Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 88 / Friday, May 7, 2010 / Proposed Rules 25167 

PART 242—CONTRACT 

ADMINISTRATION AND AUDIT 

SERVICES 

4. Revise section 242.503–2 to read as 

follows: 

242.503–2 Postaward conference 

procedure. 

(a) DD Form 1484, Post-Award 

Conference Record, may be used in 

conducting the conference and in 

preparing the conference report. 

(b) For contracts that include the 

clause at 252.234–70YY, postaward 

conferences shall include a discussion 

of the Contractor’s standard Cost and 

Software Data Reporting (CSDR) process 

that satisfies the guidelines contained in 

the CSDR Manual DoD 5000.04–M–1 

and the requirements in the Government 

approved contract CSDR plan, DD Form 

2794, Cost and Software Data Reporting 

Plan and related Resource Distribution 

Table, and DD Form 1921–3, Contractor 

Business Data Report. 

PART 252—SOLICITATION 

PROVISIONS AND CONTRACT 

CLAUSES 

5. Add section 252.234–70XX to read 

as follows: 

252.234 70XX Notice of Cost and Software 

Data Reporting System. 

As prescribed in 234.7101(a), use the 

following provision: 

NOTICE OF COST AND SOFTWARE DATA 

REPORTING SYSTEM (DATE) 

(a) The offeror shall— 

(1) Describe the standard Cost and 

Software Data Reporting (CSDR) process that 

it intends to use to satisfy the requirements 

of the CSDR Manual, DoD 5000.04–M–1, and 

the Government-approved contract CSDR 

plan, DD Form 2794 and related Resource 

Distribution Table contained in the 

solicitation. For Contractor Cost and Data 

Reporting (CCDR) application, the 

description will demonstrate how reports are 

based, to the maximum extent possible, upon 

actual cost transactions and not cost 

allocations. The description will also show 

how the data from the offeror’s accounting 

system will be mapped into the standard 

reporting categories required in the 

Contractor CCDR data item descriptions. The 

document shall also describe how the offeror 

segregates recurring and nonrecurring costs; 

(2) Provide comments on the adequacy of 

the CSDR contract plan and related Resource 

Distribution Table contained in the 

solicitation; and 

(3) Submit the DD Form 1921, Cost Data 

Summary Report, DD Form 1921–1, 

Functional Cost-Hour Report, and DD Form 

1921–2, Progress Curve Report, with its 

pricing proposal. 

(b) The offeror shall identify the 

subcontractors or the subcontracted effort, if 

the subcontractors have not been selected, to 

whom the CSDR requirements will apply. 

This will be accomplished by providing 

comments on the Resource Distribution Table 

contained in the solicitation. The offeror 

shall be responsible for ensuring the selected 

subcontractors comply with the requirements 

of the CSDR System. The offeror shall also be 

responsible for notifying the Government 

prior to changes in subcontractor or planned 

subcontract circumstances affecting CSDR 

compliance. 

(End of provision) 

6. Add section 252.234–70YY to read 

as follows: 

252.234 70YY Cost and Software Data 

Reporting System. 

As prescribed in 234.7101(b), use the 

following clause: 

COST AND SOFTWARE DATA REPORTING 

SYSTEM (DATE) 

(a) In the performance of this contract, the 

Contractor shall use— 

(1) A documented standard Cost and 

Software Data Reporting (CSDR) process that 

satisfies the guidelines contained in the 

CSDR Manual DoD 5000.04–M–1; 

(2) Management procedures that provide 

for generation of timely and reliable 

information for the Contractor Cost Data 

Reports (CCDRs) and Software Resources 

Data Reports (SRDRs) required by the CCDR 

and SRDR data items of the contract. These 

procedures will also maximize use of actual 

cost transactions rather than cost allocations; 

and 

(3) The Government-approved contract 

CSDR plan, DD Form 2794, Cost and 

Software Data Reporting Plan and related 

Resource Distribution Table, and DD Form 

1921–3, Contractor Business Data Report, as 

the basis for reporting in accordance with the 

required CSDR data item descriptions (DIDs). 

(b) The Contractor shall require the 

following subcontractors to comply with the 

CSDR requirements: 

(Contracting Officer to insert names of 

subcontractors (or subcontracted effort if 

subcontractors have not been selected) 

designated for application of the CSDR 

requirement of the clause.) 

lllllllllllllllllllll

lllllllllllllllllllll

lllllllllllllllllllll

lllllllllllllllllllll

(End of clause) 

[FR Doc. 2010–10762 Filed 5–6–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 5001–08–P 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

Defense Acquisition Regulations 

System 

[DFARS Case 2006–D029] 

48 CFR Part 225 

RIN 0750–AG57 

Defense Federal Acquisition 

Regulation Supplement; Department of 

Defense (DoD); Restriction on Ball and 

Roller Bearings 

ACTION: Proposed rule with request for 

comments. 

SUMMARY: DoD is proposing to amend 

the Defense Federal Acquisition 

Regulation Supplement (DFARS) to 

revise the domestic source restriction on 

acquisition of ball and roller bearings. 

The current DFARS restriction on ball 

and roller bearings requires that the 

bearings and the main bearing 

components be manufactured in the 

U.S. or Canada. This requirement was 

based on the restriction at 10 U.S.C. 

2534(a)(5), which expired on October 1, 

2005. The proposed revision interprets 

the annual defense appropriations act 

domestic source restriction on 

acquisition of ball and roller bearings in 

a manner similar to the domestic source 

restriction of the Buy American Act. 

DATES: Comments on the proposed rule 

should be submitted to the address 

shown below on or before July 6, 2010, 

to be considered in the formulation of 

the final rule. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, 

identified by DFARS Case 2006–D029, 

using any of the following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• E-mail: dfars@osd.mil. Include 

DFARS Case 2006–D029 in the subject 

line of the message. 

• Fax: 703–602–0350. 

• Mail: Defense Acquisition 

Regulations Council, Attn: Ms. Amy 

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

Room 3B855, 3060 Defense Pentagon, 

Washington, DC 20301–3060. 

All comments received will be posted 

to http://emissary.acq.osd.mil/dar/ 

dfars.nsf. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. 

Amy Williams, 703–602–0328. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

A. Background 

The current DFARS restriction on ball 

and roller bearings (225.7009) 

implemented two statutory restrictions: 

10 U.S.C. 2534(a)(5) and annual 

appropriations act restrictions. 10 U.S.C. 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
25168 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 88 / Friday, May 7, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

2534(a)(5) required that all ball and 

roller bearings and bearing components, 

either as end items or components of 

end items, be wholly manufactured in 

the United States or Canada. The annual 

defense appropriations act restrictions 

require that all ball and roller bearings 

be produced by a domestic source and 

be of domestic origin. This restriction 

does not apply to the acquisition of 

commercial items (either as components 

or end products), unless the commercial 

bearings themselves are purchased as 

the end products. 

In the context of DFARS Part 225, the 

DAR Council always interprets the term 

‘‘domestic’’ to include Canada, unless 

the statute specifically provides 

otherwise. Canada is part of the national 

technology and industrial base as 

defined at 10 U.S.C. 2500. Congress has 

never objected to this interpretation of 

the term ‘‘domestic.’’ 

Since the restriction at 10 U.S.C. 

2534(a)(5) was considered to be more 

stringent than the annual defense 

appropriations act restriction, the 

DFARS requirements that the bearing 

and the main bearing components must 

be 100 percent manufactured in the U.S. 

or Canada was based on 10 U.S.C. 

2534(a)(5). 10 U.S.C 2534(a)(5) expired 

on October 1, 2005. 

It is more and more difficult to 

acquire commercial bearings in which 

all the main bearing components are 100 

percent manufactured in the U.S. or 

Canada. U.S. and Canadian 

manufacturers of commercial bearings 

are increasingly going offshore for 

components, such as retainers, that do 

not represent the core competency of 

the bearing manufacturer. It is often not 

possible to obtain domestic commercial 

bearings that do not contain some 

nondomestic components. The 

Government does not constitute a large 

enough share of the market to influence 

significantly this decision by 

manufacturers of commercial bearings. 

Therefore, this rule proposes to revise 

the restriction to implement the annual 

defense appropriations act restriction in 

a way that will allow more flexibility 

with regard to the source of bearing 

components. 

The DAR Council interprets the 

phrase ‘‘produced by a domestic source 

and of domestic origin’’ to mean that a 

ball or roller bearing must be 

manufactured in the U.S. or Canada 

(domestic source) and the cost of its 

U.S. and Canadian components must 

exceed 50 percent of the cost of all its 

components (of domestic origin). This 

interpretation is comparable to 

implementation of the Buy American 

Act and to some of the other domestic 

source restrictions in the DFARS. For 

example, anchor and mooring chain is 

an appropriations act restriction that 

also requires the item to be 

manufactured in the U.S. with the cost 

of the components manufactured in the 

U.S. required to exceed 50 percent of 

the total cost of components. It is 

reasonable to apply the component test 

similarly to ball and roller bearings to 

establish that the bearing is of domestic 

origin. 

This rule was subject to Office of 

Management and Budget review under 

Executive Order 12866, dated 

September 30, 1993. 

B. 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. 

However, because this rule has impact 

on the application of domestic source 

restrictions, DoD has performed an 

initial regulatory flexibility analysis, 

which is summarized as follows: 

The objective of the rule is to allow 

more flexibility to domestic bearings 

manufacturers in the acquisition of 

nondomestic components. The legal 

basis for the rule is Section 8065 of the 

Fiscal Year 2002 DoD Appropriations 

Act (Pub. L. 107–117) and the same 

restriction in subsequent DoD 

appropriations acts. 

The final rule affects manufacturers of 

bearings, bearing components, and 

noncommercial products that 

incorporate bearings. 

• Bearings. This rule applies only to 

bearings purchased as end products or 

noncommercial bearings incorporated in 

noncommercial end products or 

noncommercial components of 

noncommercial end products (see TAB 

A). Because this rule allows some 

element of nondomestic content in ball 

and roller bearing components, as long 

as the U.S. or Canadian manufactured 

bearing contains less than 50 percent 

nondomestic bearing components, both 

large and small businesses may find 

greater numbers of sources from which 

to obtain ball and roller bearing 

components. Greater sourcing choices 

may enable small businesses to compete 

more successfully for DOD ball and 

roller bearing acquisitions. 

• Bearing components. Manufacturers 

of domestic bearing components may 

face increased competition from 

manufacturers of nondomestic bearing 

components. However, many of the 

bearing components that are being 

outsourced are no longer readily 

available from domestic sources. 

• Manufacturers of noncommercial 

products incorporating bearings. 

Manufacturers of noncommercial 

products incorporating bearings (both 

large and small businesses) will find it 

easier to acquire domestic bearings and 

will less frequently need to request 

nonavailability determinations (see TAB 

B). 

The proposed rule imposes no 

reporting, recordkeeping, or other 

information collection requirements. 

The rule does not duplicate, overlap, or 

conflict with any other Federal rules. 

There are no known significant 

alternatives to the rule that would meet 

the requirements of the statute and 

minimize any significant economic 

impact of the rule on small entities. The 

impact of this rule on small business is 

expected to be predominantly positive. 

DoD invites comments from small 

businesses and other interested parties. 

DoD also will consider comments from 

small entities concerning the affected 

DFARS subparts in accordance with 5 

U.S.C. 610. Such comments should be 

submitted separately and should cite 

DFARS Case 2006–D029. 

C. Paperwork Reduction Act 

This proposed rule does not impose 

any new or modified information 

collection requirements that require the 

approval of the Office of Management 

and Budget under 44 U.S.C. 3501, et 

seq. 

List of Subjects in 48 CFR Part 225 

Government procurement. 

Ynette R. Shelkin, 

Editor, Defense Acquisition Regulations 

System. 

Therefore, DoD proposes to amend 48 

CFR part 225 as follows: 

1. The authority citation for 48 CFR 

part 225 continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 41 U.S.C. 421 and 48 CFR 

chapter 1. 

PART 225—FOREIGN ACQUISITION 

2. Revise section 225.7009–2 to read 

as follows: 

225.7009–2 Restriction. 

(a) Do not acquire ball and roller 

bearings unless— 

(1) The bearings are manufactured in 

the United States or Canada; and 

(2) For each ball or roller bearing, the 

cost of the bearing components mined, 

produced, or manufactured in the 

United States or Canada exceeds 50 

percent of the total cost of the bearing 

components of that ball or roller 

bearing. 

(b) The restriction at 225.7002–1(b) 

may also apply to bearings that are 

made from specialty metals, such as 

high carbon chrome steel (bearing steel). 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 88 / Friday, May 7, 2010 / Proposed Rules 25169 

3. Revise section 252.225–7016 to 

read as follows: 

252.225–7016 Restriction on Acquisition 

of Ball and Roller Bearings. 

As prescribed in 225.7009–5, use the 

following clause: 

RESTRICTION ON ACQUISITION OF BALL 

AND ROLLER BEARINGS (DATE) 

(a) Definitions. As used in this clause— 

(1) Bearing component means the bearing 

element, retainer, inner race, or outer race. 

(2) Component, other than a bearing 

component, means any item supplied to the 

Government as part of an end product or of 

another component. 

(3) End product means supplies delivered 

under a line item of this contract. 

(b) Except as provided in paragraph (c) of 

this clause— 

(1) Each ball and roller bearing delivered 

under this contract shall be manufactured in 

the United States, its outlying areas, or 

Canada; and 

(2) For each ball or roller bearing, the cost 

of the bearing components mined, produced, 

or manufactured in the United States or 

Canada shall exceed 50 percent of the total 

cost of the bearing components of that ball 

or roller bearing. 

(c) The restriction in paragraph (b) of this 

clause does not apply to ball or roller 

bearings that are acquired as— 

(1) Commercial components of a 

noncommercial end product; or 

(2) Commercial or noncommercial 

components of a commercial component of a 

noncommercial end product. 

(d) The restriction in paragraph (b) of this 

clause may be waived upon request from the 

Contractor in accordance with subsection 

225.7009–4 of the Defense Federal 

Acquisition Regulation Supplement. 

(e) If this contract includes DFARS clause 

252.225–7009, Restriction on Acquisition of 

Certain Articles Containing Specialty Metals, 

all bearings that contain specialty metals, as 

defined in that clause, must meet the 

requirements of that clause. 

(f) The Contractor shall insert the 

substance of this clause, including this 

paragraph (f), in all subcontracts, except 

those for— 

(1) Commercial items; or 

(2) Items that do not contain ball or roller 

bearings. 

(End of clause) 

[FR Doc. 2010–10766 Filed 5–6–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 5001–08–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

National Highway Traffic Safety 

Administration 

49 CFR Part 594 

[Docket No. NHTSA 2010–0035; Notice 1] 

RIN 2127–AK70 

Schedule of Fees Authorized by 49 

U.S.C. 30141 

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic 

Safety Administration (NHTSA), DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: This document proposes fees 

for Fiscal Year 2011 and until further 

notice, as authorized by 49 U.S.C. 

30141, relating to the registration of 

importers and the importation of motor 

vehicles not certified as conforming to 

the Federal motor vehicle safety 

standards (FMVSS). These fees are 

needed to maintain the registered 

importer (RI) program. 

DATES: You should submit your 

comments early enough to ensure that 

Docket Management receives them no 

later than June 7, 2010. 

ADDRESSES: Comments should refer to 

the docket and notice numbers above 

and be submitted by any of the 

following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to 

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

online instructions for submitting 

comments. 

• Mail: Docket Management Facility: 

U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 

New Jersey Avenue, SE., West Building 

Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 

Washington, DC 20590–0001. 

• Hand Delivery or Courier: West 

Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 

1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., between 

9 a.m. and 5 p.m. ET, Monday through 

Friday, except Federal holidays. 

• Fax: 202–493–2251. 

Instructions: For detailed instructions 

on submitting comments and additional 

information on the rulemaking process, 

see the Public Participation heading of 

the Supplementary Information section 

of this document. Note that all 

comments received will be posted 

without change to http:// 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided. Please 

see the Privacy Act heading below. 

Privacy Act: Anyone is able to search 

the electronic form of all comments 

received into any of our dockets by the 

name of the individual submitting the 

comment (or signing the comment, 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 

19477–78) or you may visit http:// 

DocketInfo.dot.gov. 

Docket: For access to the docket to 

read background documents or 

comments received, go to http:// 

www.regulations.gov or to the street 

address listed above. Follow the online 

instructions for accessing the dockets. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Clint Lindsay, Office of Vehicle Safety 

Compliance, NHTSA (202–366–5291). 

For legal issues, you may call Nicholas 

Englund, Office of Chief Counsel, 

NHTSA (202–366–5263). You may call 

Docket Management at 202–366–9324. 

You may visit the Docket in person from 

9 a.m. to 5 p.m., Monday through 

Friday. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Introduction 

On June 24, 1996, at 61 FR 32411, we 

published a notice that discussed in full 

the rulemaking history of 49 CFR part 

594 and the fees authorized by the 

Imported Vehicle Safety Compliance 

Act of 1988, Public Law 100–562, since 

recodified at 49 U.S.C. 30141–47. The 

reader is referred to that notice for 

background information relating to this 

rulemaking action. Certain fees were 

initially established to become effective 

January 31, 1990, and have been 

periodically adjusted since then. 

We are required to review and make 

appropriate adjustments at least every 

two years in the fees established for the 

administration of the RI program. See 49 

U.S.C. 30141(e). The fees applicable in 

any fiscal year (FY) are to be established 

before the beginning of such year. Ibid. 

We are proposing fees that would 

become effective on October 1, 2010, the 

beginning of FY 2011. The statute 

authorizes fees to cover the costs of the 

importer registration program, to cover 

the cost of making import eligibility 

decisions, and to cover the cost of 

processing the bonds furnished to the 

Department of Homeland Security 

(Customs). We last amended the fee 

schedule in 2008. See final rule 

published on September 24, 2008 at 73 

FR 54981. Those fees apply to Fiscal 

Years 2009 and 2010. 

The proposed fees are based on time 

and costs associated with the tasks for 

which the fees are assessed and reflect 

the increase in hourly costs in the past 

two fiscal years attributable to the 

approximately 4.78 and 2.42 percent 

raises (including the locality adjustment 

for Washington, DC) in salaries of 

employees on the General Schedule that 

became effective on January 1, 2009, 

and on January 1, 2010, respectively. 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS