Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 130 /Wednesday, July 8, 1998 / Notices 36883

seq.), and the provisions of § 216.39 of

the Regulations Governing the Taking

and Importing of Marine Mammals (50

CFR part 216).

Dated: July 1, 1998.

Ann Terbush,

Chief, Permits and Documentation Division,

Office of Protected Resources, National

Marine Fisheries Service.

[FR Doc. 98–18121 Filed 7–7–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510–22–F

COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING

COMMISSION

Sunshine Act Meeting

TIME AND PLACE: 10:30 a.m., Tuesday,

July 28, 1998.

PLACE: 1155 21st St., N.W., Washington,

D.C., 9th Floor Conference Room.

STATUS: Closed.

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: Rule

Enforcement Matter.

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION:

Jean A. Webb, 202–418–5100.

Jean A. Webb,

Secretary of the Commission.

[FR Doc. 98–18250 Filed 7–6–98; 2:22 pm]

BILLING CODE 6351–01–M

COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING

COMMISSION

Sunshine Act Meeting

TIME AND PLACE: 2:00 p.m., Wednesday,

July 29, 1998.

PLACE: 1155 21st St., N.W., Washington,

D.C., 9th Floor Conference Room.

STATUS: Closed.

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED:

Enforcement Matters.

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION:

Jean A. Webb, 202–418–5100.

Jean A Webb,

Secretary of the Commission.

[FR Doc. 98–18249 Filed 7–6–98; 2:22 p.m.]

BILLING CODE 6351–01–M

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

[DFARS Case 97–D035]

DD Form 2631, Performance

Evaluation (Architect-Engineer)

AGENCY: Department of Defense (DoD).

ACTION: Notice and request for

comments regarding a proposed revision

of DD Form 2631.

SUMMARY: The Director of Defense

Procurement is proposing to revise the

form used for preparation of contractor

performance evaluations under

architect-engineer (A–E) contracts.

Additions are made to the form to

provide a more complete listing of the

disciplines and attributes to be

evaluated under A–E contracts, and the

descriptive rating terms are changed for

consistency with the terms used in

evaluating contractor performance

under supply and service contracts.

DATES: Comments on the proposed

revision should be submitted in writing

to the address shown below on or before

September 8, 1998.

ADDRESSES: Interested parties should

submit written comments to: Defense

Acquisition Regulations Council, Attn:

Ms. Amy Williams, PDUSD (A&T) DP

(DAR), IMD 3D139, 3062 Defense

Pentagon, Washington, DC 20301–3062.

Telefax (703) 602–0350.

E-mail comments submitted over the

Internet should be addressed to:

dfars@acq.osd.mil

Please cite DFARS Case 97–D035 in

all correspondence related to this issue.

E-mail comments should cite DFARS

Case 97–D035 in the subject line.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms.

Amy Williams, telephone (703) 602–

0131.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

A. Background

DoD uses DD Form 2631, Performance

Evaluation (Architect-Engineer), to

prepare contractor performance

evaluations under A–E contracts. DD

Form 2631 was developed primarily for

conventional design work relating to

construction of buildings and other

structures. Changes to the form are

needed to add disciplines and attributes

associated with other types of work

performed under A–E contracts, and to

address small business subcontracting

plan requirements. This proposed

revision of the form adds the following

to the list of disciplines and attributes

to be evaluated under A–E contracts

when applicable: Geospatial

Information Services; Chemistry; Risk

Assessment; Safety/Occupational

Health; Hydrographic Surveying; Field

Analysis; Innovative Approaches/

Technologies; and Implementation of

Small Business Subcontracting Plan.

In addition, the proposed revision

changes the five overall rating terms in

Block 12 of the form, for consistency

with the terms used in evaluating

contractor performance under supply

and service contracts, as follows:

From/To

Excellent—Exceptional

Above Average—Very Good

Average—Satisfactory

Below Average—Marginal

Poor—Unsatisfactory

The proposed revision also removes

the three descriptive terms

(Outstanding, Satisfactory, and

Unsatisfactory) used to rate the

disciplines and attributes listed in

Blocks 16, 17, and 19 of the form, and

replaces these terms with the five terms

proposed for use in the overall rating

category.

B. Regulatory Flexibility Act

The proposed revision is not expected

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.,

because the proposed changes to the

form are not expected to significantly

alter the manner in which contractor

performance is evaluated under A–E

contracts. Therefore, an initial

regulatory flexibility analysis has not

been performed. Comments are invited

from small businesses and other

interested parties. Please cite DFARS

Case 98–D035 in correspondence.

C. Paperwork Reduction Act

The Paperwork Reduction Act does

not apply because the proposed form

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.

Michele P. Peterson,

Executive Editor, Defense Acquisition

Regulations Council.

BILLING CODE 5000–04–M
36884 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 130 /Wednesday, July 8, 1998 / Notices

Proposed Revision of DD Form 2631, Performance Evaluation (Architect-Engineer)
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 130 /Wednesday, July 8, 1998 / Notices 36885

[FR Doc. 98–17982 Filed 7–7–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 5000–04–C