Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 60 / Friday, March 28, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 17447 

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 Part 212 

Government procurement. 

Manuel Quinones, 

Editor, Defense Acquisition Regulations 

System. 

Therefore, 48 CFR part 212 is 

amended as follows: 

PART 212—ACQUISITION OF 

COMMERCIAL ITEMS 

■ 1. The authority citation for 48 CFR 

part 212 continues to read as follows: 

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

chapter 1. 

212.7102–3 [Amended] 

■ 2. Section 212.7102–3 is amended by 

removing ‘‘January 6, 2016’’ from 

paragraph (a) and adding in its place 

‘‘December 31, 2019’’. 

[FR Doc. 2014–06737 Filed 3–27–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 5001–06–P 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

Defense Acquisition Regulations 

System 

48 CFR Parts 235 and 252 

RIN 0750–AI10 

Defense Federal Acquisition 

Regulation Supplement: Clauses With 

Alternates—Research and 

Development Contracting (DFARS 

Case 2013–D026) 

AGENCY: Defense Acquisition 

Regulations System, Department of 

Defense (DoD). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: DoD is issuing a final rule 

amending the Defense Federal 

Acquisition Regulation Supplement 

(DFARS) to create an overarching 

prescription for a research and 

development-related clause with an 

alternate. The rule also includes 

separate prescriptions for the basic and 

alternate clause and includes the full 

text of the alternate clause. 

DATES: Effective March 28, 2014. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. 

Annette Gray, telephone 571–372–6093. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

DoD published a proposed rule in the 

Federal Register at 78 FR 73475 on 

December 6, 2013, to amend the 

presentation of the DFARS part 235 

clause with its alternate and their 

prescriptions. This final rule addresses 

the single clause affected, which is 

252.235–7003, Frequency 

Authorization, and its alternate. 

One public comment was received; 

however it was not related to the 

proposed rule and therefore not 

considered in drafting the final rule. 

Minor editorial changes were made to 

standardize language used in the final 

rule for the clause prescriptions and 

prefaces in order to provide uniform 

arrangement in the regulations. 

II. Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 

Executive Orders (E.O.s) 12866 and 

13563 direct agencies to assess all costs 

and benefits of available regulatory 

alternatives and, if regulation is 

necessary, to select regulatory 

approaches that maximize net benefits 

(including potential economic, 

environmental, public health and safety 

effects, distributive impacts, and 

equity). E.O. 13563 emphasizes the 

importance of quantifying both costs 

and benefits, of reducing costs, of 

harmonizing rules, and of promoting 

flexibility. This is not a significant 

regulatory action and, therefore, was not 

subject to review under section 6(b) of 

E.O. 12866, Regulatory Planning and 

Review, dated September 30, 1993. This 

rule is not a major rule under 5 U.S.C. 

804. 

III. Regulatory Flexibility Act 

A final regulatory flexibility analysis 

has been prepared consistent with the 

Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601, 

et seq., and is summarized as follows. 

This final rule amends the Defense 

Federal Acquisition Regulation 

Supplement (DFARS) to create 

prescriptions for the basic version and 

the alternate of a DFARS part 235 

solicitation and contract clause and to 

include the full text of the alternate 

clause. 

The public did not raise any issues in 

response to the initial regulatory 

flexibility analysis. The Chief Counsel 

for Advocacy of the Small Business 

Administration did not submit any 

comments in response to the rule. 

Potential offerors, including small 

businesses, may be affected by this rule 

by seeing an unfamiliar format for 

clause alternates in solicitations and 

contracts issued by DoD contracting 

activities. According to the Federal 

Procurement Data System, in fiscal year 

2012, DoD made approximately 270,000 

contract awards (not including 

modification and orders) that exceeded 

the micro-purchase threshold, of which 

approximately 180,000 (67%) were 

awarded to small businesses. It is 

unknown how many of these contracts 

were awarded that included an alternate 

to a DFARS provision or clause. 

