36382 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 111 / Thursday, June 8, 2000 / Rules and Regulations

apply to construction permits that are

awarded on a non-comparative basis,

such as those awarded to non-mutually

exclusive applicants or through

settlement.

PART 74—EXPERIMENTAL RADIO,

AUXILIARY, SPECIAL BROADCAST

AND OTHER PROGRAM

DISTRIBUTION SERVICES

17. The authority citation for part 74

continues to read:

Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 303, 307, and

554.

18. Section 74.1233 is amended by

adding paragraphs (b)(3) and (b)(4);

revising paragraph (c)(1); removing

paragraph (e)(4) and revising paragraphs

(e)(3) introductory text, (e)(3), (i), (e)(3)

(ii), and (e)(3)(iii) to read as follows:

§ 74.1233 Processing FM translator and

booster station applications.

* * * * *

(b) * * *

(3) Applications for reserved band FM

translator stations will be processed

using filing window procedures. The

FCC will specify by Public Notice, a

period for filing reserved band FM

translator applications for a new station

or for major modifications in the

facilities of an authorized station. FM

translator applications for new facilities

or for major modifications will be

accepted only during these specified

periods. Applications submitted prior to

the window opening date identified in

the Public Notice will be returned as

premature. Applications submitted after

the specified deadline will be dismissed

with prejudice as untimely.

(4) Timely filed applications for new

facilities or for major modifications for

reserved band FM Translators will be

processed pursuant to the procedures

set forth in subpart K of Part 73

(§ 73.7000 et seq.) Subsequently, the

FCC will release Public Notices

identifying: mutually exclusive groups

of applications; applications received

during the window filing period which

are found to be non-mutually exclusive;

tentative selectees determined pursuant

to the point system procedures set forth

in § 73.7003 of this chapter; and

acceptable applications. The Public

Notices will also announce: additional

procedures to be followed for certain

groups of applications; deadlines for

filing additional information; and dates

by which petitions to deny must be filed

in accordance with the provisions of

§ 73.7004 of this chapter. If the

applicant is duly qualified, and upon

examination, the FCC finds that the

public interest, convenience and

necessity will be served by the granting

of the application, it will be granted. If

an application is found not to be

acceptable for filing, the application

will be returned, and subject to the

amendment requirements of § 73.3522

of this chapter.

(c) * * *

(1) There is not pending a mutually

exclusive application.

* * * * *

(e) * * *

(3) Where there are no available

frequencies to substitute for a mutually

exclusive application, the FCC will

apply the same point system identified

for full service reserved band FM

stations in § 73.7003(b) of this chapter.

In the event of a tie, the FCC will

consider:

(i) Each applicant’s number of

existing FM translator authorizations

(licenses and construction permits) of

the same type (fill-in or non fill-in as

defined in paragraphs (e)(1) and (e)(2) of

this section) as of the time of

application shall be compared, and the

applicant with the fewest authorizations

will be chosen as tentative selectee;

(ii) If a tie remains, after the tie

breaker in paragraph (c)(3)(i) of this

section, the remaining applicant with

the fewest pending new and major

change applications for FM translators

of the same type (fill-in or non fill-in)

will be chosen as tentative selectee;

(iii) Where the procedures in

paragraphs (e)(1), (e)(2) and (e)(3)(i) and

(e)(3)(ii) of this section fail to resolve the

mutual exclusivity, the applications will

be processed on a first-come-first-served

basis.

[FR Doc. 00–14439 Filed 6–7–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6712–01–U

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS

COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 76

Cable Television Consumer Protection

and Competition Act of 1992;

Horizontal Ownership Limits

AGENCY: Federal Communications

Commission.

ACTION: Final rule; lifting of stay.

SUMMARY: This document announces

that the Commission’s voluntarilyimposed stay of the cable horizontal

ownership rules was lifted on May 19,

2000 and that the cable horizontal

ownership rules became effective on

May 19, 2000.

DATES: The stay of 47 CFR 76.503(a)

through (f) was lifted May 19, 2000.

Parties not in compliance with the

horizontal ownership rules on this date

must come into compliance on or before

November 15, 2000.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Darryl Cooper at (202) 418–7200 or via

Internet at dacooper@fcc.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Synopsis of Action

1. On its own motion, the

Commission reconsidered the

conditions under which it would lift the

voluntarily-imposed stay of the

horizontal ownership rules, 47 CFR

76.503. These rules were adopted and

stayed in part on October 8, 1999 at 64

FR 67198 (Dec 1, 1999).

2. Subsequently, the Commission

ordered that its horizontal ownership

rules be stayed until the U.S. Court of

Appeals for the D.C Circuit issued a

decision upholding the constitutionality

of section 613(f)(1)(A) of the

Communications Act of 1934, as

amended, 47 U.S.C. 533(f)(1)(A). The

Commission also ordered that parties

not in compliance with the rules on the

date the U.S. Court of Appeals for the

D.C. Circuit issued such decision must

come into compliance within 180 days

of the court decision. This order was

published in the Federal Register (65

FR 12135, March 8, 2000).

3. On May 19, 2000, the U.S. Court of

Appeals for the D.C. Circuit issued its

decision, upholding the

constitutionality of section 613(f)(1)(A)

of the Act, as amended 47 U.S.C.

533(f)(1)(A).

Federal Communications Commission.

William H. Johnson,

Deputy Bureau Chief, Cable Services Bureau.

[FR Doc. 00–14538 Filed 6–7–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6712–01–U

OFFICE OF PERSONNEL

MANAGEMENT

48 CFR Parts 1604, 1615, 1632, and

1652

RIN 3206 AI67

Federal Employees Health Benefits

(FEHB) Program and Department of

Defense (DoD) Demonstration Project;

and Other Miscellaneous Changes

AGENCY: Office of Personnel

Management.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: OPM is issuing a final

regulation to implement the portion of

the Defense Authorization Act for 1999

that establishes authority for a

demonstration project under which

certain Medicare and other eligible DoD

beneficiaries can enroll in health benefit

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 111 / Thursday, June 8, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 36383

plans in certain geographic areas under

the Federal Employees Health Benefits

(FEHB) Program. The demonstration

project will run for a period of three

years from January 1, 2000, through

December 31, 2002. This regulation

specifies only the requirements that

differ from existing FEHB Program

regulations because of unique aspects of

the demonstration project. This

regulation also makes other

miscellaneous changes to the Federal

Employees Health Benefits Acquisition

Regulations.

DATES: The effective date of this

regulation is July 10, 2000.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Michael W. Kaszynski, Policy Analyst,

Insurance Policy and Information

Division, OPM, Room 3425, 1900 E

Street, NW., Washington, DC 20415–

0001. He can also be reached at (202)

606–0004 or by electronic mail (E-mail)

at: mwkaszyn@opm.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The

purpose of this regulation is to

implement the portion of the National

Defense Authorization Act for 1999,

Public Law 105–261, that amended

chapter 55 of title 10, United States

Code, and chapter 89 of title 5, United

States Code, to establish a

demonstration project under which

certain Medicare and other eligible DoD

beneficiaries can enroll in health benefit

plans offered under the FEHB Program.

The legislation was signed into law on

October 17, 1998. The demonstration

project will run for a period of three

years from January 1, 2000, through

December 31, 2002. DoD, with OPM

concurrence, has selected eight

geographic areas to serve as

demonstration project areas. The

legislation requires that between 6 and

10 geographic areas be selected. No

more than 66,000 individuals can

participate in the demonstration project

at any one time. Beneficiaries who are

provided coverage under the

demonstration project will not be

eligible to receive care at a military

medical treatment facility or to enroll in

a health care plan under DoD’s

TRICARE program. Individuals who

disenroll or cancel enrollment from the

demonstration project are not eligible to

reenroll in the demonstration project.

OPM will establish separate risk pools

for developing demonstration project

enrollee premium rates. The

government contribution for

demonstration enrollees will be paid by

DoD and cannot exceed the maximum

percentage or dollar amount that the

government would have contributed

had the enrollee been enrolled as a

regular FEHB enrollee in the same

health benefits plan and at the same

level of benefits.

The legislation requires OPM and

DoD to jointly produce and submit two

reports to Congress designed to assess

the viability of expanding access to the

FEHB Program to certain Medicare and

other eligible DoD beneficiaries

permanently. The first report is due by

April 1, 2001; the second is due by

December 31, 2002. The reports will

focus on enrollee participation levels,

impact on Medicare Part B enrollment,

premium rates and costs as compared to

those for regular FEHB enrollees, impact

on accessibility of care in military

treatment facilities, impact on medical

readiness and training in military

treatment facilities, impact on the cost,

accessibility, and availability of

prescription drugs for DoD beneficiaries,

and recommendations on eligibility and

enrollment.

OPM has determined it is necessary to

specify certain differences from existing

FEHB Program regulations because of

the unique features of the demonstration

project. This regulation amends chapter

16 of title 48, Code of Federal

Regulations (CFR) to enumerate these

differences.

When developing premium rates for

demonstration project community-rated

carriers, OPM will not use similarly

sized subscriber group (SSSG) rating

methodologies to determine the

reasonableness of the carrier’s

demonstration project premium rates.

We are not using SSSG’s because we

have learned from our consultations

with community-rated carriers that

there are no similar employer sponsored

groups with which to compare. Instead

we are benchmarking premiums against

adjusted community rates if available,

Medigap offerings, or other similar

products to determine reasonableness.

We believe that these data will result in

competitively developed premium rates.

We have determined the most cost

effective and administratively efficient

way for the federal government to track

expenditures is to allow experiencerated carriers participating in the

demonstration project to draw funds

from their existing FEHB Letter of Credit

(LOC) account to pay demonstration

project benefits costs in the same

manner as they do for benefits costs

incurred by regular FEHB members.

All carriers must account separately

for health benefits charges paid using

demonstration project funds and regular

FEHB funds. Direct administrative costs

attributable solely to the demonstration

project will be fully chargeable to the

demonstration project. Indirect

administrative costs associated with the

demonstration project will be allocated

to the demonstration project based on

the percentage obtained by dividing the

dollar amount of claims processed

under the demonstration project by the

dollar amount of total claims processed

for FEHB Program activity. This

percentage will also be used to

determine the amount of an experiencerated carrier’s service charge that will be

allocated to the demonstration project.

Because of the way premiums are

collected from enrollees and annuitants

and the way the government distributes

them to carriers, there will be a period

between the effective date of

demonstration project enrollees’

coverage and the first deposit of

premium into experience-rated carriers’

LOC accounts. DoD enrollments will

become effective on January 1, 2000,

and the first demonstration project

premiums will be withheld from

annuities on February 1, 2000. The

enrollees’ and government’s share of the

premiums are due to OPM from DoD on

the first day of each month thereafter

through the conclusion of the

demonstration project. However, since

enrollees will be entitled to coverage for

at least a month before the first

premium payment, there won’t be an

opportunity for carriers to build a

sufficient cash flow to cover the costs of

the demonstration project group during

this period. We are addressing this

problem by allowing experience-rated

carriers to draw on their existing LOC

accounts in the same manner as for

regular FEHB claims.

Since this is a start-up program with

no specific experience, we determined

that experience-rated and communityrated carrier risk must be mitigated in

order to keep premiums as low as

possible. Carriers will report on

demonstration project revenues, health

benefits charges, and administrative

expenses as directed by OPM.

Experience-rated carriers will be

required to perform a final

reconciliation of revenue and costs for

the demonstration group at the end of

the demonstration project. If a

community-rated carrier wants to make

a claim on the Employees Health

Benefits Fund, it will be required to

perform annual reconciliations for the

duration of the demonstration project.

OPM will reimburse carrier costs in

excess of the premiums first from the

carrier’s demonstration project

Contingency Reserve and then from the

Employees Health Benefits Fund

Administrative Reserve. After the final

accounting, OPM will place any surplus

demonstration project premiums in the

regular Contingency Reserves of all

carriers continuing in the FEHB

Program for the contract year following

36384 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 111 / Thursday, June 8, 2000 / Rules and Regulations

the year in which the demonstration

project ends. Credit will be in

proportion to the amount of

subscription charges paid and accrued

to each carrier’s plan for the last year of

the demonstration project. Should the

program be extended beyond the three

year demonstration project period, we

will regulate to address any necessary

changes to these provisions.

We also have made other

miscellaneous changes to chapter 16 of

title 48, CFR.

On July 6, 1999, OPM published an

interim regulation in the Federal

Register (64 FR 36271). OPM

subsequently received comments from

three organizations—one trade

association representing FEHB fee-forservice/PPO plans, one fee-for-service/

PPO health benefit carrier, and one

employee union. One organization that

commented on the proposed rule stated

that OPM’s proposed formula for

allocating indirect administrative costs

to the demonstration project is overly

prescriptive and conflicts with Section

31.203 of the Federal Acquisition

Regulations. The commenter indicates

that the FAR allows contractors to

allocate indirect administrative

expenses using any sound method in

accordance with generally accepted

accounting principles. This entitles

carriers to select among various

methods of allocation. While it would

seem reasonable to allow carriers to

select among various methods for

allocating administrative expenses to

the demonstration project, OPM is

required by the authorizing legislation,

Public Law 105–261, to perform an

analysis of the demonstration project’s

rates and costs. In order to perform this

analysis, OPM must set a standard for

comparison. Consequently, OPM is

requiring that only one method be used

to determine allocable indirect costs so

that these costs can be credibly

compared among carriers. We will

continue to use claims as the basis for

allocation of indirect administrative

costs associated with the demonstration

project.

One commenter believes that in order

to fulfill its obligation to DoD retirees,

the Department of Defense should pay

DoD retirees’ entire premium and

reimburse them fully for any out-ofpocket charges they incur during the

demonstration project. OPM and DoD

do not have the legislative authority to

fully pay the premiums and out-ofpocket costs for DoD beneficiaries and

their family members. The National

Defense Authorization Act for 1999

requires that the government

contribution toward DoD beneficiaries

be no more than the maximum the

government contributes toward the

premiums of regular federal employees.

The commenter also believes that

sufficient utilization and claims

experience exists on the DoD

demonstration project group for OPM to

set premium rates based on the

experience of the group without having

to base the rates on those of similarly

sized subscriber groups. While

utilization and claims data does exist on

the demonstration project group, not all

of the carriers in the FEHB Program are

experience-rated, so not all of them rely

solely on this information to set rates. A

community-rated carrier under the

regular FEHB Program is required to use

the same rating methodology to develop

its FEHB Program rates as it does for

other groups of a similar size. The

regulation eliminates the requirement

that a carrier must use the same

methodology as it uses for similar sized

employers so that the carrier can

develop its rates using Medigap or other

Medicare supplemental rating

methodologies.

One commenter questions how

separate accounting for benefits and

administrative costs will be

accomplished and verified in the

absence of requiring application of the

government’s Cost Accounting

Standards. The commenter believes that

to uphold the integrity of the FEHB

Program and to gain a true assessment

of the success or failure of the

demonstration project, OPM should

require the application of relevant Cost

Accounting Standards to charges made

by FEHB participating carriers. OPM

cannot require carriers to account for

operations using the Cost Accounting

Standards because the National Defense

Authorization Act, 2000 exempts FEHB

carriers from the standards for fiscal

year 2000.

The commenter believes that it is

inappropriate to use regular FEHB

reserves to pay any costs in excess of

premiums for the DoD group since a

portion of the funds that comprise the

Administrative Reserve are deducted

from regular FEHB enrollee premiums.

The commenter asserts that regular

FEHB enrollees should not subsidize the

DoD group. The National Defense

Authorization Act for 1999 authorizes

OPM to use the Employees Health

Benefits Fund, which includes the

FEHB Administrative Reserve, to pay

costs the office incurs for activities

associated with implementing the

demonstration project. OPM believes

that availability of the Administrative

Reserve to mitigate risk is essential to

maintain reasonable premiums given

the short duration of the demonstration

project, and the potential that a carrier

could enroll a small number of

enrollees. OPM believes that use of the

Administrative Reserve is the most

reliable and desirable manner in which

to effectuate the intentions of Congress

with regard to the demonstration

project.

One commenter asserts that use of the

Administrative Reserve to offset carrier

losses, and requirements for carriers to

pay surpluses to the Administrative

Reserve, violates the FEHB Act and the

demonstration project legislation. OPM

believes that it has the legal authority to

use the Administrative Reserve to

mitigate carrier losses incurred as a

result of the demonstration project.

Therefore, OPM is retaining this aspect

of the regulation in its final form.

The demonstration project constitutes

a mandate to study the feasibility of

providing coverage modeled after the

FEHB Program to Medicare and other

eligible military retirees and their

families. This study will result in two

reports to Congress that will influence

the decision of Congress as to whether

to expand the demonstration project to

the entire population of eligible military

retirees on a permanent basis.

The demonstration project is not a

program of insurance in the same sense

that the FEHB Program is a program of

insurance. Although the carriers

participating in the study are FEHB

Program insurance carriers, and

although the enrollees participating will

be covered for their health insurance

needs, the project is, in principle and in

operation, a study rather than a

continuing insurance program. Indeed,

the statutory limitations imposed upon

the project—limitations on number of

enrollees and the duration of the

project—are antithetical to a continuing

program of insurance, but are

appropriate to a study. OPM’s

mitigation of risk of losses during the

study is analogous to self-insuring for

purposes of mitigating risk, and allows

the demonstration project to simulate

normal conditions to overcome the

artificial constraints of an uncertain

number of enrollees and the short

duration of the project.

OPM recognizes that the unknown

participation rate and the short-term

nature of the project generate an upward

pressure on the premium rates for

demonstration project enrollees. This is

because in a typical, sustainable

program of insurance, the risk pool is

sufficiently large so that insurance risk

is spread with some confidence across

the pool while maintaining appropriate

premium rates. In contrast, under the

demonstration project, some plans may

attract only a small number of

beneficiaries, creating a small risk pool.

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 111 / Thursday, June 8, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 36385

In addition, the indefinite duration of a

typical, ongoing program allows a

carrier to anticipate the experience of

the risk pool and provides the

opportunity to recoup unexpected

losses over the long term by making

appropriate adjustments to future

premium rates based upon past

experience with the insured group.

However, where the period over which

a carrier is expected to cover the risk

pool is limited, there is a substantial

likelihood that there will be insufficient

opportunity to offset losses in

subsequent years. Thus, OPM

recognizes that the risk inherent in

covering the demonstration project

population requires mitigation if the

project is to succeed.

FEHB Program carriers can expect to

attract a small demonstration project

enrollment, may not have reserves

sufficient to cover claims in excess of

premium income, and may have

reinsurance arrangements that preclude

the use of their FEHB Program reserves

to pay demonstration project claims.

Although other strategies for

implementing the demonstration project

are available, OPM has determined that

the strategy set forth in these regulations

is the most appropriate for all FEHB

Program carriers.

We believe that the commenter has

made a valid point with respect to the

portion of the interim regulation that

required carriers to return surplus

premium to the Administrative Reserve

upon completion of the demonstration

project. OPM initially required the

return of any surplus to the

Administrative Reserve (1) as the

corresponding alternative to the

Administrative Reserve bearing the

mitigation of loss; and (2) for equitable

purposes, to enable all carriers in the

FEHB Program to ultimately enjoy any

gains as well as bear any losses. OPM

reasoned that this alternative was

preferable to allowing a windfall

resulting from higher than required

premiums to go to any one carrier.

However, as an alternative approach,

OPM agrees that it is appropriate to treat

the surplus as any other surplus reserve

that a carrier maintains upon

termination of its participation in the

FEHB Program. Therefore, OPM is

changing the final regulation to require

demonstration project surpluses to be

distributed to the Contingency Reserves

of all carriers continuing in the FEHB

Program in the year after the

demonstration project ends, in

proportion to the subscription charges

paid and accrued for the carrier for the

last year of the demonstration project.

A commenter indicated its view that

OPM failed to follow required notice

and comment procedures by failing to

provide an opportunity for comment on

the interim regulations. As we stated in

the preamble to the interim regulations,

carriers needed the information that was

contained in the interim regulations in

order to have sufficient time to develop

reserve accounts and premiums for

enrollments to be effective for contract

year 2000. OPM has now followed all of

the required procedures in adopting

these final regulations. The final

regulations are being issued after taking

into consideration the carrier’s

comments together with other

comments, in order for appropriate

preparations to be made for contract

year 2001. This commenter also

indicated that because OPM does not

advance any rationale for waiving notice

and comment on 48 CFR 1652.216–71,

Accounting and Allowable Cost, the

rule making should be rendered invalid.

OPM has simply rewritten this section

of the FEHBAR in plain language, and

has made no substantive changes to the

regulation. The Administrative

Procedures Act waives the advance

notice and comment requirement when

a change is not substantive. The

commenter states that the date of the

Audit Guide currently in effect is July

24, 1998, and that this date should be

stated in the regulation. We did not list

the specific date of the Audit Guide in

the regulation because we want to be

able to use the most recent version of

the Audit Guide in effect at any given

time. The commenter indicates that the

regulation makes an erroneous

statement that the Audit Guide should

be used to resolve all audit findings,

while the commenter believes that

corrective action plans should apply

only to audits of IPAs and should not

be extended to OPM audit findings. We

have revised the regulation accordingly.

The commenter indicated that the word

‘‘actual’’ needs to be deleted from the

phrase ‘‘ actual, reasonable, allowable,

and allocable’’ because the FAR makes

certain imputed costs, such as facilities

capital cost of money, allowable. The

Armed Services Board of Contract

Appeals has ruled that the cost of

capital is an actual cost. Therefore, no

changes were made to the regulation

based on this comment. The commenter

also stated that OPM had included a

new requirement in paragraph (b)(1)(i)

of 1652.216–71 by asking the carrier to

justify that costs chargeable to the

contract are reasonable and necessary.

While we have reworded the paragraph

in plain language, the requirement is not

new. Carriers have always been required

to show proper justification that costs

are actual, necessary, and reasonable.

The previous language in paragraph

(b)(1)(i) stated that ‘‘The allowable costs

chargeable to the contract for a contract

period shall be the actual, necessary,

and reasonable amounts incurred with

proper justification and accounting

support * * *.’’ We are simply clarifying

the requirement by stating it in the

active voice. The carrier correctly notes

that this requirement differs from a

related FAR requirement.

Because we became aware during the

rate negotiation process that some

participating carriers did not

understand that the risk mitigation

provisions applied to all carriers, the

regulation was clarified to indicate that

community-rated carrier risk will be

mitigated using the Employees Health

Benefits Fund Administrative Reserve.

Section 7701(c) of title 31, United

States Code, requires each contractor

doing business with a government

agency to furnish its Taxpayer

Identification Number (TIN) to that

agency [see FAR 4.902]. Accordingly,

we have added a new clause FEHBAR

1652.204–73, Taxpayer Identification

Number, to FEHBAR Subpart 1652.2

and the FEHBP Clause Matrix at Subpart

1652.3. We have also made reference

changes and updated the Matrix to

conform to changes in the Federal

Acquisition Regulation (FAR) since the

Matrix was last revised.

In addition to the above definitions,

in 1652.216–70(b), we have clarified

that the term ‘‘State’’ as used in 5 U.S.C.

8909(f) includes a U.S. territory or

possession.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

I certify that this regulation will not

have a significant economic impact on

a substantial number of small entities

because the regulation will only affect

health insurance carriers under the

Federal Employees Health Benefits

Program.

Executive Order 12866, Regulatory

Review

This rule has been reviewed by the

Office of Management and Budget in

accordance with Executive Order 12866.

List of Subjects in 48 CFR Parts 1604,

1615, 1632, and 1652

Government employees, Government

procurement, Health insurance.

U.S. Office of Personnel Management.

Janice R. Lachance,

Director.

For the reasons set forth in the

preamble, OPM is amending chapter 16

of title 48, CFR as follows:

36386 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 111 / Thursday, June 8, 2000 / Rules and Regulations

CHAPTER 16—OFFICE OF PERSONNEL

MANAGEMENT FEDERAL EMPLOYEES

HEALTH BENEFITS ACQUISITION

REGULATIONS

1. The authority citation for 48 CFR

Parts 1604, 1615, 1632, and 1652

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 5 U.S.C. 8913; 40 U.S.C. 486(c);

48 CFR 1.301.

PART 1604—ADMINISTRATIVE

MATTERS

2. Subpart 1604.9 consisting of

§ 1604.970 is added to read as follows:

Subpart 1604.9—Taxpayer

Identification Number

1604.970 Taxpayer Identification Number.

Insert the clause at section 1652.204–

73 in all FEHBP contracts.

PART 1615—CONTRACTING BY

NEGOTIATION

Subpart 1615.8—Price Negotiation

3. In section 1615.802 paragraph (e) is

revised to read as follows:

1615.802 Policy.

* * * * *

(e) Exceptions for the 3-Year DoD

Demonstration Project (10 U.S.C. 1108).

(1) Similarly sized subscriber group

(SSSG) rating methodologies will not be

used to determine the reasonableness of

a community-rated carrier’s

demonstration project premium rates.

Carrier premium rates will not be

adjusted for equivalency with SSSG

rating methodologies. Carriers will

benchmark premiums against adjusted

community rates if available, Medigap

offerings, or other similar products.

(2) Community-rated carriers must

propose premium rates with cost or

pricing data and rating methodology,

and experience-rated carriers must

propose premium rates with cost data

and rating methodology regardless of

group size or annual premiums.

PART 1632—CONTRACT FINANCING

Subpart 1632.1—General

4. In section 1632.170 paragraph (c) is

revised to read as follows:

1632.170 Recurring premium payments to

carriers.

* * * * *

(c) Exceptions for the 3-Year DoD

Demonstration Project (10 U.S.C. 1108)

(1) Carriers will create and maintain

separate risk pools for demonstration

project experience and regular FEHB

experience for the purpose of

establishing separate premium rates.

(2) OPM will create and maintain a

demonstration project Contingency

Reserve separate from the regular FEHB

Contingency Reserve for each carrier

participating in the demonstration

project.

(3) Carriers will account separately for

health benefits charges paid using

demonstration project funds and regular

FEHB funds. Direct administrative costs

attributable solely to the demonstration

project will be fully chargeable to the

demonstration project. Indirect

administrative costs associated with the

demonstration project will be allocated

to the demonstration project based on

the percentage obtained by dividing the

dollar amount of claims processed

under the demonstration project by the

dollar amount of total claims processed

for FEHB Program activity.

(4) The same percentage used to

determine indirect cost allocation will

also be used to determine the amount of

an experience-rated carrier’s service

charge that will be allocated to the

demonstration project.

(5) Experience-rated carriers

participating in the demonstration

project will draw funds from their Letter

of Credit (LOC) account to pay

demonstration project benefits costs in

the same manner as they do for benefits

costs incurred by regular FEHB

members.

(6) Carriers will report on

demonstration project revenues, health

benefits charges, and administrative

expenses as directed by OPM.

(7) Experience-rated carriers will

perform a final reconciliation of revenue

and costs for the demonstration group at

the end of the demonstration project.

OPM will reimburse carrier costs in

excess of the premiums first from the

carrier’s demonstration project

Contingency Reserve and then from the

Employees Health Benefits Fund

Administrative Reserve. After the final

accounting, OPM will place any surplus

demonstration project premiums in the

regular Contingency Reserves of all

carriers continuing in the FEHB

Program for the contract year following

the year in which the demonstration

project ends. Credit will be in

proportion to the amount of

subscription charges paid and accrued

to each carrier’s plan for the last year of

the demonstration project.

(8) Community-rated carriers may, at

their discretion, request funds from the

Employees Health Benefits Fund to

mitigate excessive costs in relation to

premiums. If a community-rated carrier

requests funds from the Employees

Health Benefits Fund to mitigate risk, it

will be required to perform annual

reconciliations for the duration of the

demonstration project. OPM will

reimburse carrier costs significantly in

excess of the premiums first from the

carrier’s demonstration project

Contingency Reserve and then from the

Employees Health Benefits Fund

Administrative Reserve. After the final

accounting, OPM will place any surplus

demonstration project premiums in the

regular Contingency Reserves of all

carriers continuing in the FEHB

Program for the contract year following

the year in which the demonstration

project ends. Credit will be in

proportion to the amount of

subscription charges paid and accrued

to each carrier’s plan for the last year of

the demonstration project.

(9) Should the program be extended

beyond the 3 year demonstration project

period, OPM will regulate to address

any necessary changes to these

provisions.

PART 1652—CONTRACT CLAUSES

Subpart 1652.2—Texts of FEHBP

Clauses

5. Section 1652.204–73 is added to

read as follows:

1652.204–73 Taxpayer Identification

Number.

As prescribed in 1604.970, insert the

following clause.

Taxpayer Identification Number (Jan 2000)

(a) Definitions.

Common parent, as used in this provision,

means that corporate entity that owns or

controls an affiliated group of corporations

that files its Federal income tax returns on a

consolidated basis, and of which the Carrier

is a member.

Taxpayer Identification Number (TIN), as

used in this provision, means the number

required by the Internal Revenue Service

(IRS) to be used by the Carrier in reporting

income tax and other returns.

(b) The Carrier must submit the

information required in paragraphs (d)

through (f) of this clause to comply with debt

collection requirements of 31 U.S.C. 7701(c)

and 3325(d), reporting requirements of 26

U.S.C. 6041, 6041A, and 6050M, and

implementing regulations issued by the IRS.

The Carrier is subject to the payment

reporting requirements described in Federal

Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 4.904. The

Carrier’s failure or refusal to furnish the

information will result in payment being

withheld until the TIN number is provided.

(c) The Government may use the TIN to

collect and report on any delinquent amounts

arising out of the Carrier’s relationship with

the Government (31 U.S.C. 7701(c)(3)). The

TIN provided hereunder may be matched

with IRS records to verify its accuracy.

(d) Taxpayer Identification Number (TIN).

TIN:llllllllllll

(e) Type of organization.

b Sole proprietorship;

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 111 / Thursday, June 8, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 36387

b Partnership;

b Corporate entity (not tax-exempt);

b Corporate entity (tax-exempt);

b Other llllllllllll.

(f) Common parent.

b Carrier is not owned or controlled by a

common parent as defined in paragraph

(a) of this clause.

b Name and TIN of common parent:

Name llllllllllll

TINllllllllllll

(End of Clause)

6. Section 1652.215–70 is amended by

removing ‘‘(JAN 1998)’’ from the clause

heading and adding in its place ‘‘(JAN

2000)’’ and by revising a new paragraph

(d) to read as follows:

1652.215–70 Rate Reduction for Defective

Pricing or Defective Cost or Pricing Data.

* * * * *

(d) Exception for the 3-Year DoD

Demonstration Project (10 U.S.C. 1108).

(1) Similarly sized subscriber group (SSSG)

rating methodologies shall not be used to

determine the reasonableness of the Carrier’s

demonstration project premium rates. The

Carrier’s rates shall not be adjusted for

equivalency with SSSG rating methodologies.

The Carrier shall benchmark premiums

against adjusted community rates if available,

Medigap offerings, or other similar products.

(2) The Carrier shall account separately for

health benefits charges paid using

demonstration project funds and regular

FEHB funds. Direct administrative costs

attributable solely to the demonstration

project shall be fully chargeable to the

demonstration project. Indirect

administrative costs associated with the

demonstration project will be allocated to the

demonstration project based on the

percentage obtained by dividing the dollar

amount of claims processed under the

demonstration project by the dollar amount

of total claims processed for FEHB Program

activity.

(End of Clause)

7. Section 1652.216–70 is amended by

removing ‘‘(JAN 1998)’’ from the clause

heading and adding in its place ‘‘(JAN

2000)’’ and by revising a new paragraph

(c) to read as follows:

1652.2161–70 Accounting and price

adjustment.

* * * * *

(c) Exception for the 3-Year DoD

Demonstration Project (10 U.S.C. 1108).

(1) Similarly sized subscriber group (SSSG)

rating methodologies shall not be used to

determine the reasonableness of the Carrier’s

demonstration project premium rates. The

Carrier’s rates shall not be adjusted for

equivalency with SSSG rating methodologies.

The Carrier shall benchmark premiums

against adjusted community rates if available,

Medigap offerings, or other similar products.

(2) The Carrier shall account separately for

health benefits charges paid using

demonstration project funds and regular

FEHB funds. Direct administrative costs

attributable solely to the demonstration

project shall be fully chargeable to the

demonstration project. Indirect

administrative costs associated with the

demonstration project will be allocated to the

demonstration project based on the

percentage obtained by dividing the dollar

amount of claims processed under the

demonstration project by the dollar amount

of total claims processed for FEHB Program

activity.

(End of Clause)

8. Section 1652.216–71 is amended by

revising the clause to read as follows:

1652.216–71 Accounting and allowable

cost.

* * * * *

ACCOUNTING AND ALLOWABLE COST

(FEHBAR 1652.216–71) (JAN 2000)

(a) Annual Accounting Statements. (1) The

Carrier shall furnish to OPM an accounting

of its operations under the contract. In

preparing the accounting, the Carrier shall

follow the reporting requirements and

statement formats prescribed by OPM in the

OPM Annual and Fiscal Year Financial

Reporting Instructions.

(2) The Carrier shall have its Annual

Accounting Statements and that of its

underwriter, if any, audited in accordance

with the FEHBP Experienced-Rated Carrier

and Service Organization Audit Guide

(Guide). The Carrier shall submit the audit

report and the Annual Accounting

Statements to OPM in accordance with the

requirements of the Guide.

(3) Based on the results of either the

independent audit prescribed by the Guide or

a Government audit, OPM may require the

Carrier adjust its annual accounting

statements (i) by amounts found not to

constitute actual, allowable, allocable and

reasonable costs; or (ii) to reflect prior

overpayments or underpayments.

(4) The Carrier shall develop corrective

action plans to resolve audit findings

identified in audits that were performed in

accordance with the Guide. The corrective

action plans will be prepared in accordance

with and as defined by the Guide.

(b) Definition of costs. (1) The Carrier may

charge a cost to the contract for a contract

term if the cost is actual, allowable, allocable,

and reasonable. In addition, the Carrier must:

(i) on request, document and make

available accounting support for the cost to

justify that the cost is actual, reasonable and

necessary; and

(ii) determine the cost in accordance with:

(A) the terms of this contract, and (B) Subpart

31.2 of the Federal Acquisition Regulation

(FAR) and Subpart 1631.2 of the Federal

Employees Health Benefits Program

Acquisition Regulation (FEHBAR) applicable

on the first day of the contract period.

(2) In the absence of specific contract terms

to the contrary, the Carrier shall classify

contract costs in accordance with the

following criteria:

(i) Benefits. Benefit costs consist of

payments made and liabilities incurred for

covered health care services on behalf of

FEHBP subscribers less any refunds, rebates,

allowances or other credits received.

(ii) Administrative expenses.

Administrative expenses consist of all actual,

allowable, allocable and reasonable expenses

incurred in the adjudication of subscriber

benefit claims or incurred in the Carrier’s

overall operation of the business. Unless

otherwise stated in the contract,

administrative expenses include, in part: all

taxes (excluding premium taxes, as provided

in section 1631.205–41), insurance and

reinsurance premiums, medical and dental

consultants used in the adjudication process,

concurrent or managed care review when not

billed by a health care provider and other

forms of utilization review, the cost of

maintaining eligibility files, legal expenses

incurred in the litigation of benefit payments

and bank charges for letters of credit.

Administrative expenses exclude the cost of

Carrier personnel, equipment, and facilities

directly used in the delivery of health care

services, which are benefit costs, and the

expense of managing the FEHBP investment

program which is a reduction of investment

income earned.

(iii) Investment income. While compliance

with the checks presented letter of credit

methodology will minimize funds on hand,

the Carrier shall invest and reinvest all funds

on hand, including any in the Special

Reserve or any attributable to the reserve for

incurred but unpaid claims, which are in

excess of the funds needed to discharge

promptly the obligations incurred under the

contract. Investment income represents the

net amount earned by the Carrier after

deducting investment expenses. Investment

expenses are those actual, allowable,

allocable, and reasonable contract costs that

are attributable to the investment of funds,

such as consultant or management fees.

(iv) Other charges. (A) Mandatory statutory

reserve. Charges for mandatory statutory

reserves are not allowable unless specifically

provided for in the contract. When the term

‘‘mandatory statutory reserve’’ is specifically

identified as an allowable contract charge

without further definition or explanation, it

means a requirement imposed by State law

upon the Carrier to set aside a specific

amount or rate of funds into a restricted

reserve that is accounted for separately from

all other reserves and surpluses of the Carrier

and which may be used only with the

specific approval of the State official

designated by law to make such approvals.

The amount chargeable to the contract may

not exceed an allocable portion of the

amount actually set aside. If the statutory

reserve is no longer required for the purpose

for which it was created, and these funds

become available for the general use of the

Carrier, the Carrier shall return to the FEHBP

a pro rata share based upon FEHBP’s

contribution to the total Carrier’s set aside

shall be returned to the FEHBP in accordance

with FAR 31.201–5.

(B) Premium taxes. (1) When the term

‘‘premium taxes’’ is used in this contract

without further definition or explanation, it

means a tax, fee, or other monetary payment

directly or indirectly imposed on FEHB

premiums by any State, the District of

Columbia, or the Commonwealth of Puerto

Rico or by any political subdivision or other

governmental authority of those entities, with

the sole exception of a tax on net income or

profit, if that tax, fee, or payment is

36388 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 111 / Thursday, June 8, 2000 / Rules and Regulations

applicable to a broad range of business

activity.

(2) For purposes of this paragraph (B),

OPM has determined that the term ‘‘State’’ as

used in 5 U.S.C. 8909(f) includes, but is not

limited to, a territory or possession of the

United States.

(c) Certification of Accounting Statement

Accuracy. (1) The Carrier shall certify the

annual and fiscal year accounting statements

in the form set forth in paragraph (c)(3) of

this clause. The Carrier’s chief executive

officer and the chief financial officer shall

sign the certificate.

(2) The Carrier shall require an authorized

agent of its underwriter, if any, also to certify

the annual accounting statement.

(3) The certificate required shall be in the

following form:

Certification of Accounting Statement

Accuracy

This is to certify that I have reviewed this

accounting statement and to the best of my

knowledge and belief:

1. The statement was prepared in

conformity with the guidelines issued by the

Office of Personnel Management and fairly

presents the financial results of this reporting

period in conformity with those guidelines.

2. The costs included in the statement are

actual, allowable, allocable, and reasonable

in accordance with the terms of the contract

and with the cost principles of the Federal

Employees Health Benefits Acquisition

Regulation and the Federal Acquisition

Regulation;

3. Income, rebates, allowances, refunds and

other credits made or owed in accordance

with the terms of the contract and applicable

cost principles have been included in the

statement;

4. If applicable, the letter of credit account

was managed in accordance with 5 CFR part

890, 48 CFR chapter 16, and OPM guidelines.

Carrier Name: llllllllllllll

Name of Chief Executive Officer:

(Type or Print)

lllllllllllllllllllll

Name of Chief Financial Officer:

lllllllllllllllllllll

Signature of Chief Executive Officer:

lllllllllllllllllllll

Signature of Chief Financial Officer:

lllllllllllllllllllll

Date Signed: llllllllllllll

Date Signed: llllllllllllll

Underwriter: llllllllllllll

Name and Title of Responsible Corporate

Official:

(Type or Print:)

lllllllllllllllllllll

Signature of Responsible Corporate Official:

lllllllllllllllllllll

Date Signed: llllllllllllll

(End of Certificate)

(d) Exceptions for the 3-Year DoD

Demonstration Project (10 U.S.C. 1108).

(1) The Carrier shall draw funds from its

Letter of Credit (LOC) account to pay

demonstration project benefits costs in the

same manner as it does for benefits costs

incurred by regular FEHB members. The

Carrier shall account separately for health

benefits charges paid using demonstration

project funds and regular FEHB funds. Direct

administrative costs attributable solely to the

demonstration project shall be fully

chargeable to the demonstration project.

Indirect administrative costs associated with

the demonstration project will be allocated to

the demonstration project based on the

percentage obtained by dividing the dollar

amount of claims processed under the

demonstration project by the dollar amount

of total claims processed for FEHB Program

activity. This same percentage will also be

used to determine the amount of the Carrier’s

service charge that will be allocated to the

demonstration project.

(2) The Carrier shall submit a separate

annual accounting statement and monthly

incurred claims report for demonstration

project experience.

(End of Clause)

9. Section 1652.232–70 is amended by

removing ‘‘(JAN 1998)’’ from the clause

heading and adding in its place ‘‘(JAN

2000),’’ and adding a new paragraph (f)

to read as follows:

1652.232–70 Payments—community-rated

contracts.

* * * * *

(f) Exception for the 3-Year DoD

Demonstration Project (10 U.S.C. 1108).

The Carrier may, at its discretion, request

funds from the Employees Health Benefits

Fund to mitigate excessive costs in relation

to premiums. If the Carrier requests funds

from the Employees Health Benefits Fund to

mitigate risk, it will be required to perform

annual reconciliations for the duration of the

demonstration project. OPM will reimburse

the Carrier’s costs significantly in excess of

the premiums first from the Carrier’s

demonstration project Contingency Reserve

and then from the Employees Health Benefits

Fund Administrative Reserve. After the final

accounting, OPM will place any surplus

demonstration project premiums in the

regular Contingency Reserves of all carriers

continuing in the FEHB Program for the

contract year following the year in which the

demonstration project ends. Credit will be in

proportion to the amount of subscription

charges paid and accrued to each carrier’s

plan for the last year of the demonstration

project.

(End of Clause)

10. Section 1652.232–71 is amended

by revising paragraph (f) to read as

follows:

1652.232–71 Payments—experience-rated

contracts.

* * * * *

(f) Exception for the 3-Year DoD

Demonstration Project (10 U.S.C. 1108).

The Carrier will perform a final

reconciliation of revenue and costs for the

demonstration project group at the end of the

demonstration project. OPM will reimburse

the Carrier’s costs in excess of the premiums

first from the Carrier’s demonstration project

Contingency Reserve and then from the

Employees Health Benefits Fund

Administrative Reserve. After the final

accounting, OPM will place any surplus

demonstration project premiums in the

regular Contingency Reserves of all carriers

continuing in the FEHB Program for the

contract year following the year in which the

demonstration project ends. Credit will be in

proportion to the amount of subscription

charges paid and accrued to each carrier’s

plan for the last year of the demonstration

project.

(End of Clause)

Subpart 1652.3—FEHBP Clause Matrix

11. In section 1652.370, the FEHB

Program Clause Matrix, is revised to

read as follows:

1652.370 Use of matrix.

* * * * *

FEHBP CLAUSE MATRIX

Clause No. Text reference Title Use

status

Use with

experience

rated

contracts

Use with

community rated

contracts

FAR 52.202–1 FAR 2.201 Definitions ................................................................... M T T

FAR 52.203–3 FAR 3.202 Gratuities ..................................................................... M T T

FAR 52.203–5 FAR 3.404 Covenant Against Contingent Fees ............................ M T T

FAR 52.203–7 FAR 3.502–3 Anti–Kickback Procedures .......................................... M T T

FAR 52.203–12 FAR 3.808(b) Limitation on Payments to Influence Certain Federal

Transactions.

MTT

1652.203–70 1603–7003 Misleading, Deceptive, or Unfair Advertising ............. M T T

1652.204–70 1604.705 Contractors Records Retention .................................. M T T

1652.204–71 1604.7001 Coordination of Benefits ............................................. M T T

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 111 / Thursday, June 8, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 36389

FEHBP CLAUSE MATRIX—Continued

Clause No. Text reference Title Use

status

Use with

experience

rated

contracts

Use with

community rated

contracts

1652.204–72 1604.7101 Filing Health Benefit Claims/Court Review of Disputed Claims.MTT

1652.204–73 1604.970 Taxpayer Identification Number .................................. M T T

FAR 52.209–6 FAR 9.409(b) Protecting the Government’s Interest When Subcontracting With Contractors Debarred, Suspended, or

Proposed for Debarment.

MTT

FAR 52.215–2 FAR 15.209(b) Audit & Records—Negotiation .................................... M T T

FAR 52.215–10 FAR 15.408(b) Price Reduction for Defective Cost or Pricing Data ... M T

FAR 52.215–12 FAR 15.408(d) Subcontractor Cost or Pricing Data ............................ M T

FAR 52.215–15 FAR 15.408(g) Pension Adjustments and Asset Reversions ............. M T

FAR 52.215–16 FAR 15.408(h) Facilities Capital Cost of Money ................................. M T

FAR 52.215–17 FAR 15.408(i) Waiver of Facilities Capital Cost of Money ................ A T

FAR 52.215–18 FAR 15.408(j) Reversion or Adjustment of Plans for Postretirement

Benefits (PRB) Other Than Pensions.

M T

1652.215–70 1615.804–72 Rate Reduction for Defective Pricing or Defective

Cost or Pricing Data.

M T

1652.215–71 1615.805–71 Investment Income ..................................................... M T

1652.216–70 1616.7001 Accounting and Price Adjustment .............................. M T T

1652.216–71 1616.7002 Accounting and Allowable Cost .................................. M T

FAR 52.219–8 FAR 19.708(a) Utilization of Small Business Concerns ...................... M T T

FAR 52.222–1 FAR 22.103–5(a) Notice to the Government of Labor Disputes ............. M T T

FAR 52.222–3 FAR 22.202 Convict Labor .............................................................. M T T

FAR 52.222–4 FAR 22.305 Contract Work Hours and Safety Standards ActOvertime Compensation.MTT

FAR 52.222–21 FAR 22.810(a)(1) Prohibition of Segregated Facilities ............................ M T T

FAR 52.222–26 FAR 22.810(a) Equal Opportunity ....................................................... M T T

FAR 52.222–29 FAR 22.810(g) Notification of Visa Denial .......................................... A T T

FAR 52.222–35 FAR 22.1308(a) Affirmative Action for Disabled Veterans and Veterans of the Vietnam Era.MTT

FAR 52.222–36 FAR 22.1408(a) Affirmative Action for Workers With Disabilities ......... M T T

FAR 52.222–37 FAR 22.1308(b) Employment Reports on Disabled Veterans and Veterans of the Vietnam Era.MTT

1652.222–70 1622.103–70 Notice of Significant Events ........................................ M T T

FAR 52.223–2 FAR 23.105(b) Clean Air and Water ................................................... A T T

FAR 52.223–6 FAR 23.505 Drug–Free Workplace ................................................. A T T

1652.224–70 1624.104 Confidentiality of Records ........................................... M T T

FAR 52.227–1 FAR 27.201–2(a) Authorization and Consent ......................................... M T T

FAR 52.227–2 FAR 27.202–2 Notice and Assistance Regarding Patent and Copyright Infringement.MTT

FAR 52.229–3 FAR 29.401–3 Federal, State and Local Taxes ................................. M T

FAR 52.229–4 FAR 29.401–4 Federal, State and Local Taxes (Noncompetitive

Contract).

M T

FAR 52.229–5 FAR 29.401–5 Taxes—Contracts Performed in U.S. Possessions or

Puerto Rico.

ATT

1652.229–70 FEHBAR 1629.402 Taxes—Foreign Negotiated Benefits Contracts ......... A T T

FAR 52.230–2 FAR 30.201–4(a)(1) Cost Accounting Standards ........................................ A T T

FAR 52.230–3 FAR 30.201–4(b)(1) Disclosure and Consistency of Cost Accounting

Practices.

ATT

FAR 52.230–6 FAR 30.201–4(d)(1) Administration of Cost Accounting Standards ............ A T T

FAR 52.232–8 FAR 32.111(c)(1) Discounts for Prompt Payment ................................... M T T

FAR 52.232–17 FAR 32.617(a)

Modification:

1632.617

Interest ........................................................................ M T T

FAR 52.232–23 FAR 32.806(a)(1) Assignment of Claims ................................................. A T T

FAR 52.232–33 FAR 32.1103(a) Payment by Electronic Funds Transfer—Central

Contractor Registration.

MTT

1652.232–70 1632.171 Payments—Community-Rated Contracts ................... A T

1652.232–71 1632.172 Payments—Experience-Rated Contracts ................... A T

1652.232–72 1632.772 Non-Commingling of FEHBP Funds ........................... M T

1652.232–73 1632.806–70 Approval for Assignment of Claims ............................ M T T

FAR 52.233–1 FAR 33.215 Disputes ...................................................................... M T T

FAR 52.242–1 FAR 42.802 Notice of Intent to Disallow Costs .............................. M T

FAR 52.242–3 FAR 42.709–6 Penalties for Unallowable Costs ................................. M T

FAR 52.242–13 FAR 42.903 Bankruptcy .................................................................. M T T

1652.243–70 1643.205–70 Changes—Negotiated Benefits Contracts .................. M T T

FAR 52.244–5 FAR 44.204(c) Competition in Subcontracting .................................... M T

FAR 52.244–6 FAR 44.403 Subcontracts for Commercial Items and commercial

components.

M T

36390 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 111 / Thursday, June 8, 2000 / Rules and Regulations

FEHBP CLAUSE MATRIX—Continued

Clause No. Text reference Title Use

status

Use with

experience

rated

contracts

Use with

community rated

contracts

1652.244–70 1644.270 Subcontracts ............................................................... M T

1652.245–70 1645.303–70 Government Property (Negotiated Benefits Contracts).MTT

FAR 52.246–25 FAR 6.805(a)(4) Limitation of Liability—Services .................................. M T

1652.246–70 1646.301 FEHB Inspection ......................................................... M T T

FAR 52.247–63 FAR 47.405 Preference for U.S.-Flag Air Carriers ......................... M T T

1652.249–70 1649.101–70 Renewal and Withdrawal of Approval ........................ M T T

1652.249–71 1649.101–71 FEHBP Termination for Convenience of the Government—Negotiated Benefits Contracts.MTT

1652.249–72 1649.101–72 FEHBP Termination for Default—Negotiated Benefits

Contracts.

MTT

FAR 52.251–1 FAR 51.107 Government Supply Sources ...................................... A T

FAR 52.252–4 FAR 52.107(d) Alterations in Contract ................................................ A T T

FAR 52.252–6 FAR 52.107(f) Authorized Deviations in Clauses ............................... M T T

[FR Doc. 00–13851 Filed 6–7–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6325–01–P