3274 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 16 / Wednesday, January 24, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 

(‘‘Federalism’’) if it has a substantial 

direct effect on State or local 

governments and would either preempt 

State law or impose a substantial direct 

cost of compliance on them. We have 

analyzed this rule under Executive 

Order 13132 and have determined that 

it does not have implications for 

federalism. 

F. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995, 2 U.S.C. 1531–1538, requires 

Federal agencies to assess the effects of 

their discretionary regulatory actions. In 

particular, the Act addresses actions 

that may result in the expenditure by a 

State, local, or tribal government, in the 

aggregate, or by the private sector of 

$100,000,000 (adjusted for inflation) or 

more in any one year. Though this rule 

will not result in such an expenditure, 

we do discuss the effects of this rule 

elsewhere in this preamble. 

G. Taking of Private Property 

This rule will not cause a taking of 

private property or otherwise have 

taking implications under Executive 

Order 12630 (‘‘Governmental Actions 

and Interference with Constitutionally 

Protected Property Rights’’). 

H. Civil Justice Reform 

This rule meets applicable standards 

in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive 

Order 12988, (‘‘Civil Justice Reform’’), to 

minimize litigation, eliminate 

ambiguity, and reduce burden. 

I. Protection of Children 

We have analyzed this rule under 

Executive Order 13045 (‘‘Protection of 

Children from Environmental Health 

Risks and Safety Risks’’). This rule is 

not an economically significant rule and 

would not create an environmental risk 

to health or risk to safety that might 

disproportionately affect children. 

J. Indian Tribal Governments 

This rule does not have tribal 

implications under Executive Order 

13175 (‘‘Consultation and Coordination 

with Indian Tribal Governments’’), 

because it would not have a substantial 

direct effect on one or more Indian 

tribes, on the relationship between the 

Federal Government and Indian tribes, 

or on the distribution of power and 

responsibilities between the Federal 

Government and Indian tribes. 

K. Energy Effects 

We have analyzed this rule under 

Executive Order 13211 (‘‘Actions 

Concerning Regulations That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use’’). We have 

determined that it is not a ‘‘significant 

energy action’’ under that order because 

it is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ 

under Executive Order 12866 and is not 

likely to have a significant adverse effect 

on the supply, distribution, or use of 

energy. 

L. Technical Standards 

The National Technology Transfer 

and Advancement Act, codified as a 

note to 15 U.S.C. 272, directs agencies 

to use voluntary consensus standards in 

their regulatory activities unless the 

agency provides Congress, through 

OMB, with an explanation of why using 

these standards would be inconsistent 

with applicable law or otherwise 

impractical. Voluntary consensus 

standards are technical standards (e.g., 

specifications of materials, performance, 

design, or operation; test methods; 

sampling procedures; and related 

management systems practices) that are 

developed or adopted by voluntary 

consensus standards bodies. This rule 

does not use technical standards. 

Therefore, we did not consider the use 

of voluntary consensus standards. 

M. Environment 

We have analyzed this rule under 

Department of Homeland Security 

Management Directive 023–01 and 

Commandant Instruction M16475.lD 

(COMDTINST M16475.1D), which guide 

the Coast Guard in complying with the 

National Environmental Policy Act of 

1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and have 

concluded that this action is one of a 

category of actions that do not 

individually or cumulatively have a 

significant effect on the human 

environment. This rule is categorically 

excluded under section 2.B.2 and figure 

2–1, paragraphs (34)(a) of the 

Instruction. This final rule involves 

amendments to regulations that are 

editorial. 

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 83 

Navigation (water), Waterways. 

For the reasons discussed in the 

preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 

CFR part 83 as follows: 

PART 83—NAVIGATION RULES 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 83 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: Sec. 303, Pub. L. 108–293, 118 

Stat. 1042 (33 U.S.C. 2071); Department of 

Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1. 

■ 2. Revise the heading for part 83 to 

read as set forth above. 

§ 83.34 [Amended] 

■ 3. Amend § 83.34 as follows: 

■ a. In paragraph (a)(ii), remove the 

word ‘‘danger’’; and 

■ b. In paragraph (c)(ii), remove the 

word ‘‘danger’’. 

Katia Kroutil, 

Chief, Office of Regulations and 

Administrative Law. 

[FR Doc. 2018–01304 Filed 1–23–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110–04–P 

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS 

COMMISSION 

47 CFR Part 15 

[GN Docket No. 12–268; FCC 15–140] 

Expanding the Economic and 

Innovation Opportunities of Spectrum 

Through Incentive Auctions 

AGENCY: Federal Communications 

Commission. 

ACTION: Final rule; announcement of 

effective date. 

SUMMARY: The Federal Communications 

Commission (Commission) is 

announcing that three final rules that 

appeared in the Federal Register as part 

of the Commission’s rulemaking 

Expanding the Economic and 

Innovation Opportunities of Spectrum 

do not need information collection 

approval from the Office of Management 

and Budget (OMB) and are effective 

immediately. This document is 

consistent with a Report and Order in 

which the Commission stated that it 

would publish a document in the 

Federal Register announcing OMB 

approval and the effective date of these 

rules. 

DATES: 47 CFR 15.713(b)(2)(iv), 

15.713(j)(10) introductory text and 

15.715(n) published at 81 FR 4969, 

January 29, 2016, are effective on 

January 24, 2018. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Cathy Williams at (202) 418–2918, or 

via email at Cathy.Williams@fcc.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

Report and Order, GN Docket No. 12– 

268, FCC 15–140, published at 81 FR 

4969, January 29, 2016, stated that 

modifications to section 15.713(b)(2)(iv), 

15.713(j)(10) introductory text and 

section 15.715(n) would not become 

effective until after the Federal Register 

publication of the date that OMB 

approved the resulting modification of 

the information collections under the 

Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) and the 

effective date of such modifications. 

Because subsequent review and 

consultation with OMB has revealed 

that there is no existing information 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 16 / Wednesday, January 24, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 3275 

collection that will be modified by these 

rules, OMB review is not necessary. 

Thus, these rules may become effective 

immediately. 

Federal Communications Commission. 

Marlene H. Dortch, 

Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2018–01213 Filed 1–23–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6712–01–P 

GENERAL SERVICES 

ADMINISTRATION 

48 CFR Parts 515, 538, and 552 

[GSAR Case 2016–G506; Docket No. 2016– 

0016; Sequence No. 1] 

RIN 3090–AJ75 

General Services Administration 

Acquisition Regulation (GSAR); 

Federal Supply Schedule, Order-Level 

Materials 

AGENCY: Office of Acquisition Policy, 

General Services Administration. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The General Services 

Administration (GSA) is amending the 

General Services Administration 

Acquisition Regulation (GSAR) to 

clarify the authority to acquire orderlevel materials (OLMs) when placing an 

individual task or delivery order against 

a Federal Supply Schedule (FSS) 

contract or FSS blanket purchase 

agreement (BPA). OLMs are supplies 

and/or services acquired in direct 

support of an individual task or delivery 

order placed against an FSS contract or 

BPA, when the supplies and/or services 

are not known at the time of contract or 

BPA award. 

DATES: Effective: January 24, 2018. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. 

Leah Price, GSA Acquisition Policy 

Division, Senior Policy Advisor, at 

leah.price@gsa.gov. For information 

pertaining to status or publication 

schedules, contact the Regulatory 

Secretariat at 202–501–4755. Please cite 

GSAR Case 2016–G506. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

GSA’s Federal Supply Schedule (FSS) 

program, commonly known as the GSA 

Schedules program or Multiple Award 

Schedule (MAS) program is the 

Government’s most used commercialitem purchasing channel, accounting for 

approximately $33 billion of Federal 

contract awards in fiscal year 2016 (not 

including the VA Schedules). 

GSA Schedules provide a convenient 

and effective option for both ordering 

activities and Schedule contractors. 

Ordering activities enjoy simplified 

ordering procedures and reduced prices, 

while Schedule contractors connect 

with federal business quickly and 

easily. Additional features of the 

Schedules program, including Blanket 

Purchase Agreements (BPAs) and 

Contractor Team Arrangements (CTAs), 

greatly enhance the flexibility of the 

program. 

These features offer: 

• Additional price discounts for 

ordering activities; 

• Expanded opportunities for 

contractors; 

• Elimination of redundant effort, 

with a single contracting vehicle 

fulfilling complex or ongoing needs; 

• Reductions in administrative time 

and paperwork; 

• Expanded business opportunities 

for socioeconomic groups; and 

• Help for ordering activities wishing 

to reach socioeconomic goals. 

The Schedules Program supports 

Federal Agencies’ missions by providing 

access from simple commodities such as 

pens and pencils to complex services 

such as IT Modernization. 

Authority for This Rulemaking 

41 U.S.C. 152(3)(B) deemed FSS 

procedures to meet the Competition in 

Contracting Act (CICA) requirement of 

full and open competition as long as 

participation has been open to all 

responsible sources; and orders and 

contracts under those procedures result 

in the lowest overall cost alternative to 

meet the needs of the Federal 

Government. 

GSA has long recognized the lowest 

overall cost alternative does not just 

include the actual price paid to the 

contractor, but also the administrative 

cost of conducting the acquisition. For 

example, GSA charges a low 

transactional fee for orders to be placed 

against a Schedule and the efficiency of 

the simplified acquisition process 

translates to time and cost savings. The 

administrative cost to acquire similar 

goods or services combined with 

possible fees on a new contract 

duplicates efforts resulting in a less 

efficient way to acquire those goods or 

services. 

This is also consistent with the 

Federal Acquisition System and its 

principle to minimize administrative 

operating costs (FAR 1.102(b)(2)). The 

Federal Acquisition System is designed 

to deliver the best value product or 

service to the customer in terms of cost, 

quality, and timeliness. By lowering the 

cost to conduct the acquisition, and 

simplifying the acquisition process, 

administrative savings can be achieved. 

II. Discussion of the Proposed Rule 

The proposed rule published in the 

Federal Register at 81 FR 62445 on 

September 9, 2016 and addressed the 

importance of providing the same 

flexibility for the FSS program that is 

currently authorized for other indefinite 

delivery, indefinite quantity (IDIQ) 

vehicles, which will help reduce 

contract duplication and the associated 

administrative costs and inefficiencies. 

GSA also discussed how the proposed 

changes would also reduce transaction 

costs by eliminating the need for 

additional contracts for ancillary work. 

The rule aimed at achieving parity 

between the FSS programs and other 

IDIQs, in terms of acquiring OLMs. 

The rule presented two price 

protections found in all IDIQ contracts 

which authorized OLMs plus three 

additional price protections not 

generally found in such contracts. 

All IDIQ contracts authorizing OLMs 

include two key government 

protections: 

1. The contracting officer must 

determine the prices are fair and 

reasonable. 

2. FAR Clause 52.212–4 Alternate 1 

paragraph (i)(1)(ii) which addresses: 

a. Paying for commercial items at prices 

not to exceed established catalog or 

market price 

b. Conditions for reimbursing 

contractors for actual cost 

c. Procedures for handling indirect cost 

reimbursement 

The three unique protections GSA 

included in the proposed rule were: 

1. The requirement to submit three 

quotes; 

2. Limitation of percentage of order 

which can be OLM; and 

3. Establishment of an OLM SIN, 

which requires reporting of OLM. 

Commenters noted that due to these 

three unique GSA protections, the 

proposed rule did not fully meet the 

parity objective. In the final rule, GSA 

maintained these three unique 

protections while simplifying and 

narrowing the three quote requirement. 

This is more fully discussed in the 

Analysis of Public Comments section. 

GSA agrees that this leaves the final rule 

close to, but not at full parity. However, 

the requirements are currently the best 

available means to ensure price 

reasonableness and provide confidence 

to customers when using the new OLM 

authority on Federal Supply Schedules. 

This is more fully discussed in the 

Analysis of Public Comments section. 

These price protections, when 

combined with the current design of the 

FSS program, are sufficient to ensure 

the Federal Supply Schedules continue 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES