the public regarding
this proposed rule and the draft postdelisting monitoring plan for the San
Miguel Island fox, Santa Rosa Island
fox, and Santa Cruz Island fox.
DATES: We will accept comments
received or postmarked on or before
April 18, 2016. We must receive
requests for public hearings, in writing,
at the address shown in the FOR FURTHER
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
INFORMATION CONTACT
7723
section by April 1,
2016.
Comment submission: You
may submit comments by one of the
following methods:
(1) Electronically: Go to the Federal
eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. In the Search box,
enter FWS–R8–ES–2015–0170, which is
the docket number for this rulemaking.
Then click on the Search button. On the
resulting page, in the Search panel on
the left side of the screen, under the
Document Type heading, click on the
Proposed Rules link to locate this
document. You may submit a comment
by clicking on ‘‘Comment Now!’’
(2) By hard copy: Submit by U.S. mail
or hand-deliver to: Public Comments
Processing, Attn: FWS–R8–ES–2015–
0170; Division of Policy, Performance,
and Management Programs; U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service, MS: BPHC; 5275
Leesburg Pike, Falls Church, VA 22041–
3803.
We request that you send comments
only by the methods described above.
We will post all comments on https://
www.regulations.gov. This generally
means that we will post any personal
information you provide us (see the
Information Requested section, below,
for more information).
Document availability: A copy of the
Recovery Plan for Four Subspecies of
Island Fox (Urocyon littoralis)
referenced throughout this document
can be viewed at https://ecos.fws.gov/
speciesProfile/profile/
speciesProfile.action?spcode=A08I, at
https://www.regulations.gov under
Docket No. FWS–R8–ES–2015–0170, or
at the Ventura Fish and Wildlife Office’s
Web site at https://www.fws.gov/
Ventura/. The post-delisting monitoring
plan for the northern Channel Island fox
subspecies (San Miguel, Santa Rosa, and
Santa Cruz Island foxes) consists of two
documents: the epidemic response plan
for northern Channel Island foxes
(Hudgens et al. 2013, entire) and the
golden eagle management strategy (NPS
2015a, entire). These documents will
also be posted on https://ecos.fws.gov/
speciesProfile/profile/
speciesProfile.action?spcode=A08I, at
https://www.regulations.gov under
Docket No. FWS–R8–ES–2015–0170,
and the Ventura Fish and Wildlife
Office’s Web site at https://www.fws.gov/
Ventura/.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Stephen P. Henry, Field Supervisor,
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Ventura
Fish and Wildlife Office, 2493 Portola
Road, Suite B, Ventura, CA 93003; by
telephone 805–644–1766; or by
facsimile 805–644–3958. If you use a
ADDRESSES:
E:\FR\FM\16FEP1.SGM
16FEP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 30 (Tuesday, February 16, 2016)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 7721-7723]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-03039]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Defense Acquisition Regulations System
48 CFR Parts 231
[Docket DARS-2015-0070]
RIN 0750-AI81
Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement: Enhancing the
Effectiveness of Independent Research and Development (DFARS Case 2016-
D002)
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 improve the effectiveness of
independent research and development investments by the defense
industrial base that are reimbursed as allowable costs.
DATES: Comments on the proposed rule should be submitted in writing to
the address shown below on or before April 18, 2016, to be considered
in the formation of a final rule.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments identified by DFARS Case 2016-D002, using
any of the following methods:
Regulations.gov: https://www.regulations.gov. Submit
comments via the Federal eRulemaking portal by entering ``DFARS Case
2016-D002'' under the heading ``Enter keyword or ID'' and selecting
``Search.'' Select the link ``Submit a Comment'' that corresponds with
``DFARS Case 2016-D002.'' Follow the instructions provided at the
``Submit a Comment'' screen. Please include your name, company name (if
any), and ``DFARS Case 2016-D002'' on your attached document.
Email: osd.dfars@mail.mil. Include DFARS Case 2016-D002 in
the subject line of the message.
Fax: 571-372-6094.
Mail: Defense Acquisition Regulations System, Attn: Mr.
Mark Gomersall, 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), 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: Mr. Mark Gomersall, telephone 571-372-
6099.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
Better Buying Power (BBP) is the implementation of best practices
to strengthen DoD's buying power, improve industry productivity, and
provide an affordable, value-added military capability to the
warfighter (see https://bbp.dau.mil/.) Launched in 2010, BBP encompasses
a set of fundamental acquisition principles to achieve greater
efficiencies through affordability, cost control, elimination of
unproductive processes and bureaucracy, and
[[Page 7722]]
promotion of competition. BBP initiatives also incentivize productivity
and innovation in industry and Government, and improve tradecraft in
the acquisition of services.
The Independent Research and Development (IR&D) initiative outlined
in BBP 3.0 is intended to improve the effectiveness of IR&D investments
by the defense industrial base that are reimbursed as allowable costs.
As stated in the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition,
Technology, and Logistics BBP 3.0 Implementation Memorandum, dated
April 9, 2015 (see https://bbp.dau.mil/references.html), IR&D
investments need to meet the complementary goals of providing defense
companies an opportunity to exercise independent judgement on
investments in promising technologies that will provide a competitive
advantage, including the creation of intellectual property, while at
the same time pursuing technologies that may improve the military
capability of the United States. To achieve this goal, both DoD and the
industrial base need to work together to ensure that DoD has visibility
into the opportunity created by Government-reimbursed IR&D efforts
performed by defense contractors.
In accordance with 10 U.S.C. 2372(f), contractor IR&D investments
are not directed by the Government--they are identified by individual
companies and are intended to advance a particular company's ability to
develop and deliver superior and more competitive products to the
warfighter. However, these efforts can have the best payoff, both for
DoD and for individual performing companies, when the Government is
well informed of the investments that companies are making, and when
companies are well informed about related investments being made
elsewhere in the Government's research and development portfolios and
about Government plans for potential future acquisitions where this
IR&D may be relevant.
II. Discussion and Analysis
DoD is proposing to revise DFARS 231.205-18, Independent Research
and Development and Bid and Proposal Costs, to require that proposed
new IR&D efforts be communicated to appropriate DoD personnel prior to
the initiation of these investments, and that results from these
investments should also be shared with appropriate DoD personnel. The
intent of such engagement is not to reduce the independence of IR&D
investment selection, nor to establish a bureaucratic requirement for
Government approval prior to initiating an IR&D project. Instead, the
objective of this engagement is to ensure that both IR&D performers and
their potential DoD customers have sufficient awareness of each other's
efforts and to provide industry with some feedback on the relevance of
proposed and completed IR&D work.
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 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.
IV. Regulatory Flexibility Act
DoD does not expect this proposed 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.
However, an initial regulatory flexibility analysis has been prepared
and is summarized as follows:
DoD is proposing to amend the Defense Federal Acquisition
Regulation Supplement (DFARS) to improve the effectiveness of
independent research and development (IR&D) investments by the defense
industrial base that are reimbursed as allowable costs in accordance
with Federal Acquisition Regulation 31.205-18(c). The IR&D initiative
outlined in Better Buying Power 3.0 is intended to improve the
effectiveness of IR&D investments by the defense industrial base that
are reimbursed as allowable costs. To achieve this goal, both DoD and
the industrial base need to work together to ensure the Department has
visibility into the opportunity created by Government-reimbursed IR&D
efforts performed by defense contractors. The rule proposes to revise
DFARS 231.205-18, Independent Research and Development and Bid and
Proposal Costs, to require that proposed new IR&D efforts be
communicated to appropriate DoD personnel prior to the initiation of
these investments, and that results from these investments should also
be shared with appropriate DoD personnel.
At this time DoD is unable to estimate the number of small entities
to which this rule will apply. However, DoD does not expect the rule to
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities, because DFARS 231.205-18(c)(iii) applies only to major
contractors, which are defined as those whose covered segments
allocated a total of more than $11,000,000 in independent research and
development and bid and proposal costs to covered contracts during the
preceding fiscal year.
There is no change to reporting and recordkeeping as a result of
this rule. The recordkeeping is limited to that required to properly
record and report IR&D projects to the Defense Technical Information
Center (DTIC) using DTIC's online IR&D database.
The rule 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.
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 2016-D002), in
correspondence.
V. Paperwork Reduction Act
The rule affects the information collection requirements at Defense
Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS) 231.205-18, currently
approved under the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Control Number
0704-0483, entitled, ``Independent Research and Development Technical
Descriptions,'' in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (44
U.S.C. chapter 35); however, the impact of this rule is negligible.
Currently, contractors are required to (1) report Independent Research
and Development (IR&D) projects to the Defense Technical Information
Center (DTIC) using the DTIC's on-line IR&D database and (2) update
these inputs at least annually and when the project is completed. This
rule merely changes the web address for submission of this report and
requires major contractors to include in the report the name of the
Government employee with which a technical interchange was held prior
to initiation of the IR&D effort and the date of such interchange.
[[Page 7723]]
List of Subjects in 48 CFR Parts 231
Government procurement.
Jennifer L. Hawes,
Editor, Defense Acquisition Regulations System.
Therefore, 48 CFR part 231 is proposed to be amended as follows:
PART 231--CONTRACT COST PRINCIPLES AND PROCEDURES
0
1. The authority citation for part 231 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 41 U.S.C. 1303 and 48 CFR chapter 1.
0
2. In section 231.205-18, revise paragraph (c)(iii)(C) to read as
follows:
231.205-18 Independent research and development and bid and proposal
costs.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(iii) * * *
(C) For annual IR&D costs to be allowable--
(1) The IR&D projects generating the costs must be reported to the
Defense Technical Information Center (DTIC) using the DTIC's on-line
input form and instructions at https://www.defenseinnovationmarketplace.mil/;
(2) The inputs must be updated with a summary of results at least
annually and when the project is completed;
(3) Copies of the input and updates must be made available for
review by the cognizant administrative contracting officer (ACO) and
the cognizant Defense Contract Audit Agency auditor to support the
allowability of the costs;
(4) Contractors that do not meet the threshold as a major
contractor are encouraged to use the DTIC on-line input form to report
IR&D projects to provide DoD with visibility into the technical content
of the contractors' IR&D activities; and
(5) For IR&D projects initiated in the contractor's fiscal year
2017 and later, as a prerequisite for the subsequent determination of
allowability, major contractors must--
(i) Engage in a technical interchange with a technical or
operational DoD Government employee before IR&D costs are generated so
that contractor plans and goals for IR&D projects benefit from the
awareness of and feedback by a DoD employee who is informed of related
ongoing and future potential interest opportunities; and
(ii) Use the online input form for IR&D projects reported to DTIC
to document the technical interchange, which includes the name of the
DoD Government employee and the date the technical interchange
occurred.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2016-03039 Filed 2-12-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001-06-P
