Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 121 / Tuesday, June 24, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 35699 

1 In order to determing the EPA effective date for 

a specific provision listed in this table, consult the 

Federal Register notice cited in this column for the 

particular provision. 

1 In order to determine the EPA effective date for 

a specific provision listed in this table, consult the 

Federal Register notice cited in this column for the 

particular provision. 

* * * * * 

Subpart EE—New Hampshire 

■ 3. In § 52.1520, Table (c) ‘‘EPAAPPROVED NEW HAMPSHIRE 

REGULATIONS’’ is amended by 

revising the existing entry for Env-A 300 

to read as follows: 

§ 52.1520 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(c) EPA approved regulations. 

EPA-APPROVED NEW HAMPSHIRE REGULATIONS

State citation Title/subject State effective 

date EPA approval date 1 Explanations 

*******

Env-A 300 .................................... Ambient Air Quality Standards. ... 9/1/2012 6/24/14 ..............................

[Insert Federal Register 

page number where the 

document begins].

*******

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2014–14531 Filed 6–23–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

48 CFR Parts 202 and 217 

RIN 0750–AI23 

Defense Federal Acquisition 

Regulation Supplement: Definition of 

‘‘Congressional Defense Committees’’ 

(DFARS Case 2013–D027) 

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 clarify the meaning of the 

phrase ‘‘congressional defense 

committees.’’ 

DATES: Effective June 24, 2014. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. 

Lee Renna, telephone 571–372–6095. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

DoD is amending the DFARS to clarify 

the meaning of the phrase 

‘‘congressional defense committees.’’ 

Generally, when this phrase appears in 

the DFARS, it has the same meaning as 

set forth in 10 U.S.C. 101(a)(16), i.e., the 

Committee on Armed Services and the 

Committee on Appropriations, of the 

Senate and of the House. In DFARS 

202.101, a new paragraph has been 

added, indicating that the definition for 

‘‘congressional defense committees’’ is 

in accordance with 10 U.S.C. 101(a)(16), 

or as otherwise specified by statute for 

particular applications. The definition 

at 202.101 will no longer include the 

Subcommittees on Defense of the 

Committees on Appropriation, in 

keeping with the definition at 10 U.S.C. 

101(a)(16). 

There are instances, however, when 

this definition may be modified to 

reflect the unique requirements of a 

specific law. Such is the case at DFARS 

217.103. At DFARS subpart 217.1, 

which pertains to multiyear contracting, 

the definition for ‘‘congressional 

defense committees’’ is derived from 

DoD annual appropriations acts. As 

such, a new definition has been added, 

which also encompasses the 

Subcommittees on Defense of the 

Committees on Appropriations for the 

Senate and House. 

II. Publication of This Final Rule for 

Public Comment Is Not Required by 

Statute 

‘‘Publication of proposed 

regulations,’’ 41 U.S.C. 1707, is the 

statute which applies to the publication 

of the Defense Federal Acquisition 

Regulation Supplement. Paragraph (a)(1) 

of the statute requires that a 

procurement policy, regulation, 

procedure, or form (including an 

amendment or modification thereof) 

must be published for public comment 

if it relates to the expenditure of 

appropriated funds, and has either a 

significant effect beyond the internal 

operating procedures of the agency 

issuing the policy, regulation, procedure 

or form, or has a significant cost or 

administrative impact on contractors or 

offerors. This final rule is not required 

to be published for public comment 

because it will not have a significant 

cost or administrative impact. These 

requirements affect only the internal 

operating procedures of the 

Government. 

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 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act does 

not apply to this rule because this final 

rule does not constitute a significant 

DFARS revision within the meaning of 

FAR 1.501–1, and 41 U.S.C. 1707 does 

not require publication for public 

comment. 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
35700 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 121 / Tuesday, June 24, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 

V. Paperwork Reduction Act 

This 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 202 and 

217 

Government procurement. 

Amy G. Williams, 

Deputy, Defense Acquisition Regulations 

System. 

Therefore, 48 CFR parts 202 and 217 

are amended as follows: 

■ 1. The authority citation for 48 CFR 

parts 202 and 217 continues to read as 

follows: 

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

chapter 1. 

PART 202—DEFINITIONS OF WORDS 

AND TERMS 

■ 2. Amend section 202.101 by revising 

the definition of ‘‘congressional defense 

committees’’ to read as follows: 

202.101 Definitions. 

Congressional defense committees 

means— 

(1) In accordance with 10 U.S.C. 

101(a)(16), except as otherwise specified 

in paragraph (2) of this definition or as 

otherwise specified by statute for 

particular applications— 

(i) The Committee on Armed Services 

of the Senate; 

(ii) The Committee on Appropriations 

of the Senate; 

(iii) The Committee on Armed 

Services of the House of 

Representatives; and 

(iv) The Committee on Appropriations 

of the House of Representatives. 

(2) For use in subpart 217.1, see the 

definition at 217.103. 

* * * * * 

PART 217—SPECIAL CONTRACTING 

METHODS 

■ 3. Amend section 217.103 by adding, 

in alphabetical order, the definition for 

‘‘congressional defense committees’’ to 

read as follows: 

217.103 Definitions. 

* * * * * 

Congressional defense committees 

means— 

(1) The Committee on Armed Services 

of the Senate; 

(2) The Committee on Appropriations 

of the Senate; 

(3) The Subcommittee on Defense of 

the Committee on Appropriations of the 

Senate; 

(4) The Committee on Armed Services 

of the House of Representatives; 

(5) The Committee on Appropriations 

of the House of Representatives; and 

(6) The Subcommittee on Defense of 

the Committee on Appropriations of the 

House of Representatives. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2014–14585 Filed 6–23–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 5001–06–P 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

Defense Acquisition Regulations 

System 

48 CFR Part 237 

RIN 0750–AI05 

Defense Federal Acquisition 

Regulation Supplement: Private Sector 

Notification Requirements of InSourcing Actions (DFARS Case 2012– 

D036) 

AGENCY: Defense Acquisition 

Regulations System, Department of 

Defense (DoD). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: DoD has adopted as final, 

with changes, an interim rule amending 

the Defense Federal Acquisition 

Regulation Supplement (DFARS) to 

implement a section of the National 

Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for 

Fiscal Year 2012 regarding private 

sector notification of in-sourcing 

actions. 

DATES: Effective June 24, 2014. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. 

Janetta Brewer, telephone 571–372– 

6104. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

DoD published an interim rule in the 

Federal Register at 78 FR 65218 on 

October 31, 2013, to establish 

procedures for the timely notification of 

any contractor that performs a function 

that the Secretary plans to convert (insource) to performance by DoD civilian 

employees and provide the 

congressional defense committees a 

copy of any such notification. One 

respondent submitted comments in 

response to the interim rule. 

II. Discussion and Analysis 

DoD reviewed the public comments in 

the development of the final rule. A 

discussion of the comments is provided 

below. No changes were made to the 

final rule based on the public 

comments; however, one editorial 

change is being made to clarify a 

reference. 

A. Analysis of Public Comments 

Comment: The respondent 

commented that, while the interim rule 

requires the contracting officer to notify 

an affected incumbent contractor about 

an in-sourcing decision within 20 

business days of receiving the decision 

from the in-sourcing program official, 

the rule does not specifically address 

how soon DoD can commence the insourcing action after issuing the notice. 

The respondent stated the rule should 

require issuance of the in-sourcing 

notice in a reasonable amount of time 

prior to DoD’s commencement of the insourcing action. 

Response: No action was taken as a 

result of this comment. DoD guidance at 

DFARS 237.102–79 and in the 

memorandum at DFARS Procedures, 

Guidance and Information 237.102–79, 

reflects that the in-sourcing of 

contracted services falls into the 

following three categories of 

justification (1) inherently 

Governmental functions (2) work 

closely associated with inherently 

Governmental functions, critical in 

nature, and unauthorized personal 

services, and (3) cost-based in-sourcing 

decisions. The nature of the contracts in 

these three categories is such that it is 

essential for the Government to have the 

ability to take in-sourcing actions once 

notification is provided to affected 

incumbent contractors. 

Comment: The respondent suggested 

including specific details of the 

rationale for the in-sourcing decision in 

the notice to the contractors to ensure 

meaningful insight about the rationale. 

Response: No action was taken on this 

comment as DoD included language 

requiring that a summary of why the 

service is being insourced be included 

in the notice and therefore, as written, 

the rule fulfills the objective of 

transparency and accountability. 

B. Other Changes 

Editorial changes were made to clarify 

where the OASD memorandum ‘‘Private 

Sector Notification Requirements in 

Support of In Sourcing Actions,’’ dated 

January 29, 2013, can be found in the 

DFARS Procedures Guidance and 

Information. 

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 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES