Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 235 / Friday, December 6, 2013 / Proposed Rules 73475 

(1) The removal of the nonavailability 

exception to the Buy American statute 

for aluminum-clad steel wire will 

neither increase nor decrease small 

businesses’ participation in future 

procurements, particularly with regard 

to set-asides under the Small Business 

Program. This conclusion is primarily 

attributed to the application of the 

nonmanufacturer rule. Under the 

nonmanufacturer rule, any small 

business concern proposing to furnish a 

product that it did not itself 

manufacture must furnish the product 

of a domestic small business 

manufacturer. However, in industries 

where the Small Business 

Administration (SBA) has determined 

there are no domestic small business 

manufacturers, SBA may issue a waiver 

to the nonmanufacturer rule to permit 

small businesses to provide any firm’s 

product (see FAR 19.102(f)(7)). 

Reinstatement of the Buy American 

statute restrictions has no effect on the 

application of the nonmanufacturer 

rule. 

(2) With respect to the procurement of 

sperm oil, DoD does not use this 

product in any application. As such, a 

discussion of future procurement 

opportunities for this substance is no 

longer relevant. 

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. 

DoD invites comments from small 

business concerns and other interested 

parties on the expected impact of this 

rule on small entities. 

DoD will also consider comments 

from small entities concerning the 

existing regulations in subparts affected 

by this rule in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 

610. Interested parties must submit such 

comments separately and should cite 5 

U.S.C. 610 (DFARS Case 2013–D020), in 

correspondence. 

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 Part 225 

Government procurement. 

Manuel Quinones, 

Editor, Defense Acquisition Regulations 

System. 

Therefore, 48 CFR part 225 is 

proposed to be amended as follows: 

PART 225—FOREIGN ACQUISITION 

■ 1. The authority citation for 48 CFR 

part 225 continues to read as follows: 

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

chapter 1. 

225.104 [Removed] 

■ 2. Remove section 225.104. 

[FR Doc. 2013–29154 Filed 12–5–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 5001–06–P 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

Defense Acquisition Regulations 

System 

48 CFR Part 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: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: DoD is proposing to amend 

the Defense Federal Acquisition 

Regulation Supplement (DFARS) to 

create an overarching prescription for 

the research and development-related 

clause with an alternate. The rule also 

proposes to add a separate prescription 

for the basic clause and for the alternate, 

and to include in the regulation the full 

text of the alternate clause. 

DATES: Comment date: Comments on the 

proposed rule should be submitted in 

writing to the address shown below on 

or before February 4, 2014, to be 

considered in the formation of a final 

rule. 

ADDRESSES: Submit comments 

identified by DFARS Case 2013–D026, 

using any of the following methods: 

Æ Regulations.gov: http://

www.regulations.gov. Submit comments 

via the Federal eRulemaking portal by 

entering ‘‘DFARS Case 2013–D026’’ 

under the heading ‘‘Enter keyword or 

ID’’ and selecting ‘‘Search.’’ Select the 

link ‘‘Submit a Comment’’ that 

corresponds with ‘‘DFARS Case 2013– 

D026.’’ Follow the instructions provided 

at the ‘‘Submit a Comment’’ screen. 

Please include your name, company 

name (if any), and ‘‘DFARS Case 2013– 

D026’’ on your attached document. 

Æ Email: dfars@mail.mil. Include 

DFARS Case 2013–D026 in the subject 

line of the message. 

Æ Fax: 571–372–6094. 

Æ Mail: Defense Acquisition 

Regulations System, Attn: (Ms. Annette 

Gray, OUSD(AT&L)DPAP/DARS, Room 

3B855, 3060 Defense Pentagon, 

Washington, DC 20301–3060. 

Comments received generally will be 

posted without change to http://

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided. To 

confirm receipt of your comment(s), 

please check www.regulations.gov, 

approximately two to three days after 

submission to verify posting (except 

allow 30 days for posting of comments 

submitted by mail). 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. 

Annette Gray, Defense Acquisition 

Regulations System, 

OUSD(AT&L)DPAP/DARS, Room 

3B855, 3060 Defense Pentagon, 

Washington, DC 20301–3060. 

Telephone 571–372–6093; facsimile 

571–372–6101. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

In order to facilitate use of automated 

contract writing systems, DoD is 

processing multiple cases, by DFARS 

part, to modify the naming convention 

for clauses with alternates, revise the 

clause prescriptions and clause 

prefaces, and provide each alternate 

clause in full text in the regulation. 

The inclusion of the full text of the 

alternate clause in the regulation should 

make the terms of the alternate clearer 

to contractors and to DoD contracting 

officers. The current convention for 

alternate clauses is to show only the 

paragraphs that differ from from the 

basic clause. Placing the alternate clause 

in full text in the regulation will clarify 

paragraph substitutions. As a result, 

inapplicable paragraphs from the basic 

clause that are superseded by the 

alternate will not be included in 

solicitations or contracts, reducing the 

potential for confusion. 

II. Discussion and Analysis 

This proposed rule addresses clause 

252.235–7003, Frequency 

Authorization, and its alternate. The 

rule does not revise the prescriptions in 

any substantive way or change the 

applicability of the basic clause or the 

alternate. The rule proposes to make the 

following changes: 

• Amend section 235.072, Additional 

Contract Clauses, to reflect the 

restructuring of 252.235–7003, 

Frequency Authorization, into basic and 

alternate clauses with corresponding 

distinctive clause prescriptions for each 

clause. The new basic clause title is 

‘‘Frequency Authorization—Basic’’. 

Similarly, the title of the alternate 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
73476 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 235 / Friday, December 6, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

clause is ‘‘Frequency Authorization— 

Alternate’’. The specific prescriptions 

for the basic clause and the alternate 

clause address the requirements for 

their individual use to enable proper 

selection of either the basic clause or the 

alternate clause as appropriate. 

• Revise clause 252.235–7003 to 

reflect the inclusion of the full text of 

the alternate clause in addition to the 

full text of the basic clause. The preface 

for clause 252.235–7003 is revised to 

add paragraph (a) for the basic clause, 

which refers to the prescrition at 

235.072(b)(1) for use of the basic clause. 

Likewise, the paragraph (b) preface has 

been added to refer to the prescription 

for the alternate clause and also 

expanded to address the difference 

between the alternate clause and the 

basic clause. The preface at paragraph 

(b) for the alternate clause reads as 

follows: ‘‘(b) Frequency Authorization— 

Alternate. For the specific prescription 

for use of the alternate, see 

235.072(b)(2). The alternate uses a 

different paragraph (c) than the basic 

clause.’’ The proposed changes will 

increase the clarity and ease of use of 

the basic clause and alternate clause, 

but will not revise the applicability of 

the clauses in any way. The text of the 

alternate clause will no longer consist 

solely of paragraph (c), and instead will 

include the entire text of 252.235–7003 

(basic clause) along with paragraph (c) 

substituted for the corresponding 

paragraph of the basic clause. 

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 

DoD does not expect this proposed 

rule 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 it merely revises the 

prescriptions and reformats a clause 

with an alternate. However, an initial 

regulatory flexibility analysis has been 

performed and is summarized as 

follows: 

The purpose of this case is to amend 

the Defense Federal Acquisition 

Regulation Supplement (DFARS) to 

create prescriptions for the basic and 

alternate versions of DFARS clause 

252.235–7003, Frequency 

Authorization, and to include the full 

text of the clause alternate. 

The use of stand-alone basic and 

alternate clauses and tailored 

prescriptions for the basic and alternate 

versions of the DFARS clause will 

facilitate use of automated contract 

writing systems. The prior convention 

required the prescription for the basic 

clause to address all the possibilities 

covered by the alternate, and then the 

prescription for the alternate addressed 

only those differences for the use of that 

particular alternate. This rule will revise 

the prescriptions so that the regulation 

will contain the full text of the basic and 

alternate clause and each will stand on 

its own. The prescriptions will not be 

revised in any way to change the 

applicability. 

Additionally, the inclusion of the full 

text of the alternate clause should make 

the terms of the alternate clause clearer 

to offerors and contractors, as well as to 

DoD contracting officers. Instead of the 

current convention for the alternate to 

show only paragraphs that differ from 

the basic clause, this rule proposes to 

include the full text of each version of 

the clause in the regulation. This will 

assist in making the terms of the clauses 

clearer, because all paragraph 

substitutions will be identified. 

Inapplicable paragraphs from the basic 

version of the clause that are superseded 

by the alternate will not be included in 

solicitations or contracts and this 

should prevent confusion. 

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 

modifications and orders) that exceeded 

the micro-purchase threshold, of which 

approximately 180,000 (67%) were 

awarded to about 35,000 unique small 

business entities. 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 where the alternate 

is also included in the solicitation and 

contract. 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. 

DoD invites comments from small 

business concerns and other interested 

parties on the expected impact of this 

rule on small entities. 

DoD will also consider comments 

from small entities concerning the 

existing regulations in subparts affected 

by this rule in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 

610. Interested parties must submit such 

comments separately and should cite 5 

U.S.C. 610 (DFARS Case 2013–D026), in 

correspondence. 

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 235 and 

252 

Government procurement. 

Manuel Quinones, 

Editor, Defense Acquisition Regulations 

System. 

Therefore, 48 CFR parts 235 and 252 

are proposed to be amended as follows: 

■ 1. The authority citation for 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. Section 235.072 paragraph (b) is 

revised to read as follows: 235. 

235.072 Additional contract clauses. 

* * * * * 

(b) Use the basic or the alternate of the 

clause at 252.235–7003, Frequency 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 235 / Friday, December 6, 2013 / Proposed Rules 73477 

Authorization, in solicitations and 

contracts for developing, producing, 

constructing, testing, or operating a 

device requiring a frequency 

authorization. 

(1) Use the clause Frequency 

Authorization–Basic 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 clause Frequency 

Authorization–Alternate 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. Section 252.235–7003 is revised to 

read as follows: 

252.235–7003 Frequency authorization. 

As prescribed in 235.072(b), use one 

of the following clauses: 

(a) Frequency Authorization—Basic. 

For the specific prescription for use of 

the basic clause, see 235.072(b)(1). 

FREQUENCY AUTHORIZATION— 

BASIC (DATE) 

(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 Contracting Officer shall furnish 

the procedures for obtaining 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) 

(b) Frequency Authorization— 

Alternate. For the specific prescription 

for use of the alternate, see 

235.072(b)(2). The alternate uses a 

different paragraph (c) than the basic 

clause. 

FREQUENCY AUTHORIZATION– 

ALTERNATE (DATE) 

(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. 2013–29155 Filed 12–5–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 5001–06–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

50 CFR Part 229 

[Docket No. 131017871–3871–01] 

RIN 0648–BD72 

List of Fisheries for 2014 

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The National Marine 

Fisheries Service (NMFS) publishes its 

proposed List of Fisheries (LOF) for 

2014, as required by the Marine 

Mammal Protection Act (MMPA). The 

proposed LOF for 2014 reflects new 

information on interactions between 

commercial fisheries and marine 

mammals. NMFS must classify each 

commercial fishery on the LOF into one 

of three categories under the MMPA 

based upon the level of mortality and 

serious injury of marine mammals that 

occurs incidental to each fishery. The 

classification of a fishery on the LOF 

determines whether participants in that 

fishery are subject to certain provisions 

of the MMPA, such as registration, 

observer coverage, and take reduction 

plan (TRP) requirements. The fishery 

classifications and list of marine 

mammal stocks incidentally injured or 

killed described on the Final LOF for 

2013 remain in effect until the effective 

date of the Final LOF for 2014. 

DATES: Comments must be received by 

January 6, 2014. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

on the proposed rule, identified by 

‘‘NOAA–NMFS–2013–0148’’ by any of 

the following methods: 

(1) Electronic Submissions: Submit all 

electronic comments through the 

Federal eRulemaking portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov (follow 

instructions for submitting comments). 

(2) Mail: Submit written comments to 

Chief, Marine Mammal and Sea Turtle 

Conservation Division, Attn: List of 

Fisheries, Office of Protected Resources, 

NMFS, 1315 East-West Highway, Silver 

Spring, MD 20910. 

Comments regarding the burden-hour 

estimates, or any other aspect of the 

collection of information requirements 

contained in this proposed rule, should 

be submitted in writing to Chief, Marine 

Mammal and Sea Turtle Conservation 

Division, Office of Protected Resources, 

NMFS, 1315 East-West Highway, Silver 

Spring, MD 20910, and email the Office 

of Information and Regulatory Affairs at 

ORIA_submissions@omb.eop.gov. 

Instructions: All comments received 

are a part of the public record and will 

generally be posted to http:// 

www.regulations.gov without change. 

All Personal Identifying Information 

(e.g., name, address, etc.) voluntarily 

submitted by the commenter may be 

publicly accessible. Do not submit 

Confidential Business Information or 

otherwise sensitive or protected 

information. NMFS will accept 

anonymous comments (enter ‘‘N/A’’ in 

the required fields, if you wish to 

remain anonymous). Attachments to 

electronic comments will be accepted in 

Microsoft Word, Excel, WordPerfect, or 

Adobe PDF file formats only. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lisa 

White, Office of Protected Resources, 

301–427–8494; Allison Rosner, 

Northeast Region, 978–281–9328; 

Jessica Powell, Southeast Region, 727– 

824–5312; Elizabeth Petras, West Coast 

Region (CA), 562–980–3238; Brent 

Norberg, West Coast Region (WA/OR), 

206–526–6550; Kim Rivera, Alaska 

Region, 907–586–7424; Nancy Young, 

Pacific Islands Region, 808–944–2282. 

Individuals who use a 

telecommunications device for the 

hearing impaired may call the Federal 

Information Relay Service at 1–800– 

877–8339 between 8 a.m. and 4 p.m. 

Eastern time, Monday through Friday, 

excluding Federal holidays. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

What is the List of Fisheries? 

Section 118 of the MMPA requires 

NMFS to place all U.S. commercial 

fisheries into one of three categories 

based on the level of incidental 

mortality and serious injury of marine 

mammals occurring in each fishery (16 

U.S.C. 1387(c)(1)). The classification of 

a fishery on the LOF determines 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS