Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 3 / Thursday, January 5, 1995 / Rules and Regulations 1749

(8) Negotiate an advance agreement

with the contractor setting forth, at a

minimum, cost ceiling amounts on

restructuring projects and, when

necessary, a cost amortization schedule.

Cost ceilings may not exceed the

amount of projected restructuring

savings on a present value basis. The

advance agreement shall not be

executed until the certification required

by 231.205–70(c)(1)(iv) is obtained.

(9) Submit to the Director of Defense

Procurement, Office of the Under

Secretary of Defense (Acquisition &

Technology), ATTN: OUSD(A&T)DP/

CPF, a recommendation for certification

of net benefit. Include the information

described in 231.205–70(e).

(e) Information needed to obtain

certification of net benefit. (1) The

novation agreement (if one is required).

(2) The contractor’s restructuring

proposal.

(3) The proposed advance agreement.

(4) The audit report.

(5) Any other pertinent information.

(6) The cognizant ACO’s

recommendation for certification. This

recommendation must clearly indicate

that contractor projections of future cost

savings resulting for DoD from the

business combination are based on

audited cost data and should result in

overall reduced costs for the

Department.

SUBPART 242.12—NOVATION AND

CHANGE-OF-NAME AGREEMENTS

3. Sections 242.1202 and 242.1204 are

added to read as follows:

242.1202 Responsibility for executing

agreements.

The contracting officer responsible for

processing and executing novation and

change-of-name agreements shall ensure

agreements are executed promptly.

242.1204 Agreement to recognize a

successor in interest (novation agreement).

(e) When a novation agreement is

required and the transferee intends to

incur restructuring costs as defined at

231.205–70, the cognizant contracting

officer shall include the following

provision as paragraph (b)(7) of the

novation agreement instead of the

paragraph (b)(7) provided in the sample

format at FAR 42.1204(e):

‘‘(7)(i) Except as set forth in subparagraph

(7)(ii) below, the Transferor and the

Transferee agree that the Government is not

obligated to pay or reimburse either of them

for, or otherwise give effect to, any costs,

taxes, or other expenses, or any related

increases, directly or indirectly arising out of

or resulting from the transfer or this

Agreement, other than those that the

Government in the absence of this transfer or

Agreement would have been obligated to pay

or reimburse under the terms of the contracts.

(ii) The Government recognizes that

restructuring by the Transferee incidental to

the acquisition/merger may be in the best

interests of the Government. Restructuring

costs that are allowable under part 31 of the

Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) or part

231 of the Defense Federal Acquisition

Regulation Supplement (DFARS) may be

reimbursed under flexibly-priced novated

contracts, provided the Transferee

demonstrates that the restructuring will

reduce overall costs to the Department of

Defense (DoD) and/or the National

Aeronautics and Space Administration

(NASA), and the requirements included in

DFARS 231.205–70 are met. These costs and

the contracting parties’ responsibilities shall

be addressed in a Memorandum of

Understanding to be negotiated between the

cognizant contracting officer and the

Transferee. The Memorandum of

Understanding will specify the types and

treatment of restructuring costs and the

methodology to be used to demonstrate

reduced costs to DoD and/or NASA.

Restructuring costs shall not be allowed on

novated contracts unless there is an audit of

the restructuring proposal; a determination

by the contracting officer of overall reduced

costs to DoD/NASA; and an Advance

Agreement setting forth cost ceiling amounts

on restructuring projects and the period to

which such costs shall be assigned.’’

[FR Doc. 95–158 Filed 1–4–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 5000–04–M

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety

Administration

49 CFR Part 555

[Docket 93–40; Notice 3]

RIN 2127–AE88

Temporary Exemption From Motor

Vehicle Safety Standards

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic

Safety Administration (NHTSA), DOT.

ACTION: Technical correction; final rule.

SUMMARY: This notice corrects a

grammatical error in the language of the

certification label required for a vehicle

temporarily exempted from compliance

with the Federal motor vehicle safety

standards.

