Federal Acquisition Regulation: Audit of Settlement Proposals, 63158-63159 [2016-22070]
Download as PDF
63158
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 178 / Wednesday, September 14, 2016 / Proposed Rules
second-round allocations to new units
(or ultimately for allocation to existing
units).
Objections should be strictly limited
to whether EPA has correctly identified
the new units eligible for second-round
2016 NUSA allocations of CSAPR NOX
Ozone Season allowances according to
the criteria described above and should
be emailed to the address identified in
ADDRESSES. Objections must include: (1)
Precise identification of the specific
data the commenter believes are
inaccurate, (2) new proposed data upon
which the commenter believes EPA
should rely instead, and (3) the reasons
why EPA should rely on the
commenter’s proposed data and not the
data referenced in this notice.
Authority: 40 CFR 97.511(b).
Dated: September 7, 2016.
Reid P. Harvey,
Director, Clean Air Markets Division, Office
of Atmospheric Programs, Office of Air and
Radiation.
[FR Doc. 2016–22090 Filed 9–13–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 131
[EPA–HQ–OW–2015–0392; FRL–9952–39–
OW]
RIN 2040–AF61
Water Quality Standards;
Establishment of Revised Numeric
Criteria for Selenium for the San
Francisco Bay and Delta, State of
California; Extension of Public
Comment Period
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule; extension of
comment period.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is extending the comment
period for the proposed rule, ‘‘Water
Quality Standards; Establishment of
Revised Numeric Criteria for Selenium
for the San Francisco Bay and Delta,
State of California.’’ In response to
stakeholder requests, EPA is extending
the comment period for an additional 45
days, from September 13, 2016, to
October 28, 2016.
DATES: The comment period for the
proposed rule that published on July 15,
2016 (81 FR 46030) has been extended.
Comments must be received on or
before October 28, 2016.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:52 Sep 13, 2016
Jkt 238001
OW–2015–0392, to the Federal
eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
Once submitted, comments cannot be
edited or removed from Regulations.gov.
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. 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:
Julianne McLaughlin, Office of Water,
Standards and Health Protection
Division (4305T), U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania
Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20460;
telephone number: (202) 566–2542;
email address: Mclaughlin.Julianne@
epa.gov; or Diane E. Fleck, P.E., Esq.,
Water Division (WTR–2–1), U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency
Region 9, 75 Hawthorne Street, San
Francisco, CA 94105; telephone number
(415) 972–3527; email address:
Fleck.Diane@EPA.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On July
15, 2016, EPA published the proposed
rule, ‘‘Water Quality Standards;
Establishment of Revised Numeric
Criteria for Selenium for the San
Francisco Bay and Delta, State of
California’’ in the Federal Register (81
FR 46030). EPA proposes to revise the
current federal Clean Water Act
selenium water quality criteria
applicable to the San Francisco Bay and
Delta to ensure that the criteria are set
at levels that protect aquatic life and
aquatic-dependent wildlife, including
federally listed threatened and
endangered species.
The original deadline to submit
comments on the proposed rule was
September 13, 2016. This action extends
the comment period for 45 days. Written
comments must now be received on or
before October 28, 2016.
For more information on this
proposed rule, please visit https://
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
epa.gov/wqs-tech/water-qualitystandards-establishment-revisednumeric-criteria-selenium-sanfrancisco-bay.
Dated: September 7, 2016.
Michael H. Shapiro,
Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of
Water.
[FR Doc. 2016–22087 Filed 9–13–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
GENERAL SERVICES
ADMINISTRATION
NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND
SPACE ADMINISTRATION
48 CFR Part 49
[FAR Case 2015–039; Docket No. 2015–
0039, Sequence No. 1]
RIN 9000–AN26
Federal Acquisition Regulation: Audit
of Settlement Proposals
Department of Defense (DoD),
General Services Administration (GSA),
and the National Aeronautics and Space
Administration (NASA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
DoD, GSA, and NASA are
proposing to amend the Federal
Acquisition Regulation (FAR) to raise
the dollar threshold requirement for the
audit of prime contract settlement
proposals and subcontract settlements
from $100,000 to $750,000.
DATES: Interested parties should submit
written comments to the Regulatory
Secretariat Division at one of the
addresses shown below on or before
November 14, 2016 to be considered in
the formation of the final rule.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments in
response to FAR case 2015–039 by any
of the following methods:
• Regulations.gov: https://
www.regulations.gov. Submit comments
via the Federal eRulemaking portal by
searching for ‘‘FAR Case 2015–039’’.
Select the link ‘‘Comment Now’’ that
corresponds with ‘‘FAR Case 2015–
039.’’ Follow the instructions provided
on the screen. Please include your
name, company name (if any), and
‘‘FAR Case 2015–039’’ on your attached
document.
• Mail: General Services
Administration, Regulatory Secretariat
Division (MVCB), ATTN: Ms. Flowers,
1800 F Street NW., 2nd Floor,
Washington, DC 20405.
Instructions: Please submit comments
only and cite FAR Case 2015–039, in all
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\14SEP1.SGM
14SEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 178 / Wednesday, September 14, 2016 / Proposed Rules
correspondence related to this case. All
comments received will be posted
without change to https://
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal and/or business confidential
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.
Kathlyn Hopkins, Procurement Analyst,
at 202–969–7226 for clarification of
content. For information pertaining to
status or publication schedules, contact
the Regulatory Secretariat Division at
202–501–4755. Please cite FAR Case
2015–039.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
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.
I. Background
Of all contracts awarded to small
businesses in a typical year, the number
terminated and subject to FAR part 49
procedures is less than one-fifth of one
percent. Moreover, since the rule raises the
audit threshold, even fewer small businesses
will be subject to audits of their termination
settlement proposals.
DOD, GSA, and NASA are proposing
to amend FAR 49.107 to increase the
dollar threshold for the audit of prime
contract settlement proposals and
subcontract settlements, submitted in
the event of contract termination. The
threshold is increased from $100,000 to
align with the threshold in FAR 15.403–
4(a)(1) for obtaining certified cost or
pricing data, which is currently
$750,000. Other than the dollar amount,
there will be no link between the
requirements for certified cost or pricing
data and the audit threshold for
termination settlement proposals.
The proposed amendment will help
alleviate contract close-out backlogs and
enable contracting officers to more
quickly deobligate excess funds from
terminated contracts.
Under FAR 49.001, a ‘‘settlement
proposal’’ is a proposal for effecting
settlement of a contract terminated in
whole or in part, submitted by a
contractor or subcontractor in the form,
and supported by the data, required by
FAR part 49. Termination clauses and
other contract clauses authorize
contracting officers to terminate
contracts for convenience or for default,
and to enter into settlement agreements.
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:52 Sep 13, 2016
Jkt 238001
III. Regulatory Flexibility Act
DoD, GSA, and NASA do not expect
this rule to have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small
entities within the meaning of the
Regulatory Flexibility Act 5 U.S.C. 601,
et seq. because the rule raises the
threshold for audit requirements, thus
reducing burdens on all types of
businesses. However, an Initial
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA)
has been performed and it is
summarized as follows:
The Regulatory Secretariat Division
has submitted a copy of the IRFA to the
Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small
Business Administration. A copy of the
IRFA may be obtained from the
Regulatory Secretariat Division. DoD,
GSA, and NASA invite comments from
small business concerns and other
interested parties on the expected
impact of this proposed rule on small
entities.
DoD, GSA, and NASA will also
consider comments from small entities
concerning the existing regulations in
subparts affected by the proposed rule
consistent with 5 U.S.C. 610. Interested
parties must submit such comments
separately and should cite 5 U.S.C. 610
(FAR Case 2015–039), in
correspondence.
IV. Paperwork Reduction Act
The rule does not contain any
information collection requirements that
require the approval of the Office of
Management and Budget under the
Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C.
chapter 35).
List of Subjects in 48 CFR Part 49
Government procurement.
Dated: September 9, 2016.
William F. Clark,
Director, Office of Government-wide
Acquisition Policy, Office of Acquisition
Policy, Office of Government-wide Policy.
Therefore, DoD, GSA, and NASA are
proposing to amend 48 CFR part 49 as
set forth below:
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 9990
63159
PART 49—TERMINATION OF
CONTRACTS
1. The authority citation for 48 CFR
part 49 continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 40 U.S.C. 121(c); 10 U.S.C.
chapter 137; and 51 U.S.C. 20113.
2. Amend section 16.505 by revising
paragraphs (a) and (b) to read as follows:
■
49.107 Audit of prime contract settlement
proposals and subcontract settlements.
(a) The TCO shall refer each prime
contractor settlement proposal valued at
or above the threshold for obtaining
certified cost or pricing data set forth in
FAR 15.403–4(a)(1) to the appropriate
audit agency for review and
recommendations. The TCO may submit
settlement proposals of less than the
threshold for obtaining certified cost or
pricing data to the audit agency.
Referrals shall indicate any specific
information or data that the TCO
considers relevant and shall include
facts and circumstances that will assist
the audit agency in performing its
function. The audit agency shall
develop requested information and may
make any further accounting reviews it
considers appropriate. After its review,
the audit agency shall submit written
comments and recommendations to the
TCO. When a formal examination of
settlement proposals valued under the
threshold for obtaining certified cost or
pricing data is not warranted, the TCO
will perform or have performed a desk
review and include a written summary
of the review in the termination case
file.
(b) The TCO shall refer subcontract
settlements received for approval or
ratification to the appropriate audit
agency for review and recommendations
when:
(1) The amount exceeds the threshold
for obtaining certified cost or pricing
data; or
(2) The TCO determines that a
complete or partial accounting review is
advisable. The audit agency shall
submit written comments and
recommendations to the TCO. The
review by the audit agency does not
relieve the prime contractor or higher
tier subcontractor of the responsibility
for performing an accounting review.
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 2016–22070 Filed 9–13–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6820–EP–P
E:\FR\FM\14SEP1.SGM
14SEP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 178 (Wednesday, September 14, 2016)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 63158-63159]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-22070]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION
NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION
48 CFR Part 49
[FAR Case 2015-039; Docket No. 2015-0039, Sequence No. 1]
RIN 9000-AN26
Federal Acquisition Regulation: Audit of Settlement Proposals
AGENCY: Department of Defense (DoD), General Services Administration
(GSA), and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: DoD, GSA, and NASA are proposing to amend the Federal
Acquisition Regulation (FAR) to raise the dollar threshold requirement
for the audit of prime contract settlement proposals and subcontract
settlements from $100,000 to $750,000.
DATES: Interested parties should submit written comments to the
Regulatory Secretariat Division at one of the addresses shown below on
or before November 14, 2016 to be considered in the formation of the
final rule.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments in response to FAR case 2015-039 by any of
the following methods:
Regulations.gov: https://www.regulations.gov. Submit
comments via the Federal eRulemaking portal by searching for ``FAR Case
2015-039''. Select the link ``Comment Now'' that corresponds with ``FAR
Case 2015-039.'' Follow the instructions provided on the screen. Please
include your name, company name (if any), and ``FAR Case 2015-039'' on
your attached document.
Mail: General Services Administration, Regulatory
Secretariat Division (MVCB), ATTN: Ms. Flowers, 1800 F Street NW., 2nd
Floor, Washington, DC 20405.
Instructions: Please submit comments only and cite FAR Case 2015-039,
in all
[[Page 63159]]
correspondence related to this case. All comments received will be
posted without change to https://www.regulations.gov, including any
personal and/or business confidential 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. Kathlyn Hopkins, Procurement
Analyst, at 202-969-7226 for clarification of content. For information
pertaining to status or publication schedules, contact the Regulatory
Secretariat Division at 202-501-4755. Please cite FAR Case 2015-039.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
DOD, GSA, and NASA are proposing to amend FAR 49.107 to increase
the dollar threshold for the audit of prime contract settlement
proposals and subcontract settlements, submitted in the event of
contract termination. The threshold is increased from $100,000 to align
with the threshold in FAR 15.403-4(a)(1) for obtaining certified cost
or pricing data, which is currently $750,000. Other than the dollar
amount, there will be no link between the requirements for certified
cost or pricing data and the audit threshold for termination settlement
proposals.
The proposed amendment will help alleviate contract close-out
backlogs and enable contracting officers to more quickly deobligate
excess funds from terminated contracts.
Under FAR 49.001, a ``settlement proposal'' is a proposal for
effecting settlement of a contract terminated in whole or in part,
submitted by a contractor or subcontractor in the form, and supported
by the data, required by FAR part 49. Termination clauses and other
contract clauses authorize contracting officers to terminate contracts
for convenience or for default, and to enter into settlement
agreements.
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, GSA, and NASA do not expect this rule to have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities within the
meaning of the Regulatory Flexibility Act 5 U.S.C. 601, et seq. because
the rule raises the threshold for audit requirements, thus reducing
burdens on all types of businesses. However, an Initial Regulatory
Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) has been performed and it is summarized as
follows:
Of all contracts awarded to small businesses in a typical year,
the number terminated and subject to FAR part 49 procedures is less
than one-fifth of one percent. Moreover, since the rule raises the
audit threshold, even fewer small businesses will be subject to
audits of their termination settlement proposals.
The Regulatory Secretariat Division has submitted a copy of the
IRFA to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business
Administration. A copy of the IRFA may be obtained from the Regulatory
Secretariat Division. DoD, GSA, and NASA invite comments from small
business concerns and other interested parties on the expected impact
of this proposed rule on small entities.
DoD, GSA, and NASA will also consider comments from small entities
concerning the existing regulations in subparts affected by the
proposed rule consistent with 5 U.S.C. 610. Interested parties must
submit such comments separately and should cite 5 U.S.C. 610 (FAR Case
2015-039), in correspondence.
IV. Paperwork Reduction Act
The rule does not contain any information collection requirements
that require the approval of the Office of Management and Budget under
the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. chapter 35).
List of Subjects in 48 CFR Part 49
Government procurement.
Dated: September 9, 2016.
William F. Clark,
Director, Office of Government-wide Acquisition Policy, Office of
Acquisition Policy, Office of Government-wide Policy.
Therefore, DoD, GSA, and NASA are proposing to amend 48 CFR part 49
as set forth below:
PART 49--TERMINATION OF CONTRACTS
0
1. The authority citation for 48 CFR part 49 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 40 U.S.C. 121(c); 10 U.S.C. chapter 137; and 51
U.S.C. 20113.
0
2. Amend section 16.505 by revising paragraphs (a) and (b) to read as
follows:
49.107 Audit of prime contract settlement proposals and subcontract
settlements.
(a) The TCO shall refer each prime contractor settlement proposal
valued at or above the threshold for obtaining certified cost or
pricing data set forth in FAR 15.403-4(a)(1) to the appropriate audit
agency for review and recommendations. The TCO may submit settlement
proposals of less than the threshold for obtaining certified cost or
pricing data to the audit agency. Referrals shall indicate any specific
information or data that the TCO considers relevant and shall include
facts and circumstances that will assist the audit agency in performing
its function. The audit agency shall develop requested information and
may make any further accounting reviews it considers appropriate. After
its review, the audit agency shall submit written comments and
recommendations to the TCO. When a formal examination of settlement
proposals valued under the threshold for obtaining certified cost or
pricing data is not warranted, the TCO will perform or have performed a
desk review and include a written summary of the review in the
termination case file.
(b) The TCO shall refer subcontract settlements received for
approval or ratification to the appropriate audit agency for review and
recommendations when:
(1) The amount exceeds the threshold for obtaining certified cost
or pricing data; or
(2) The TCO determines that a complete or partial accounting review
is advisable. The audit agency shall submit written comments and
recommendations to the TCO. The review by the audit agency does not
relieve the prime contractor or higher tier subcontractor of the
responsibility for performing an accounting review.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2016-22070 Filed 9-13-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6820-EP-P