Nothing substantive will change in 

solicitations or contracts for potential 

offerors, and only the appearance of 

how clause alternates are presented in 

the solicitations and contracts will be 

changed. This rule may result in 

potential offerors, including small 

businesses, expending more time to 

become familiar with and to understand 

the new format of the clause alternates 

in full text contained in contracts issued 

by any DoD contracting activity. The 

rule also anticipates saving contractors 

time by making all paragraph 

substitutions from the basic version of 

the clause, and not requiring the 

contractors to read inapplicable 

paragraphs contained in the basic 

version of the clause. The overall 

burden caused by this rule is expected 

to be negligible and will not be any 

greater on small businesses than it is on 

large businesses. 

This rule does not add any new 

information collection requirements. 

The rule does not duplicate, overlap, or 

conflict with any other Federal rules. No 

alternatives were identified that will 

accomplish the objectives of the rule. 

IV. Paperwork Reduction Act 

The rule does not contain any 

information collection requirements that 

require the approval of the Office of 

Management and Budget under the 

Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 

chapter 35). 

List of Subjects in 48 CFR Parts 235 and 

252 

Government procurement. 

Manuel Quinones, 

Editor, Defense Acquisition Regulations 

System. 

Therefore, 48 CFR parts 235 and 252 

are amended as follows: 

■ 1. The authority citation for 48 CFR 

parts 235 and 252 continues to read as 

follows: 

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

chapter 1. 

PART 235—RESEARCH AND 

DEVELOPMENT CONTRACTING 

■ 2. In section 235.072, revise paragraph 

(b) to read as follows: 

235.072 Additional contract clauses. 

* * * * * 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
17448 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 60 / Friday, March 28, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 

(b) Use the basic or the alternate of the 

clause at 252.235–7003, Frequency 

Authorization, in solicitations and 

contracts for developing, producing, 

constructing, testing, or operating a 

device requiring a frequency 

authorization. 

(1) Use the basic clause if agency 

procedures do not authorize the use of 

DD Form 1494, Application for 

Equipment Frequency Allocation, to 

obtain radio frequency authorization. 

(2) Use the alternate I clause if agency 

procedures authorize the use of DD 

Form 1494, Application for Equipment 

Frequency Allocation, to obtain 

frequency authorization. 

* * * * * 

PART 252—SOLICITATION 

PROVISIONS AND CONTRACT 

CLAUSES 

■ 3. Amend section 252.235–7003 by— 

■ a. Revising the introductory text, 

clause title and date; and 

■ b. Revising Alternate I. 

252.235–7003 Frequency authorization. 

As prescribed in 235.072(b), use one 

of the following clauses: 

Basic. As prescribed at 235.072(b)(1), 

use the following clause. 

FREQUENCY AUTHORIZATION—BASIC 

(MAR 2014) 

* * * * * 

Alternate I. As prescribed at 235.072(b)(2), 

use the following clause, which uses a 

different paragraph (c) than the basic clause. 

FREQUENCY AUTHORIZATION— 

ALTERNATE I (MAR 2014) 

(a) The Contractor shall obtain 

authorization for radio frequencies required 

in support of this contract. 

(b) For any experimental, developmental, 

or operational equipment for which the 

appropriate frequency allocation has not 

been made, the Contractor shall provide the 

technical operating characteristics of the 

proposed electromagnetic radiating device to 

the Contracting Officer during the initial 

planning, experimental, or developmental 

phase of contract performance. 

(c) The Contractor shall use DD Form 1494, 

Application for Equipment Frequency 

Allocation, to obtain radio frequency 

authorization. 

(d) The Contractor shall include this 

clause, including this paragraph (d), in all 

subcontracts requiring the development, 

production, construction, testing, or 

operation of a device for which a radio 

frequency authorization is required. 

(End of clause) 

[FR Doc. 2014–06736 Filed 3–27–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 5001–06–P 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

Defense Acquisition Regulations 

System 

48 CFR Parts 246 and 252 

RIN 0750–AH95 

Defense Federal Acquisition 

Regulation Supplement: Clauses With 

Alternates—Quality Assurance 

(DFARS Case 2013–D004) 

AGENCY: Defense Acquisition 

Regulations System, Department of 

Defense (DoD). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: DoD is issuing a final rule 

amending the Defense Federal 

Acquisition Regulation Supplement 

(DFARS) to create an overarching 

prescription for a quality assurancerelated clause with two alternates. The 

rule also includes separate prescriptions 

for the basic and alternate clauses and 

includes the full text of each alternate. 

DATES: Effective March 28, 2014. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. 

Annette Gray, telephone 571–372–6093. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

DoD published a proposed rule in the 

Federal Register at 78 FR 48407 on 

August 8, 2013, to revise the 

presentation of the DFARS part 246 

clause with alternates and their 

prescriptions. 

II. Discussion 

This final rule addresses the single 

DFARS part 246 clause that has 

alternates. The affected clause is 

252.246–7001, Warranty of Data, with 

two alternates. The naming convention 

results in new clause titles: Warranty of 

Data—Basic, Warranty of Data— 

Alternate I, and Warranty of Data— 

Alternate II. 

No public comments were submitted 

in response to the proposed rule. Minor 

editorial changes were made in the final 

rule to standardize language used for the 

clause prescriptions and prefaces to 

provide uniform arrangement in the 

regulations. 

III. Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 

Executive Orders (E.O.s) 12866 and 

13563 direct agencies to assess all costs 

and benefits of available regulatory 

alternatives and, if regulation is 

necessary, to select regulatory 

approaches that maximize net benefits 

(including potential economic, 

environmental, public health and safety 

effects, distributive impacts, and 

equity). E.O. 13563 emphasizes the 

importance of quantifying both costs 

and benefits, of reducing costs, of 

harmonizing rules, and of promoting 

flexibility. This is not a significant 

regulatory action and, therefore, was not 

subject to review under section 6(b) of 

E.O. 12866, Regulatory Planning and 

Review, dated September 30, 1993. This 

rule is not a major rule under 5 U.S.C. 

804. 

IV. Regulatory Flexibility Act 

A final regulatory flexibility analysis 

has been prepared consistent with the 

Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601, 

et seq., and is summarized as follows. 

This final rule amends the Defense 

Federal Acquisition Regulation 

Supplement (DFARS) to (1) create an 

umbrella prescription for the elements 

common to the basic clause and both 

alternates, (2) create a specific 

prescription for the basic clause and 

each alternate clause that address only 

the requirements for their use of the 

alternate so that it is clear which is 

appropriate in a specific procurement, 

and (3) include the full text of the clause 

alternate. The inclusion of the full text 

of the alternate clause makes the terms 

clearer to offerors, and contractors, as 

well as to DoD contracting officers. The 

prescriptions are not revised in any way 

to change when the clause is applicable 

to offerors, contractors, or 

subcontractors. 

No comments were received from the 

public in response to the initial 

regulatory flexibility analysis. The Chief 

Counsel for Advocacy of the Small 

Business Administration did not submit 

any comments in response to the rule. 

Potential offerors, including small 

businesses, may be affected by this rule 

by seeing an unfamiliar format for 

clause alternates in solicitations and 

contracts issued by DoD contracting 

activities. According to the Federal 

Procurement Data System, in Fiscal 

Year 2012, DoD made approximately 

270,000 contract awards (not including 

modification and orders) that exceeded 

the micro-purchase threshold, of which 

approximately 180,000 (67%) were 

awarded to small businesses. It is 

unknown how many of these contracts 

were awarded that included an alternate 

to a DFARS provision or clause. Nothing 

substantive will change in solicitations 

or contracts for potential offerors, and 

only the appearance of how clause 

alternates are presented in the 

solicitations and contracts will be 

changed. This rule may result in 

potential offerors, including small 

businesses, expending more time to 

become familiar with and to understand 

the new format of the clause alternates 

in full text contained in contracts issued 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES