Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 98 / Tuesday, May 22, 2007 / Proposed Rules 28663 

C. Paperwork Reduction Act 

The Paperwork Reduction Act does 

not apply, because the rule does not 

impose any 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 207 

Government procurement. 

Michele P. Peterson, 

Editor, Defense Acquisition Regulations 

System. 

Therefore, DoD proposes to amend 48 

CFR part 207 as follows: 

PART 207—ACQUISITION PLANNING 

1. The authority citation for 48 CFR 

part 207 continues to read as follows: 

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

Chapter 1. 

2. Section 207.470 is amended as 

follows: 

a. By redesignating paragraphs (a) and 

(b) as paragraphs (b) and (c) 

respectively; 

b. By adding a new paragraph (a); and 

c. In newly designated paragraph (c), 

by removing ‘‘Except as provided in 

paragraph (a) of this section’’ and 

adding in its place ‘‘Except as provided 

in paragraphs (a) and (b) of this 

section’’. The new paragraph (a) reads as 

follows: 

207.470 Statutory requirements. 

(a) Requirement for statutory 

authorization for certain contracts 

relating to vessels, aircraft, and combat 

vehicles. The contracting officer shall 

not enter into any contract for any 

vessel, aircraft, or combat vehicle, 

through a lease, charter, or similar 

agreement, or for services that provide 

for the use of the contractor’s vessel, 

aircraft, or combat vehicle, unless—

(1) The head of the agency has 

satisfied the requirements of 10 U.S.C. 

2401; and 

(2)(i) The contract will be a long-term 

lease, charter, or similar agreement (10 

U.S.C. 2401(d)(1)); or 

(ii) The terms of the contract provide 

for a substantial termination liability (10 

U.S.C. 2401(d)(2)). 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. E7–9744 Filed 5–21–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 5001–08–P 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

Defense Acquisition Regulations 

System 

48 CFR Part 215 

Contract Profit/Fee Policies 

AGENCY: Defense Acquisition 

Regulations System, Department of 

Defense (DoD). 

ACTION: Request for public input. 

SUMMARY: DoD is conducting a review of 

the Department’s contract profit/fee 

policies. As part of this review, DoD 

would like to hear the views of 

interested parties regarding the 

effectiveness of the profit/fee policies 

presently used for DoD contracts. 

DATES: Submit written comments to the 

address shown below on or before July 

23, 2007. 

ADDRESSES: Submit comments to: Office 

of the Director, Defense Procurement 

and Acquisition Policy, ATTN: OUSD 

(AT&L) DPAP (CPF), IMD 3C132, 3062 

Defense Pentagon, Washington, DC 

20301–3062. Comments also may be 

submitted by facsimile at (703) 602–

7887, or by e-mail at Bill.Sain@osd.mil. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. 

Bill Sain, by telephone at (703) 602–

0293, or by e-mail at Bill.Sain@osd.mil. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: DoD 

contract profit/fee policies, to include 

policy for developing pre-negotiation 

profit or fee objectives, are described in 

the Defense Federal Acquisition 

Regulation Supplement (DFARS), in 

sections 215.404–4 and 215.404–70 

through 215.404–76. One of the key 

aspects of DoD’s profit policy is the 

Weighted Guidelines. While there have 

been some revisions to the Weighted 

Guidelines over the past few years, the 

basis for the existing policy was 

established in the mid-1980s. Since 

then, there have been a number of 

changes, including (1) the evolution of 

DoD’s acquisition programs, (2) 

extensive industry consolidation, and 

(3) a significant increase in the number 

of DoD contracts for services. In light of 

these many changes, DoD is interested 

in receiving public input on the existing 

profit/fee policies, with regard to those 

that are working effectively and those 

that should be revised or eliminated, 

along with supporting rationale. 

Potential areas for consideration 

include, but are not limited to, the 

following: 

• The contractor risk factors used in 

DoD’s structured approach for 

developing profit/fee objectives, 

particularly with regard to—

• The pertinence of the existing 

factors; 

• Whether the ranges and normal 

values used for the existing factors are 

still valid; and 

• Whether there are other risk factors 

that are not reflected in the existing 

policies. 

• Any changes needed to—

• The technology incentive at DFARS 

215.404–71–2(c)(2) and (d)(4); 

• The contract type risk factor at 

DFARS 215.404–71–3; 

• The facilities capital employed 

factor at DFARS 215.404–71–4; 

• The cost efficiency factor at DFARS 

215.404–71–5; 

• The modified weighted guidelines 

at DFARS 215.404–72; 

• The policies as they provide for 

consideration of the amount of 

investment a contractor has in a 

contract; 

• The policies as they provide for 

consideration of the extent of contract 

financing payments; 

• The policies as they apply to 

contracts for services; and 

• The policies as they apply to 

contracts for research, development, 

test, and evaluation. 

• Whether any of the existing 

structured approaches for profit analysis 

should play a role in establishing the 

base fee or pool on award-fee contracts. 

Michele P. Peterson, 

Editor, Defense Acquisition Regulations 

System. 

[FR Doc. E7–9754 Filed 5–21–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 5001–08–P 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

Defense Acquisition Regulations 

System 

48 CFR Part 232 

Contract Financing 

AGENCY: Defense Acquisition 

Regulations System, Department of 

Defense (DoD). 

ACTION: Request for public input. 

SUMMARY: DoD is conducting a review of 

the Department’s contract financing 

policies. As part of this review, DoD 

would like to hear the views of 

interested parties regarding the 

effectiveness of the financing policies 

presently used for DoD contracts. 

DATES: Submit written comments to the 

address shown below on or before July 

23, 2007. 

ADDRESSES: Submit comments to: Office 

of the Director, Defense Procurement 

and Acquisition Policy, ATTN: OUSD 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSALS
28664 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 98 / Tuesday, May 22, 2007 / Proposed Rules 

(AT&L) DPAP (CPF), IMD 3C132, 3062 

Defense Pentagon, Washington, DC 

20301–3062. Comments also may be 

submitted by facsimile at (703) 602–

7887, or by e-mail at 

John.McPherson@osd.mil. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. 

John McPherson, by telephone at (703) 

602–0296, or by e-mail at 

John.McPherson@osd.mil. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: DoD 

policies on contract financing are 

described in Part 32 of the Federal 

Acquisition Regulation (FAR) and Part 

232 of the Defense FAR Supplement. 

These policies cover a variety of 

contract finance issues, including noncommercial item purchase financing; 

commercial item purchase financing; 

loan guarantees for defense production; 

advance payments for noncommercial 

items; progress payments based on 

costs; contract debts; contract funding; 

assignment of claims; prompt payment; 

performance-based payments; electronic 

funds transfer; electronic submission 

and processing of payment requests; and 

levies on contract payments. 

DoD is interested in receiving public 

input on these contract financing 

policies, particularly with regard to 

those that are considered to be 

especially effective or ineffective, along 

with supporting rationale. 

Michele P. Peterson, 

Editor, Defense Acquisition Regulations 

System. 

[FR Doc. E7–9751 Filed 5–21–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 5001–08–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Fish and Wildlife Service 

50 CFR Part 17 

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife 

and Plants; Status of the Rio Grande 

Cutthroat Trout 

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Notice of intent to initiate a 

status review. 

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service (Service), announce our 

intent to initiate a candidate status 

review for the Rio Grande cutthroat 

trout (Oncorhynchus clarki virginalis) to 

determine if candidate status is 

warranted. The Endangered Species Act 

of 1973, as amended (Act), requires that 

we identify species of wildlife and 

plants that are endangered or 

threatened, based on the best available 

scientific and commercial information. 

Through the Federal rulemaking 

process, we add these species to the List 

of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife 

at 50 CFR 17.11 or the List of 

Endangered or Threatened Plants at 50 

CFR 17.12. As part of this program, we 

maintain a list of species that we regard 

as candidates for listing. A candidate is 

one for which we have on file sufficient 

information on biological vulnerability 

and threats to support a proposal to list 

as endangered or threatened but for 

which preparation and publication of a 

proposal is precluded by higher-priority 

listing actions. During or prior to April 

2008, we will make a determination 

concerning the results of the status 

review for the Rio Grande cutthroat 

trout, and, shortly thereafter, we will 

publish this determination in the 

Federal Register. 

DATES: We will accept comments and 

information from all interested parties 

for our use in the status review and in 

preparing a revised finding until July 6, 

2007. 

ADDRESSES: If you wish to comment, 

you may submit your comments and 

materials by any of the following 

methods: 

1. You may mail or hand-deliver your 

written comments and information to 

Wally ‘‘J’’ Murphy, Field Supervisor, 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, New 

Mexico Ecological Services Field Office, 

2105 Osuna NE, Albuquerque, New 

Mexico 87113. 

2. You may fax your comments to 

Wally ‘‘J’’ Murphy, Field Supervisor, 

New Mexico Ecological Services Field 

Office, at (505) 346–2542. 

3. You may send comments by 

electronic mail (e-mail) to 

R2FWE_AL@fws.gov. 

4. You may go to the Federal 

eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

In the event that our Internet connection 

is not functional, please submit your 

comments by one of the alternate 

methods mentioned above. 

Comments and materials received, as 

well as supporting documentation used 

in the preparation of candidate status 

review, will be available for public 

inspection, by appointment, during 

normal business hours at the New 

Mexico Ecological Services Field Office, 

at the street address above (telephone: 

(505) 346–2525). 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Wally ‘‘J’’ Murphy, Field Supervisor, 

New Mexico Ecological Services Field 

Office (see ADDRESSES) (telephone: (505) 

346–2525; facsimile: (505) 346–2542). 

Persons who use a telecommunications 

device for the deaf (TDD) may call the 

Federal Information Relay Service 

(FIRS) at 800/877–8339. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

On February 25, 1998, we received a 

petition from the Southwest Center for 

Biological Diversity requesting that the 

Service add the Rio Grande cutthroat 

trout (Onchorynchus clarki virginalis) to 

the List of Endangered and Threatened 

Wildlife. The petition addressed the 

range-wide distribution of the Rio 

Grande cutthroat trout, including 

populations in Colorado and New 

Mexico. 

Section 4(b)(3)(B) of the Act requires 

that we make a finding on whether a 

petition to list, delist, or reclassify a 

species presents substantial scientific or 

commercial information indicating that 

the petitioned action may be warranted. 

We subsequently published a notice of 

a 90-day finding in the Federal Register 

(63 FR 49062, September 14, 1998). In 

the 90-day finding, we concluded that 

the petition did not present substantial 

information indicating that listing of the 

Rio Grande cutthroat trout may be 

warranted. 

On June 9, 1999, the Southwest 

Center for Biological Diversity filed a 

complaint challenging the September 

14, 1998, 90-day petition finding as 

violating the Act and the Administrative 

Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 551 et seq). On 

November 8, 2001, a settlement 

agreement executed by both parties (the 

Service and the Southwest Center for 

Biological Diversity) was filed with the 

court. The settlement agreement 

stipulated that we would conduct a 

candidate status review for the Rio 

Grande cutthroat trout. 

After completing the candidate status 

review for the Rio Grande cutthroat 

trout, the Service made a determination 

that listing of the trout was not 

warranted because the trout was neither 

endangered nor likely to become 

endangered within the foreseeable 

future throughout all or a significant 

portion of its range. Notice of that 

determination was published in the 

Federal Register on June 11, 2002 (67 

FR 39936). Since that time, the Service 

has further defined how it analyzes 

what constitutes a ‘‘significant portion’’

of a species’’ range. For example, in the 

recent finding regarding the status of the 

Western Great Lakes distinct population 

segment of gray wolf (72 FR 6052, 

February 8, 2007), the Service outlined 

a framework for analyzing whether a 

species is in danger of extinction 

throughout a significant portion of its 

range. In addition, in the 5 years since 

the June 2002 deterimation, a significant 

amount of new information and data 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSALS