Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 52 / Thursday, March 17, 2011 / Proposed Rules 14641 

List of Subjects in 42 CFR Part 1007 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Fraud, Grant programs— 

health, Medicaid, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements. 

Accordingly, 42 CFR part 1007 is 

proposed to be amended as set forth 

below: 

PART 1007—[AMENDED] 

1. Revise the authority citation to part 

1007 to read as follows: 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 1396b(a)(6), 

1396b(b)(3), 1396b(q), and 1302. 

2. In § 1007.1, add in alphabetical 

order the definition for ‘‘data mining’’ to 

read as follows: 

§ 1007.1 Definitions. 

* * * * * 

Data mining is defined as the practice 

of electronically sorting Medicaid 

claims through statistical models and 

intelligent technologies to uncover 

patterns and relationships contained 

within the Medicaid claims activity and 

history to identify aberrant utilization 

and billing practices that are potentially 

fraudulent. 

* * * * * 

3. In § 1007.17, add paragraph (i) to 

read as follows: 

§ 1007.17 Annual report. 

* * * * * 

(i) All costs expended that year 

attributed to data mining activities 

under § 1007.20; the number of cases 

generated from those data mining 

activities; the outcome and status of 

those cases, including the expected and 

actual monetary recoveries (both 

Federal and non-Federal share); and any 

other relevant indicia of return on 

investment from such activities. 

* * * * * 

4. In § 1007.19, revise paragraph (e)(2) 

to read as follows: 

§ 1007.19 Federal financial participation 

(FFP). 

* * * * * 

(e) * * * 

(2) Routine verification with 

recipients of whether services billed by 

providers were actually received, or, 

except as provided in section 1007.20, 

efforts to identify situations in which a 

question of fraud may exist, including 

the screening of claims and analysis of 

patterns of practice that involve data 

mining as defined in section 1007.1; 

* * * * * 

5. Add § 1007.20 to read as follows: 

§ 1007.20 Conditions under which data 

mining is permissible and approval by HHS 

Office of Inspector General. 

(a) Notwithstanding § 1007.19(e)(2), a 

unit may engage in data mining and 

receive Federal Financial Participation 

only under the three following 

conditions: 

(1) The activity has a defined duration 

and staff time devoted to the activity is 

described; 

(2) The MFCU identifies the methods 

of cooperation between the MFCU and 

State Medicaid agency as well as a 

primary point of contact for data mining 

at the two agencies; and 

(3) MFCU employees engaged in data 

mining receive specialized training in 

data mining techniques. 

(b) The MFCU shall describe how it 

will comply with each of the conditions 

described in paragraph (a) of this 

section as part of the agreement required 

by § 1007.9(d). 

(c) The Office of Inspector General, 

Department of Health and Human 

Services, in consultation with the 

Centers for Medicare & Medicaid 

Services, approves in advance the 

provisions of the agreement as defined 

in paragraph (b) of this section. 

Dated: May 14, 2010. 

Daniel R. Levinson, 

Inspector General. 

Dated: October 15, 2010. 

Kathleen Sebelius, 

Secretary, Department of Health and Human 

Services. 

Editorial Note: This document was 

received in the Office of the Federal Register 

on March 10, 2011. 

[FR Doc. 2011–6012 Filed 3–16–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4152–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

Defense Acquisition Regulations 

System 

48 CFR Parts 209 and 252 

Defense Federal Acquisition 

Regulation Supplement; Identification 

of Critical Safety Items (DFARS Case 

2010–D022) 

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 add 

a contract clause that clearly identifies 

any items being purchased that are 

critical safety items so that the proper 

risk-based surveillance can be 

performed. 

DATES: Comments on the proposed rule 

should be submitted in writing to the 

address shown below on or before May 

16, 2011, to be considered in the 

formation of the final rule. 

ADDRESSES: Submit comments 

identified by DFARS Case 2010–D022, 

using any of the following methods: 

Æ Regulations.gov: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. 

Submit comments via the Federal 

eRulemaking portal by inputting 

‘‘DFARS Case 2010–D022’’ under the 

heading ‘‘Enter keyword or ID’’ and 

selecting ‘‘Search.’’ Select the link 

‘‘Submit a Comment’’ that corresponds 

with ‘‘DFARS Case 2010–D022.’’ Follow 

the instructions provided at the ‘‘Submit 

a Comment’’ screen. Please include your 

name, company name (if any), and 

‘‘DFARS Case 2010–D022’’ on your 

attached document. 

Æ E-mail: dfars@osd.mil. Include 

DFARS Case 2010–D022 in the subject 

line of the message. 

Æ Fax: 703–602–0350. 

Æ Mail: Defense Acquisition 

Regulations System, Attn: Meredith 

Murphy, OUSD(AT&L)DPAP(DARS), 

Room 3B855, 3060 Defense Pentagon, 

Washington, DC 20301–3060. 

Comments received generally will be 

posted without change to http:// 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided. To 

confirm receipt of your comment(s), 

please check http://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: 

Meredith Murphy, Defense Acquisition 

Regulations System, OUSD (AT&L) 

DPAP (DARS), Room 3B855, 3060 

Defense Pentagon, Washington, DC 

20301–3060. Telephone 703–602–1302; 

facsimile 703–602–0350. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

This DFARS case was initiated at the 

request of the Defense Contract 

Management Agency so that when DoD 

requiring activities identify 

procurements involving critical safety 

items, the buying activities will include 

a clause in the solicitation and resulting 

contract that identifies specific items in 

the procurement that are critical safety 

items. 

The National Defense Authorization 

Act for Fiscal Year 2004 (Pub. L. 108– 

136), section 802, entitled ‘‘Quality 

Control in Procurement of Aviation 

Critical Safety Items and Related 

WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1

14642 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 52 / Thursday, March 17, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

Services,’’ defined ‘‘aviation critical 

safety item’’ to mean a part, assembly, 

installation equipment, launch 

equipment, recovery equipment, or 

support equipment for an aircraft or 

aviation weapon system which, if it 

failed, could cause catastrophic damage, 

unacceptable risk of personal injury, or 

loss of life. Implementing regulations 

established processes for designated 

design control activities to identify 

aviation critical safety items. Similar 

definitions and requirements have been 

applied to ship critical safety items to 

implement section 130 of the National 

Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 

Year 2007. When design control 

activities identify such items to the 

contracting activity, the latter will 

contract only with sources approved by 

the design control activity for the 

procurement, modification, repair, or 

overhaul of critical safety items. Using 

the clause in this proposed rule will 

enable contract administration activities 

to identify and apply additional riskbased surveillance to comply with joint 

agency instructions, such as 

Management of Aviation Critical Safety 

Items (dated January 25, 2006). 

DoD is proposing to amend DFARS 

subpart 209.2, Qualifications 

Requirements, to add a new contract 

clause. Specifically, DoD proposes to 

add a clause prescription at DFARS 

209.270–5, Contract clause, and a new 

clause at 252.209–700X, Critical Safety 

Items. The requirement to identify 

critical safety items, procure such items 

only from sources designated by the 

design control activity, and apply 

enhanced risk-based surveillance has 

been in effect for a number of years. 

However, there was no single DoD-wide 

means of complying with this 

requirement. 

II. Executive Order 12866 

This is a significant regulatory action 

and, therefore, was subject to review 

under Executive Order 12866, 

Regulatory Planning and Review, dated 

September 30, 1993. This rule is not a 

major rule under 5 U.S.C. 804. 

III. Executive Order 13563 

In accordance with Executive Order 

13563, Improving Regulation and 

Regulatory Review, dated January 18, 

2011, DoD has determined that this rule 

is not excessively burdensome to the 

public. It is consistent with the intent of 

the National Defense Authorization Acts 

for Fiscal Years 2004 and 2007 and joint 

agency instructions, such as 

Management of Aviation Critical Safety 

Items (dated January 25, 2006), to 

identify and apply additional risk-based 

surveillance to items identified as 

critical safety items. 

IV. Regulatory Flexibility Act 

DoD does not expect this rule to have 

a significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

within the meaning of the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601, et seq., 

because the rule does not impose new 

requirements on small entities. Its 

purpose is to alert Government qualityassurance activities to existing 

heightened surveillance requirements 

that are imposed by DoD requiring 

activities. The process for identifying an 

item as a critical safety item occurs 

entirely outside the procurement 

process, as does the process of 

approving a source for production of a 

critical safety item. Therefore, an initial 

regulatory flexibility analysis has not 

been prepared. 

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 2010–D022) in 

correspondence. 

V. Paperwork Reduction Act 

The rule does not contain any 

information collection requirements that 

require the approval of the Office of 

Management and Budget under the 

Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 

chapter 35). 

List of Subjects in 48 CFR Parts 209 and 

252 

Government procurement. 

Ynette R. Shelkin, 

Editor, Defense Acquisition Regulations 

System. 

Therefore, 48 CFR parts 209 and 252 

are proposed to be amended as follows: 

1. The authority citation for 48 CFR 

parts 209 and 252 continues to read as 

follows: 

Authority: 41 U.S.C. 1303 and 48 CFR 

chapter 1. 

PART 209—CONTRACTOR 

QUALIFICATIONS 

2. Add section 209.270–5 to read as 

follows: 

209.270–5 Contract clause. 

The contracting officer shall insert the 

clause at 252.209–700X, Critical Safety 

Items, in solicitations and contracts 

when the acquisition includes one or 

more items designated by the design 

control activity as critical safety items. 

PART 252—SOLICITATION 

PROVISIONS AND CONTRACT 

CLAUSES 

3. Add section 252.209–700X to read 

as follows: 

252.209–700X Critical Safety Items. 

As prescribed in 209.270–5, use the 

following clause: 

Critical Safety Items (Date) 

(a) Definitions. 

Aviation critical safety item means a part, 

an assembly, installation equipment, launch 

equipment, recovery equipment, or support 

equipment for an aircraft or aviation weapon 

system if the part, assembly, or equipment 

contains a characteristic, any failure, 

malfunction, or absence of which could 

cause— 

(1) A catastrophic or critical failure 

resulting in the loss of, or serious damage to, 

the aircraft or weapon system; 

(2) An unacceptable risk of personal injury 

or loss of life; or 

(3) An uncommanded engine shutdown 

that jeopardizes safety. 

Design control activity— 

(1) With respect to an aviation critical 

safety item, means the systems command of 

a military department that is specifically 

responsible for ensuring the airworthiness of 

an aviation system or equipment, in which 

an aviation critical safety item is to be used; 

and 

(2) With respect to a ship critical safety 

item, means the systems command of a 

military department that is specifically 

responsible for ensuring the seaworthiness of 

a ship or ship equipment, in which a ship 

critical safety item is to be used. 

Ship critical safety item means any ship 

part, assembly, or support equipment 

containing a characteristic, the failure, 

malfunction, or absence of which could 

cause— 

(1) A catastrophic or critical failure 

resulting in loss of, or serious damage to, the 

ship; or 

(2) An unacceptable risk of personal injury 

or loss of life. 

(b) Identification of critical safety items. 

One or more of the items being acquired 

under this contract is an aviation or ship 

critical safety item. The following items have 

been designated aviation critical safety items 

or ship critical safety items by the designated 

design control activity: 

lllllllllllllllllllll

lllllllllllllllllllll

lllllllllllllllllllll

lllllllllllllllllllll

(insert additional lines, as necessary) 

(c) Heightened quality assurance 

surveillance. Items designated in paragraph 

(b) of this clause are subject to heightened, 

risk-based surveillance by the designated 

quality assurance representative. 

WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1

Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 52 / Thursday, March 17, 2011 / Proposed Rules 14643 

(End of clause) 

[FR Doc. 2011–6231 Filed 3–16–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 5001–08–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Pipeline and Hazardous Materials 

Safety Administration 

49 CFR Part 173 

[Docket Number PHMSA–2009–0303 

(HM–213D)] 

RIN 2137–AE53 

Hazardous Materials: Safety 

Requirements for External Product 

Piping on Cargo Tanks Transporting 

Flammable Liquids 

AGENCY: Pipeline and Hazardous 

Materials Safety Administration 

(PHMSA), DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking; 

extension of comment period. 

SUMMARY: PHMSA is notifying the 

public of our intent to extend the 

comment period by 30 days for a notice 

of proposed rulemaking published on 

January 27, 2011. 

DATES: The comment period for the 

NPRM closing on March 28, 2011, is 

extended until April 27, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

identified by the docket number 

(PHMSA–2009–0303) by any of the 

following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to 

http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

online instructions for submitting 

comments. 

• Fax: 1–202–493–2251. 

• Mail: Docket Operations, U.S. 

Department of Transportation, West 

Building, Ground Floor, Room W12– 

140, Routing Symbol M–30, 1200 New 

Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 

20590. 

• Hand Delivery: To Docket 

Operations, Room W12–140 on the 

ground floor of the West Building, 1200 

New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, 

DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., 

Monday through Friday, except Federal 

Holidays. 

Instructions: All submissions must 

include the agency name and docket 

number for this notice at the beginning 

of the comment. Note that all comments 

received will be posted without change 

to the docket management system, 

including any personal information 

provided. 

Docket: For access to the dockets to 

read background documents or 

comments received, go to http:// 

www.regulations.gov, or DOT’s Docket 

Operations Office (see ADDRESSES). 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dirk 

Der Kinderen, Standards and 

Rulemaking Division, Pipeline and 

Hazardous Materials Safety 

Administration, telephone (202) 366– 

8553; or Leonard Majors, Engineering 

and Research Division, Pipeline and 

Hazardous Materials Safety 

Administration, telephone (202) 366– 

4545. 

Privacy Act: Anyone is able to search 

the electronic form of any written 

communications and comments 

received into any of our dockets by the 

name of the individual submitting the 

document (or signing the document, if 

submitted on behalf of an association, 

business, labor union, etc.). You may 

review DOT’s complete Privacy Act 

Statement in the Federal Register 

published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 

19477) or you may visit http:// 

www.regulations.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

On January 27, 2011, PHMSA 

published a notice of proposed 

rulemaking (NPRM) (HM–213D; 76 FR 

4847) seeking public comment on a 

proposal to prohibit the transportation 

of flammable liquids in exposed 

external product piping (wetlines) on a 

cargo tank motor vehicle (CTMV) unless 

the CTMV is equipped with bottom 

damage protection that conforms to the 

requirements of § 178.337–10 or 

§ 178.345–8(b)(1), as appropriate. We 

also invited comment on a number of 

provisions associated with this 

proposed prohibition such as the 

residue performance standard relating to 

applicability of the proposed 

prohibition as well as conditional 

exceptions and the proposed transition 

period and compliance dates. See the 

January 27, 2011 NPRM for background 

and a complete discussion of the 

proposals. 

II. Comment Period Extension 

We received comments from the 

American Trucking Associations, Inc. 

(ATA), the Commercial Vehicle Safety 

Alliance, the National Tank Truck 

Carriers, Inc., and the Tank Truck 

Manufacturers Association requesting 

an extension of the comment period. 

These member organizations represent 

carriers, manufacturers, and officials 

affected by the NPRM. They state their 

primary basis for extension is to allow 

for thorough review and analysis of the 

HM–213D docket materials. For 

example, the ATA notes in their 

comment that the regulatory evaluation 

for this NPRM contains numerous new 

assumptions and revised economic 

analyses that warrant extensive 

evaluation by industry experts and 

outside consultants. They indicate that 

the evaluation will require a review of 

(1) The wetlines incidents cited by 

PHMSA; (2) the use and retrofit 

requirements associated with a manual 

purging system; and (3) the feasibility of 

alternatives available to comply with 

the proposed prohibition. The 

associations also indicate the need for 

time to convene with members at 

meetings scheduled to occur in April 

and May of 2011 to present findings and 

to obtain feedback. Additionally, the 

comment period for this NPRM overlaps 

with numerous other regulatory 

initiatives within DOT and other 

Federal agencies, such as the 

Environmental Protection Agency, the 

Occupational Safety and Health 

Administration, and the U.S. Customs 

and Border Protection that impact their 

members. Finally, they note that the 

trucking industry is dominated by small 

businesses that do not have the 

resources to understand and 

meaningfully participate in the 

rulemaking process of so many 

concurrent rulemaking actions. In light 

of the significance of this rulemaking to 

their members and for the reasons 

summarized above, the associations 

request that PHMSA grant an extension 

to the HM–213D NPRM comment period 

ranging from sixty days to six months. 

Although PHMSA continues to 

believe that the initial 60-day comment 

period provides enough time to review 

and respond to the rulemaking 

proposals and supporting material, 

PHMSA is consenting to the commenter 

requests to extend the comment period 

to ensure sufficient time for public 

review. However, we do not consider a 

lengthy extension (e.g., 120 days) to be 

warranted. Accordingly, in the interest 

of moving this rulemaking action 

forward in a timely manner, we believe, 

in addition to the time that remains in 

the current comment period, extending 

the comment period by 30 days would 

be sufficient to relieve the burdens of 

conducting an extensive evaluation, 

overlapping rulemaking actions, and 

needing time to meet with respective 

trucking industry members for feedback. 

Thus, the comment period for the 

HM–213D NPRM is extended from 

March 28, 2011 until April 27, 2011. 

WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1