Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement: Rights in Technical Data (DFARS Case 2016-D008), 28812-28816 [2016-10827]
Download as PDF
28812
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 90 / Tuesday, May 10, 2016 / Proposed Rules
not occur. We are proposing to approve
UDEQ’s submittal with regard to the
requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)
prongs 1 and 2 for the 2008 Pb NAAQS.
ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
IV. Proposed Action
The EPA is proposing to approve CAA
section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) prongs 1 and 2
for the 2008 Pb NAAQS, and proposing
to disapprove prongs 1 and 2 for the
2008 ozone NAAQS based on
consideration of modeling results in
EPA’s August 4, 2015 NODA. The EPA
is soliciting public comments on this
proposed action and will consider
public comments received during the
comment period.
V. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
Under the CAA, the Administrator is
required to approve a SIP submission
that complies with the provisions of the
Act and applicable federal regulations.
42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a).
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, the
EPA’s role is to approve state actions,
provided that they meet the criteria of
the Clean Air Act. Accordingly, this
proposed action merely proposes
approval of some state law as meeting
federal requirements and proposes
disapproval of other state law because it
does not meet federal requirements; this
proposed action does not propose
additional requirements beyond those
imposed by state law. For that reason,
this proposed action:
• Is not a significant regulatory action
subject to review by the Office of
Management and Budget under
Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821,
January 21, 2011);
• Does not impose an information
collection burden under the provisions
of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
• Is certified as not having a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
• Does not contain any unfunded
mandate or significantly or uniquely
affect small governments, as described
in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995 (Pub. L.104–4);
• Does not have Federalism
implications as specified in Executive
Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999);
• Is not an economically significant
regulatory action based on health or
safety risks subject to Executive Order
13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997);
• Is not a significant regulatory action
subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR
28355, May 22, 2001);
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:20 May 09, 2016
Jkt 238001
• Is not subject to requirements of
Section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because
application of those requirements would
be inconsistent with the Clean Air Act;
and
• Does not provide the EPA with the
discretionary authority to address, as
appropriate, disproportionate human
health or environmental effects, using
practicable and legally permissible
methods, under Executive Order 12898
(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
In addition, the SIP does not apply on
any Indian reservation land or in any
other area where the EPA or an Indian
tribe has demonstrated that a tribe has
jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian
country, the proposed rule does not
have tribal implications and will not
impose substantial direct costs on tribal
governments or preempt tribal law as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65
FR 67249, November 9, 2000).
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.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: April 26, 2016.
Shaun L. McGrath,
Regional Administrator, Region 8.
[FR Doc. 2016–10893 Filed 5–9–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Defense Acquisition Regulations
System
48 CFR Parts 227 and 252
[Docket DARS–2016–0010]
RIN 0750–AI91
Defense Federal Acquisition
Regulation Supplement: Rights in
Technical Data (DFARS Case 2016–
D008)
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
implement a section of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00077
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Year 2016 that addresses rights in
technical data relating to major weapon
systems, expanding application of the
presumption that a commercial item has
been developed entirely at private
expense.
DATES: Comments on the proposed rule
should be submitted in writing to the
address shown below on or before July
11, 2016, to be considered in the
formation of a final rule.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments
identified by DFARS Case 2016–D008,
using any of the following methods:
Æ Regulations.gov: https://
www.regulations.gov. Submit comments
via the Federal eRulemaking portal by
entering ‘‘DFARS Case 2016–D008’’
under the heading ‘‘Enter keyword or
ID’’ and selecting ‘‘Search.’’ Select the
link ‘‘Submit a Comment’’ that
corresponds with ‘‘DFARS Case 2016–
D008.’’ Follow the instructions provided
at the ‘‘Submit a Comment’’ screen.
Please include your name, company
name (if any), and ‘‘DFARS Case 2016–
D008’’ on your attached document.
Æ Email: osd.dfars@mail.mil. Include
DFARS Case 2016–D008 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.
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, telephone 571–372–
6106.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
DoD is proposing to revise the DFARS
to implement section 813(a) of the
National Defense Authorization Act
(NDAA) for Fiscal Year (FY) 2016 (Pub.
L. 114–92) that modifies 10 U.S.C.
2321(f) to address rights in technical
data relating to major weapon systems.
The validation of asserted restrictions
on technical data is based on statutory
requirements, codified primarily at 10
U.S.C. 2321, which are implemented in
the DFARS at 227.7102–3 for
commercial technical data and at
227.7103–13 for noncommercial
technical data, and incorporated into
individual contracts via the clause
E:\FR\FM\10MYP1.SGM
10MYP1
ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 90 / Tuesday, May 10, 2016 / Proposed Rules
DFARS 252.227–7037, Validation of
Restrictive Markings on Technical Data,
for both commercial technical data and
noncommercial technical data. By longstanding policy, these requirements and
procedures are adapted and applied to
noncommercial computer software (see
227.7203–13 and clause 252.227–7019,
Validation of Asserted Restrictions—
Computer Software), but are not applied
to commercial computer software.
Since 1995, these validation
procedures have included specialized
presumptions and procedures for
commercial technical data. For
discussion purposes, these specialized
requirements will be referred to as the
‘‘Commercial Rule’’ (see 10 U.S.C.
2320(b)(1) and 2321(f)). Under the
Commercial Rule, a contracting officer
is required to presume that a
commercial item has been developed
entirely at private expense, unless
shown otherwise in accordance with the
procedures at 10 U.S.C. 2321(f).
Subsequently, section 802(b) of the
NDAA for FY 2007, as amended by
section 815(a)(2) of the NDAA for FY
2008, modified 10 U.S.C. 2321(f)(2) to
establish another specialized set of
procedures for technical data related to
major systems (including subsystems or
components thereof). For discussion
purposes, this second set of specialized
requirements has been referred to as the
‘‘Major Systems Rule.’’ Under the Major
Systems Rule, a contracting officer’s
challenge to asserted restrictions on
technical data relating to a major system
shall be sustained unless the contractor
or subcontractor submits information
demonstrating that the item was
developed exclusively at private
expense; except for commercially
available off-the-shelf (COTS) items,
which remained subject to the
Commercial Rule in all cases.
The Major Systems Rule, as an
exception to the Commercial Rule, was
implemented in the DFARS via DFARS
Case 2007–D003, which was published
for comments as a proposed rule in the
Federal Register on May 07, 2010 (75
FR 25161), and subsequently became
effective via a final rule published on
September 20, 2011 (76 FR 58144). As
a result, the Commercial Rule was
implemented for technical data at
DFARS 227.7103–13(c)(1) and in the
clause at DFARS 252.227–7037(b)(1),
and the Major Systems Rule was
implemented at 227.7103–13(c)(2) and
252.227–7037(b)(2). Additionally, the
Major Systems Rule was applied to
noncommercial computer software at
227.7203–13(d) and in the clause at
252.227–7019(f), although in the
noncommercial computer software
implementation the Major Systems Rule
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:20 May 09, 2016
Jkt 238001
stands alone, rather than as an
exception to the Commercial Rule,
because neither the Commercial Rule,
nor any element of the validation
procedures overall, has been applied to
commercial computer software.
Section 813(a) revised 10 U.S.C.
2321(f) to amend both the Commercial
Rule and the Major Systems Rule in two
primary ways:
(1) The major systems rule was
narrowed to apply only to major
weapon systems—essentially converting
the Major Systems Rule into the Major
Weapon Systems Rule.
(2) The COTS exception to the Major
Systems Rule was expanded to include
three additional exceptions. More
specifically, the formerly COTS-only
exception was expanded to include—
(i) COTS items with modifications of
a type customarily available in the
commercial marketplace or minor
modifications made to meet Federal
Government requirements;
(ii) Commercial subsystems or
components of a major weapon system,
if the major weapon system was
acquired as a commercial item in
accordance with 10 U.S.C. 2379(a); and
(iii) Components of a subsystem, if the
subsystem was acquired as a
commercial item in accordance with 10
U.S.C. 2379(b).
II. Discussion and Analysis
A. Implementation of the Statutory
Changes for Validation of Asserted
Restrictions on Technical Data
Because the DFARS already included
an implementation of the Commercial
Rule and Major Systems Rule, and
section 813(a) revised only particular
characteristics and subelements of the
Major Systems Rule, the
implementation of the statutory changes
is relatively straightforward. More
specifically, the Major Systems Rule is
amended to apply only in the case of a
major weapon system (see revised
DFARS 227.7103–13(c)(2)(ii), and
252.227–7037(b)(2)), and the exception
to the Major Systems Rule that
previously referenced only COTS items,
was expanded to include the three new
exceptions, as well (see new DFARS
227.7103–13(c)(2)(ii)(1) through (3), and
252.227–7037(b)(2)(i)).
In addition, a minor change was made
to the coverage for the Commercial Rule,
which had previously referred to COTS
items as always being covered by the
Commercial Rule. Under the new
schema, which includes four categories
of items that are exceptions to the Major
Weapon Systems Rule, and thereby are
always governed by the Commercial
Rule, it was deemed to be too
PO 00000
Frm 00078
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
28813
complicated to refer to all four
exceptions in both the coverage for the
Commercial Rule and the Major Weapon
Systems Rule. Accordingly, the
exceptions are listed only within the
Major Weapon Systems Rule, and the
Commercial Rule merely crossreferences that coverage as an exception
to the Commercial Rule. In addition to
avoiding unnecessary duplication in the
coverage, this approach provides an
advantage in circumstances involving
an assertion regarding any type of
commercial item that is not part of a
major weapon system or subsystem
thereof, such that there would be no
need to parse through the entire Major
Weapon Systems Rule only to find that
the item is covered by one of the
exceptions to the Major Weapon
Systems Rule, and thus still covered by
the Commercial Rule.
B. Application of the Revised
Requirements and Procedures to
Validation of Asserted Restrictions on
Computer Software
DoD has made no additional edits to
extend the section 813(a) construct to
noncommercial computer software, and
has deleted the baseline coverage of
noncommercial computer software in
major systems, currently at DFARS
227.7203–13(d) and 252.227–7019(f),
because the purpose for the Major
Weapon Systems Rule is to function as
an exception to the Commercial Rule;
but in the context of computer software,
these validation procedures do not
apply to commercial computer software,
and the coverage for noncommercial
computer software is concerned only
with the Major Weapon Systems Rule
procedures for noncommercial
computer software. In the end, the
application of the Major Weapon
Systems Rule in those cases is extremely
unlikely to reach a result that is any
different from the application of the
‘‘normal’’ rules for noncommercial
computer software. More specifically, in
all cases the Government cannot initiate
a challenge unless it has a reasonable
basis to do so (see DFARS 227.7203–
13(a) and (e)(3)(i), and 252.227–
7019(d)(3) and (e)(1) for noncommercial
computer software; see also 227.7103–
13(a), (c)(1), and (d)(4), and 252.227–
7037(d)(2) for technical data). After a
challenge is initiated, both the Major
Weapon Systems Rule and the ‘‘normal’’
validation procedures would result in
the challenge being sustained unless the
contractor provides information to
demonstrate that the noncommercial
computer software was developed
exclusively at private expense.
E:\FR\FM\10MYP1.SGM
10MYP1
28814
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 90 / Tuesday, May 10, 2016 / Proposed Rules
III. Applicability to Contracts at or
Below the Simplified Acquisition
Threshold (SAT) and for Commercial
Items, Including Commercially
Available Off-the-Shelf (COTS) Items
This proposed rule does not add any
new provisions or clauses or add new
requirements to existing provision or
clauses. Rather, when acquiring major
weapon systems, it expands the
circumstances relating to commerciality
in which the contracting officer shall
presume that development was
exclusively at private expense.
ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
IV. 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.
V. 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 performed
and is summarized as follows:
This proposed rule was initiated to
implement section 813(a) of the
National Defense Authorization Act
(NDAA) for Fiscal Year (FY) 2016 (Pub.
L. 114–92).
The objective of this rule is to reduce
the requirement to respond to
Government challenges of restricted
rights, by expanding the applicability of
the presumption regarding development
exclusively at private expense in
accordance with section 813(a) of the
NDAA for FY 2016.
DoD cannot accurately determine the
number of small entities that will be
affected by this change in the
regulations, because DoD does not have
sufficient information about subcontract
awards of subsystems and components
of major weapon systems. However,
DoD estimates an annual reduction of 50
prechallenge requests for information
and 2 challenges of asserted technical
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:20 May 09, 2016
Jkt 238001
data restrictions. DoD further estimates,
based on data from the DoD FY 2014
Small Business Procurement Scorecard,
that this reduction in challenges will
affect about 17 small businesses (52
prechallenges/challenges × 33 percent of
subcontract awards to small businesses).
The proposed rule reduces the
requirement to respond to Government
challenge of restricted rights. Under
current regulations, the presumption
regarding development exclusively at
private expense does not apply to major
systems or subsystems or components
thereof, except for commercially
available off-the-shelf items. This rule
expands applicability of the
presumption regarding development
exclusively at private expense with
regard to a major weapon system, or a
subsystem or component thereof, to
cover—
• A commercial subsystem or
component of a major weapon system,
if the major weapon system was
acquired as a commercial item in
accordance with DFARS subpart 234.70
(10 U.S.C. 2379(a));
• A component of a subsystem, if the
subsystem was acquired as a
commercial item in accordance with
DFARS subpart 234.70 (10 U.S.C.
2379(b)); and
• Commercially available off-the-shelf
items with modifications of a type
customarily available in the commercial
marketplace or minor modifications
made to meet Federal Government
requirements.
The classes of small entities that will
be affected by this reduction are small
businesses that provide any items in the
above categories that are not challenged
due to the new statute.
The rule does not duplicate, overlap,
or conflict with any other Federal rules.
This rule reduces the burden on small
entities to the maximum extent
permitted by 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 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–D008), in
correspondence.
VI. Paperwork Reduction Act
This rule affects the information
collection requirements in the
provisions at DFARS 252.227–7019 and
252.227–7037, currently approved
under OMB Control Number 0704–0369,
entitled ‘‘Defense Federal Acquisition
PO 00000
Frm 00079
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Regulation Supplement (DFARS): Rights
in Technical Data and Computer
Software,’’ in accordance with the
Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C.
chapter 35). The rule is expected to
result in a reduction of 1,040 hours in
the total estimated burden hours. DoD
will submit a change request to OMB to
document the reduction in burden
hours at the final rule stage.
A. Based on the advice of DoD subject
matter experts, DoD currently estimates
approximately 500 prechallenge
requests for information and
approximately 20 challenges per year
associated with DFARS clause 252.227–
7019, Validation of Asserted
Restrictions—Computer Software, and
252.227–7037, Validation of Restrictive
Markings on Technical Data. 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
estimated average burden to respond to
a prechallenge request for information is
10 hours, and the estimated average
burden to respond to each challenge, is
270 hours, resulting in a weighted
average of approximately 20 hours per
response.
Under current regulations, the
presumption regarding development
exclusively at private expense does not
apply to major systems or subsystems or
components thereof, except for
commercially available off-the-shelf
items. This rule expands applicability of
the presumption regarding development
exclusively at private expense with
regard to a major weapon system, or a
subsystem or component thereof, to
cover—
• A commercial subsystem or
component of a major weapon system,
if the major weapon system was
acquired as a commercial item in
accordance with DFARS subpart 234.70
(10 U.S.C. 2379(a));
• A component of a subsystem, if the
subsystem was acquired as a
commercial item in accordance with
DFARS subpart 234.70 (10 U.S.C.
2379(b)); and
• Commercially available off-the-shelf
items with modifications of a type
customarily available in the commercial
marketplace or minor modifications
made to meet Federal Government
requirements.
Therefore, DoD estimates a reduction
of about 10 percent in the estimated
number of prechallenge requests for
information and challenges under
DFARS 252.227–7019 and 252.227–
7037 as follows:
E:\FR\FM\10MYP1.SGM
10MYP1
28815
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 90 / Tuesday, May 10, 2016 / Proposed Rules
Current
requirement
Revised
Delta
Respondents ................................................................................................................................
Responses per respondent .........................................................................................................
520
1
468
1
52
1
Total annual responses ........................................................................................................
Preparation hours per response ..................................................................................................
520
20
468
20
52
20
Total response burden hours ........................................................................................
10,400
9,360
1,040
ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
B. Request for Comments Regarding
Paperwork Burden
List of Subjects in 48 CFR Parts 227 and
252
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 proposed rule,
but comments to OMB will be most
useful if received by OMB within 30
days after the date of this proposed rule.
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 2016–D008 in the subject line of
the message.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:20 May 09, 2016
Jkt 238001
Government procurement.
Jennifer L. Hawes,
Editor, Defense Acquisition Regulations
System.
Therefore, 48 CFR parts 227 and 252
is proposed to be amended as follows:
■ 1. The authority citation for parts 227
and 252 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 41 U.S.C. 1303 and 48 CFR
chapter 1.
PART 227—PATENT, DATA, AND
COPYRIGHTS
2. Amend section 227.7103–13 by—
a. In paragraph (c)(1), removing
‘‘commercial item, component, or
process’’ and adding ‘‘commercial item’’
in its place and removing ‘‘the item,
component or process’’ and adding
‘‘that item’’ in its place; and
■ b. Revising paragraphs (c)(2)(i) and
(ii).
The revisions read as follows:
■
■
227.7103–13 Government right to review,
verify, challenge and validate asserted
restrictions.
*
*
*
*
*
(c) * * *
(2) * * *
(i) Commercial items. Except as
provided in paragraph (c)(2)(ii) of this
subsection, contracting officers shall
presume that a commercial item was
developed exclusively at private
expense whether or not a contractor or
subcontractor submits a justification in
response to a challenge notice. When a
challenge is warranted, a contractor’s or
subcontractor’s failure to respond to the
challenge notice cannot be the sole basis
for issuing a final decision denying the
validity of an asserted restriction.
(ii) Major weapon systems. When the
contracting officer challenges an
asserted restriction regarding technical
data for a major weapon system or a
subsystem or component thereof on the
basis that the technology was not
developed exclusively at private
expense—
(A) The presumption in paragraph
(c)(2)(i) of this subsection applies to—
PO 00000
Frm 00080
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
(1) A commercial subsystem or
component of a major weapon system,
if the major weapon system was
acquired as a commercial item in
accordance with subpart 234.70 (10
U.S.C. 2379(a));
(2) A component of a subsystem, if the
subsystem was acquired as a
commercial item in accordance with
subpart 234.70 (10 U.S.C. 2379(b)); and
(3) Any other component, if the
component is a commercially available
off-the-shelf item or a commercially
available off-the-shelf item with
modifications of a type customarily
available in the commercial marketplace
or minor modifications made to meet
Federal Government requirements; and
(B) In all other cases, the contracting
officer shall sustain the challenge unless
information provided by the contractor
or subcontractor demonstrates that the
item was developed exclusively at
private expense.
*
*
*
*
*
227.7203–13
[Amended]
3. Section 227.7203–13 is amended by
removing paragraph (d) and
redesignating paragraphs (e), (f), and (g)
as paragraphs (d), (e), and (f),
respectively.
■
PART 252—SOLICITATION
PROVISIONS AND CONTRACT
CLAUSES
4. Amend section 252.227–7019 by—
a. Removing the clause date ‘‘(SEPT
2011)’’ and adding ‘‘(DATE)’’ in its
place;
■ b. Removing paragraph (f);
■ c. Redesignating paragraphs (g), (h),
(i), and (j) as paragraphs (f), (g), (h), and
(i), respectively;
■ d. In newly redesignated paragraph
(f)(5)—
■ i. Removing ‘‘(g)(1)’’ and adding
‘‘(f)(1)’’ in its place;
■ ii. Removing ‘‘Officer will’’ and
adding ‘‘Officer shall’’ in its place; and
■ iii. Removing ‘‘paragraph (f) of this
clause and’’;
■ f. In newly redesignated paragraph
(f)(6) introductory text, removing ‘‘the
written explanation furnished pursuant
to paragraph (f)(1) of this clause, or any
other’’ and adding ‘‘any’’ in its place;
■
■
E:\FR\FM\10MYP1.SGM
10MYP1
28816
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 90 / Tuesday, May 10, 2016 / Proposed Rules
g. In newly redesignated paragraph
(g)(1) introductory text, removing
‘‘(h)(3)’’ and adding ‘‘(g)(3)’’ in its place;
and
■ h. In newly redesignated paragraph
(g)(3), removing ‘‘(h)(1)’’ and adding
‘‘(g)(1)’’ in its place.
■ 5. Amend section 252.227–7037 by—
■ a. Removing the clause date ‘‘(JUN
2013)’’ and adding ‘‘(DATE)’’ in its
place; and
■ b. Revising paragraphs (b)(1) and (2).
The revision reads as follows:
■
ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Jkt 238001
BILLING CODE 5001–06–P
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Defense Acquisition Regulations
System
48 CFR Part 252
RIN 0750–AI94
(b) * * *
(1) Commercial items. (i) Except as
provided in paragraph (b)(2) of this
clause, the Contracting Officer will
presume that the Contractor’s or a
subcontractor’s asserted use or release
restrictions with respect to a
commercial item is justified on the basis
that the item was developed exclusively
at private expense.
(ii) The Contracting Officer will not
challenge such assertions unless the
Contracting Officer has information that
demonstrates that the commercial item
was not developed exclusively at
private expense.
(2) Major weapon systems. In the case
of a challenge to a use or release
restriction that is asserted with respect
to data of the Contractor or a
subcontractor for a major weapon
system or a subsystem or component
thereof on the basis that the major
weapon system, subsystem, or
component was developed exclusively
at private expense—
(i) The presumption in paragraph
(b)(1) of this clause applies to—
(A) A commercial subsystem or
component of a major weapon system,
if the major weapon system was
acquired as a commercial item in
accordance with DFARS subpart 234.70
(10 U.S.C. 2379(a));
(B) A component of a subsystem, if
the subsystem was acquired as a
commercial item in accordance with
DFARS subpart 234.70 (10 U.S.C.
2379(b)); and
(C) Any other component, if the
component is a commercially available
off-the-shelf item or a commercially
available off-the-shelf item with
modifications of a type customarily
available in the commercial marketplace
or minor modifications made to meet
Federal Government requirements; and
(ii) In all other cases, the challenge to
the use or release restriction will be
sustained unless information provided
by the Contractor or a subcontractor
demonstrates that the item or process
15:20 May 09, 2016
[FR Doc. 2016–10827 Filed 5–9–16; 8:45 am]
[Docket DARS–2016–0016]
252.227–7037 Validation of restrictive
markings on technical data.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
was developed exclusively at private
expense.
*
*
*
*
*
Defense Federal Acquisition
Regulation Supplement: Display of
Hotline Posters (DFARS Case 2016–
D018)
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
consolidate the multiple hotline posters
into one poster that delineates multiple
reportable offenses.
DATES: Comments on the proposed rule
should be submitted in writing to the
address shown below on or before July
11, 2016, to be considered in the
formation of a final rule.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments
identified by DFARS Case 2016–D018,
using any of the following methods:
Æ Regulations.gov: https://
www.regulations.gov. Submit comments
via the Federal eRulemaking portal by
entering ‘‘DFARS Case 2016–D018’’
under the heading ‘‘Enter keyword or
ID’’ and selecting ‘‘Search.’’ Select the
link ‘‘Submit a Comment’’ that
corresponds with ‘‘DFARS Case 2016–
D018.’’ Follow the instructions provided
at the ‘‘Submit a Comment’’ screen.
Please include your name, company
name (if any), and ‘‘DFARS Case 2016–
D018’’ on your attached document.
Æ Email: osd.dfars@mail.mil. Include
DFARS Case 2016–D018 in the subject
line of the message.
Æ Fax: 571–372–6094.
Æ Mail: Defense Acquisition
Regulations System, Attn: Mr.
Christopher Stiller, 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,
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00081
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
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.
Christopher Stiller, telephone 571–372–
6176.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
This rule proposes to revise the
DFARS to update DFARS clause
252.203–7004, Display of Hotline
Posters. This clause currently requires
the display of a DoD fraud hotline
poster, a separate combating trafficking
in persons poster, and a whistleblower
protection poster. DoD has consolidated
the posters into one poster to reduce the
number of posters required to be
displayed and proposes updating the
clause accordingly. This rule also
removes the United States-only
restriction for use of the DoD poster,
because the human trafficking poster
requires display outside the United
States, even though the fraud hotline
poster did not. Additionally, if the
contract is funded, in whole or in part,
by the Department of Homeland
Security (DHS) disaster relief funds and
the work is to be performed in the
United States, the DHS fraud hotline
poster must also be displayed. The
clause also is amended to provide
contact information for obtaining the
DHS poster.
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 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.
III. 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 performed
and is summarized as follows:
E:\FR\FM\10MYP1.SGM
10MYP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 90 (Tuesday, May 10, 2016)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 28812-28816]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-10827]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Defense Acquisition Regulations System
48 CFR Parts 227 and 252
[Docket DARS-2016-0010]
RIN 0750-AI91
Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement: Rights in
Technical Data (DFARS Case 2016-D008)
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 implement a section of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016 that addresses rights in
technical data relating to major weapon systems, expanding application
of the presumption that a commercial item has been developed entirely
at private expense.
DATES: Comments on the proposed rule should be submitted in writing to
the address shown below on or before July 11, 2016, to be considered in
the formation of a final rule.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments identified by DFARS Case 2016-D008, using
any of the following methods:
[cir] Regulations.gov: https://www.regulations.gov. Submit comments
via the Federal eRulemaking portal by entering ``DFARS Case 2016-D008''
under the heading ``Enter keyword or ID'' and selecting ``Search.''
Select the link ``Submit a Comment'' that corresponds with ``DFARS Case
2016-D008.'' Follow the instructions provided at the ``Submit a
Comment'' screen. Please include your name, company name (if any), and
``DFARS Case 2016-D008'' on your attached document.
[cir] Email: osd.dfars@mail.mil. Include DFARS Case 2016-D008 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.
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, telephone 571-
372-6106.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
DoD is proposing to revise the DFARS to implement section 813(a) of
the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year (FY) 2016
(Pub. L. 114-92) that modifies 10 U.S.C. 2321(f) to address rights in
technical data relating to major weapon systems.
The validation of asserted restrictions on technical data is based
on statutory requirements, codified primarily at 10 U.S.C. 2321, which
are implemented in the DFARS at 227.7102-3 for commercial technical
data and at 227.7103-13 for noncommercial technical data, and
incorporated into individual contracts via the clause
[[Page 28813]]
DFARS 252.227-7037, Validation of Restrictive Markings on Technical
Data, for both commercial technical data and noncommercial technical
data. By long-standing policy, these requirements and procedures are
adapted and applied to noncommercial computer software (see 227.7203-13
and clause 252.227-7019, Validation of Asserted Restrictions--Computer
Software), but are not applied to commercial computer software.
Since 1995, these validation procedures have included specialized
presumptions and procedures for commercial technical data. For
discussion purposes, these specialized requirements will be referred to
as the ``Commercial Rule'' (see 10 U.S.C. 2320(b)(1) and 2321(f)).
Under the Commercial Rule, a contracting officer is required to presume
that a commercial item has been developed entirely at private expense,
unless shown otherwise in accordance with the procedures at 10 U.S.C.
2321(f).
Subsequently, section 802(b) of the NDAA for FY 2007, as amended by
section 815(a)(2) of the NDAA for FY 2008, modified 10 U.S.C.
2321(f)(2) to establish another specialized set of procedures for
technical data related to major systems (including subsystems or
components thereof). For discussion purposes, this second set of
specialized requirements has been referred to as the ``Major Systems
Rule.'' Under the Major Systems Rule, a contracting officer's challenge
to asserted restrictions on technical data relating to a major system
shall be sustained unless the contractor or subcontractor submits
information demonstrating that the item was developed exclusively at
private expense; except for commercially available off-the-shelf (COTS)
items, which remained subject to the Commercial Rule in all cases.
The Major Systems Rule, as an exception to the Commercial Rule, was
implemented in the DFARS via DFARS Case 2007-D003, which was published
for comments as a proposed rule in the Federal Register on May 07, 2010
(75 FR 25161), and subsequently became effective via a final rule
published on September 20, 2011 (76 FR 58144). As a result, the
Commercial Rule was implemented for technical data at DFARS 227.7103-
13(c)(1) and in the clause at DFARS 252.227-7037(b)(1), and the Major
Systems Rule was implemented at 227.7103-13(c)(2) and 252.227-
7037(b)(2). Additionally, the Major Systems Rule was applied to
noncommercial computer software at 227.7203-13(d) and in the clause at
252.227-7019(f), although in the noncommercial computer software
implementation the Major Systems Rule stands alone, rather than as an
exception to the Commercial Rule, because neither the Commercial Rule,
nor any element of the validation procedures overall, has been applied
to commercial computer software.
Section 813(a) revised 10 U.S.C. 2321(f) to amend both the
Commercial Rule and the Major Systems Rule in two primary ways:
(1) The major systems rule was narrowed to apply only to major
weapon systems--essentially converting the Major Systems Rule into the
Major Weapon Systems Rule.
(2) The COTS exception to the Major Systems Rule was expanded to
include three additional exceptions. More specifically, the formerly
COTS-only exception was expanded to include--
(i) COTS items with modifications of a type customarily available
in the commercial marketplace or minor modifications made to meet
Federal Government requirements;
(ii) Commercial subsystems or components of a major weapon system,
if the major weapon system was acquired as a commercial item in
accordance with 10 U.S.C. 2379(a); and
(iii) Components of a subsystem, if the subsystem was acquired as a
commercial item in accordance with 10 U.S.C. 2379(b).
II. Discussion and Analysis
A. Implementation of the Statutory Changes for Validation of Asserted
Restrictions on Technical Data
Because the DFARS already included an implementation of the
Commercial Rule and Major Systems Rule, and section 813(a) revised only
particular characteristics and subelements of the Major Systems Rule,
the implementation of the statutory changes is relatively
straightforward. More specifically, the Major Systems Rule is amended
to apply only in the case of a major weapon system (see revised DFARS
227.7103-13(c)(2)(ii), and 252.227-7037(b)(2)), and the exception to
the Major Systems Rule that previously referenced only COTS items, was
expanded to include the three new exceptions, as well (see new DFARS
227.7103-13(c)(2)(ii)(1) through (3), and 252.227-7037(b)(2)(i)).
In addition, a minor change was made to the coverage for the
Commercial Rule, which had previously referred to COTS items as always
being covered by the Commercial Rule. Under the new schema, which
includes four categories of items that are exceptions to the Major
Weapon Systems Rule, and thereby are always governed by the Commercial
Rule, it was deemed to be too complicated to refer to all four
exceptions in both the coverage for the Commercial Rule and the Major
Weapon Systems Rule. Accordingly, the exceptions are listed only within
the Major Weapon Systems Rule, and the Commercial Rule merely cross-
references that coverage as an exception to the Commercial Rule. In
addition to avoiding unnecessary duplication in the coverage, this
approach provides an advantage in circumstances involving an assertion
regarding any type of commercial item that is not part of a major
weapon system or subsystem thereof, such that there would be no need to
parse through the entire Major Weapon Systems Rule only to find that
the item is covered by one of the exceptions to the Major Weapon
Systems Rule, and thus still covered by the Commercial Rule.
B. Application of the Revised Requirements and Procedures to Validation
of Asserted Restrictions on Computer Software
DoD has made no additional edits to extend the section 813(a)
construct to noncommercial computer software, and has deleted the
baseline coverage of noncommercial computer software in major systems,
currently at DFARS 227.7203-13(d) and 252.227-7019(f), because the
purpose for the Major Weapon Systems Rule is to function as an
exception to the Commercial Rule; but in the context of computer
software, these validation procedures do not apply to commercial
computer software, and the coverage for noncommercial computer software
is concerned only with the Major Weapon Systems Rule procedures for
noncommercial computer software. In the end, the application of the
Major Weapon Systems Rule in those cases is extremely unlikely to reach
a result that is any different from the application of the ``normal''
rules for noncommercial computer software. More specifically, in all
cases the Government cannot initiate a challenge unless it has a
reasonable basis to do so (see DFARS 227.7203-13(a) and (e)(3)(i), and
252.227-7019(d)(3) and (e)(1) for noncommercial computer software; see
also 227.7103-13(a), (c)(1), and (d)(4), and 252.227-7037(d)(2) for
technical data). After a challenge is initiated, both the Major Weapon
Systems Rule and the ``normal'' validation procedures would result in
the challenge being sustained unless the contractor provides
information to demonstrate that the noncommercial computer software was
developed exclusively at private expense.
[[Page 28814]]
III. Applicability to Contracts at or Below the Simplified Acquisition
Threshold (SAT) and for Commercial Items, Including Commercially
Available Off-the-Shelf (COTS) Items
This proposed rule does not add any new provisions or clauses or
add new requirements to existing provision or clauses. Rather, when
acquiring major weapon systems, it expands the circumstances relating
to commerciality in which the contracting officer shall presume that
development was exclusively at private expense.
IV. 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.
V. 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 performed
and is summarized as follows:
This proposed rule was initiated to implement section 813(a) of the
National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year (FY) 2016
(Pub. L. 114-92).
The objective of this rule is to reduce the requirement to respond
to Government challenges of restricted rights, by expanding the
applicability of the presumption regarding development exclusively at
private expense in accordance with section 813(a) of the NDAA for FY
2016.
DoD cannot accurately determine the number of small entities that
will be affected by this change in the regulations, because DoD does
not have sufficient information about subcontract awards of subsystems
and components of major weapon systems. However, DoD estimates an
annual reduction of 50 prechallenge requests for information and 2
challenges of asserted technical data restrictions. DoD further
estimates, based on data from the DoD FY 2014 Small Business
Procurement Scorecard, that this reduction in challenges will affect
about 17 small businesses (52 prechallenges/challenges x 33 percent of
subcontract awards to small businesses).
The proposed rule reduces the requirement to respond to Government
challenge of restricted rights. Under current regulations, the
presumption regarding development exclusively at private expense does
not apply to major systems or subsystems or components thereof, except
for commercially available off-the-shelf items. This rule expands
applicability of the presumption regarding development exclusively at
private expense with regard to a major weapon system, or a subsystem or
component thereof, to cover--
A commercial subsystem or component of a major weapon
system, if the major weapon system was acquired as a commercial item in
accordance with DFARS subpart 234.70 (10 U.S.C. 2379(a));
A component of a subsystem, if the subsystem was acquired
as a commercial item in accordance with DFARS subpart 234.70 (10 U.S.C.
2379(b)); and
Commercially available off-the-shelf items with
modifications of a type customarily available in the commercial
marketplace or minor modifications made to meet Federal Government
requirements.
The classes of small entities that will be affected by this
reduction are small businesses that provide any items in the above
categories that are not challenged due to the new statute.
The rule does not duplicate, overlap, or conflict with any other
Federal rules.
This rule reduces the burden on small entities to the maximum
extent permitted by 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 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-D008), in
correspondence.
VI. Paperwork Reduction Act
This rule affects the information collection requirements in the
provisions at DFARS 252.227-7019 and 252.227-7037, currently approved
under OMB Control Number 0704-0369, entitled ``Defense Federal
Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS): Rights in Technical Data and
Computer Software,'' in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (44
U.S.C. chapter 35). The rule is expected to result in a reduction of
1,040 hours in the total estimated burden hours. DoD will submit a
change request to OMB to document the reduction in burden hours at the
final rule stage.
A. Based on the advice of DoD subject matter experts, DoD currently
estimates approximately 500 prechallenge requests for information and
approximately 20 challenges per year associated with DFARS clause
252.227-7019, Validation of Asserted Restrictions--Computer Software,
and 252.227-7037, Validation of Restrictive Markings on Technical Data.
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 estimated average burden
to respond to a prechallenge request for information is 10 hours, and
the estimated average burden to respond to each challenge, is 270
hours, resulting in a weighted average of approximately 20 hours per
response.
Under current regulations, the presumption regarding development
exclusively at private expense does not apply to major systems or
subsystems or components thereof, except for commercially available
off-the-shelf items. This rule expands applicability of the presumption
regarding development exclusively at private expense with regard to a
major weapon system, or a subsystem or component thereof, to cover--
A commercial subsystem or component of a major weapon
system, if the major weapon system was acquired as a commercial item in
accordance with DFARS subpart 234.70 (10 U.S.C. 2379(a));
A component of a subsystem, if the subsystem was acquired
as a commercial item in accordance with DFARS subpart 234.70 (10 U.S.C.
2379(b)); and
Commercially available off-the-shelf items with
modifications of a type customarily available in the commercial
marketplace or minor modifications made to meet Federal Government
requirements.
Therefore, DoD estimates a reduction of about 10 percent in the
estimated number of prechallenge requests for information and
challenges under DFARS 252.227-7019 and 252.227-7037 as follows:
[[Page 28815]]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Current
requirement Revised Delta
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Respondents..................................................... 520 468 52
Responses per respondent........................................ 1 1 1
-----------------------------------------------
Total annual responses...................................... 520 468 52
Preparation hours per response.................................. 20 20 20
-----------------------------------------------
Total response burden hours............................. 10,400 9,360 1,040
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 proposed rule, but comments to OMB will be most useful if
received by OMB within 30 days after the date of this proposed rule.
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 2016-D008 in the subject line of
the message.
List of Subjects in 48 CFR Parts 227 and 252
Government procurement.
Jennifer L. Hawes,
Editor, Defense Acquisition Regulations System.
Therefore, 48 CFR parts 227 and 252 is proposed to be amended as
follows:
0
1. The authority citation for parts 227 and 252 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 41 U.S.C. 1303 and 48 CFR chapter 1.
PART 227--PATENT, DATA, AND COPYRIGHTS
0
2. Amend section 227.7103-13 by--
0
a. In paragraph (c)(1), removing ``commercial item, component, or
process'' and adding ``commercial item'' in its place and removing
``the item, component or process'' and adding ``that item'' in its
place; and
0
b. Revising paragraphs (c)(2)(i) and (ii).
The revisions read as follows:
227.7103-13 Government right to review, verify, challenge and validate
asserted restrictions.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(2) * * *
(i) Commercial items. Except as provided in paragraph (c)(2)(ii) of
this subsection, contracting officers shall presume that a commercial
item was developed exclusively at private expense whether or not a
contractor or subcontractor submits a justification in response to a
challenge notice. When a challenge is warranted, a contractor's or
subcontractor's failure to respond to the challenge notice cannot be
the sole basis for issuing a final decision denying the validity of an
asserted restriction.
(ii) Major weapon systems. When the contracting officer challenges
an asserted restriction regarding technical data for a major weapon
system or a subsystem or component thereof on the basis that the
technology was not developed exclusively at private expense--
(A) The presumption in paragraph (c)(2)(i) of this subsection
applies to--
(1) A commercial subsystem or component of a major weapon system,
if the major weapon system was acquired as a commercial item in
accordance with subpart 234.70 (10 U.S.C. 2379(a));
(2) A component of a subsystem, if the subsystem was acquired as a
commercial item in accordance with subpart 234.70 (10 U.S.C. 2379(b));
and
(3) Any other component, if the component is a commercially
available off-the-shelf item or a commercially available off-the-shelf
item with modifications of a type customarily available in the
commercial marketplace or minor modifications made to meet Federal
Government requirements; and
(B) In all other cases, the contracting officer shall sustain the
challenge unless information provided by the contractor or
subcontractor demonstrates that the item was developed exclusively at
private expense.
* * * * *
227.7203-13 [Amended]
0
3. Section 227.7203-13 is amended by removing paragraph (d) and
redesignating paragraphs (e), (f), and (g) as paragraphs (d), (e), and
(f), respectively.
PART 252--SOLICITATION PROVISIONS AND CONTRACT CLAUSES
0
4. Amend section 252.227-7019 by--
0
a. Removing the clause date ``(SEPT 2011)'' and adding ``(DATE)'' in
its place;
0
b. Removing paragraph (f);
0
c. Redesignating paragraphs (g), (h), (i), and (j) as paragraphs (f),
(g), (h), and (i), respectively;
0
d. In newly redesignated paragraph (f)(5)--
0
i. Removing ``(g)(1)'' and adding ``(f)(1)'' in its place;
0
ii. Removing ``Officer will'' and adding ``Officer shall'' in its
place; and
0
iii. Removing ``paragraph (f) of this clause and'';
0
f. In newly redesignated paragraph (f)(6) introductory text, removing
``the written explanation furnished pursuant to paragraph (f)(1) of
this clause, or any other'' and adding ``any'' in its place;
[[Page 28816]]
0
g. In newly redesignated paragraph (g)(1) introductory text, removing
``(h)(3)'' and adding ``(g)(3)'' in its place; and
0
h. In newly redesignated paragraph (g)(3), removing ``(h)(1)'' and
adding ``(g)(1)'' in its place.
0
5. Amend section 252.227-7037 by--
0
a. Removing the clause date ``(JUN 2013)'' and adding ``(DATE)'' in its
place; and
0
b. Revising paragraphs (b)(1) and (2).
The revision reads as follows:
252.227-7037 Validation of restrictive markings on technical data.
(b) * * *
(1) Commercial items. (i) Except as provided in paragraph (b)(2) of
this clause, the Contracting Officer will presume that the Contractor's
or a subcontractor's asserted use or release restrictions with respect
to a commercial item is justified on the basis that the item was
developed exclusively at private expense.
(ii) The Contracting Officer will not challenge such assertions
unless the Contracting Officer has information that demonstrates that
the commercial item was not developed exclusively at private expense.
(2) Major weapon systems. In the case of a challenge to a use or
release restriction that is asserted with respect to data of the
Contractor or a subcontractor for a major weapon system or a subsystem
or component thereof on the basis that the major weapon system,
subsystem, or component was developed exclusively at private expense--
(i) The presumption in paragraph (b)(1) of this clause applies to--
(A) A commercial subsystem or component of a major weapon system,
if the major weapon system was acquired as a commercial item in
accordance with DFARS subpart 234.70 (10 U.S.C. 2379(a));
(B) A component of a subsystem, if the subsystem was acquired as a
commercial item in accordance with DFARS subpart 234.70 (10 U.S.C.
2379(b)); and
(C) Any other component, if the component is a commercially
available off-the-shelf item or a commercially available off-the-shelf
item with modifications of a type customarily available in the
commercial marketplace or minor modifications made to meet Federal
Government requirements; and
(ii) In all other cases, the challenge to the use or release
restriction will be sustained unless information provided by the
Contractor or a subcontractor demonstrates that the item or process was
developed exclusively at private expense.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2016-10827 Filed 5-9-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001-06-P