DATES: The effective date of the final

rule is February 6, 1995.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Taylor Vinson, Office of Chief Counsel,

NHTSA (202–366–5263).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On

October 29, 1993, NHTSA amended 49

CFR 555.9(c)(1), the certification

requirements for motor vehicles that

have been temporarily exempted from

compliance with one or more of the

Federal motor vehicle safety standards,

to conform it to the requirements of 49

CFR 567.4(g)(5) for nonexempted

vehicles by including a reference to the

Theft Prevention Standard (58 FR

58103).

As amended, the manufacturer of an

exempted vehicle, under paragraph

555.9(c)(1), shall:

(c) Meet all applicable requirements

of Part 567 of this chapter, except that—

(1) Instead of the statement required

by Sec. 567.4(g)(5) of this chapter, the

following statement shall appear:

‘‘THIS VEHICLE CONFORMS TO ALL

APPLICABLE FEDERAL MOTOR

VEHICLE SAFETY AND THEFT

PREVENTION STANDARDS (and, if a

passenger car), BUMPER STANDARD

IN EFFECT ON THE DATE OF

MANUFACTURE SHOWN ABOVE

EXCEPT FOR STANDARDS NOS.

(listing the standards by number and

title for which an exemption has been

granted) EXEMPTED PURSUANT TO

NHTSA EXEMPTION NO.

llllll.’’

Michael Grossman, representing

Automobili Lamborghini, telephoned

NHTSA to comment that this wording

would require an exempted

manufacturer of a passenger car to

certify in part to ‘‘* * * THEFT

PREVENTION STANDARDS, BUMPER

STANDARD. * * *’’ He recommended

that NHTSA correct this grammatical

error by incorporating the language of

the general certification requirement at

Sec. 567.4(g)(5) with the exception now

in effect under which the exempted

standards are listed. NHTSA concurs

with this comment, and is amending

paragraph 555.9(c)(1) in an appropriate

manner. A manufacturer of an exempted

vehicle shall now:

(c) Meet all applicable requirements

of Part 567 of this chapter, except that—

(1) The statement required by

paragraph 567.4(g)(5) of this chapter

shall end with the phrase ‘‘except for

Standards Nos. [listing the standards by

number and title for which an

exemption has been granted] exempted

pursuant to NHTSA Exemption No.

llllllll’’.

This amendment also addresses a recent

observation by Chrysler Corporation

that vehicles other than passenger cars,

such as its electric vans which are

covered by a Temporary Exemption, are

not yet subject to 49 CFR Part 541

Federal Motor Vehicle Theft Prevention

Standard, and its recommendation that

the parenthetical reference to passenger

cars should precede and not follow the

reference to the theft prevention

standard in paragraph 555.9.
1750 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 3 / Thursday, January 5, 1995 / Rules and Regulations

Although the wording of the two

labels varies slightly, the variation is not

substantive. The agency therefore has no

objection if exempted manufacturers

wish to exhaust their present supply of

labels with the old wording.

The notice also revises the authority

citation for Part 555 to reflect the

recodification in Title 49 of the United

States Code of the statutory provisions

previously in Title 15.

Effective Date

Because the amendment is technical

in nature and has no substantive impact,

it is hereby found that notice and

comment thereon are unnecessary.

Further, because the amendment is

technical in nature and has no

substantive impact, it is hereby found

for good cause shown that an effective

date earlier than 180 days after issuance

of the rule is in the public interest, and

the amendment is effective February 6,

1995. As the amendment makes no

substantive change, it does not affect

any of the impacts previously

considered in the promulgation of part

555.

Rulemaking Analyses

Executive Order 12866 and DOT

Regulatory Policies and Procedures.

This rulemaking action has not been

considered under Executive Order

12866. However, it has been determined

to be not significant under the

Department of Transportation’s

regulatory policies and procedures. The

agency has determined that the

economic effects of the amendment are

so minimal that a full regulatory

evaluation is not required.

Manufacturers subject to the final rule

are not affected by the technical

correction.

Regulatory Flexibility Act. The agency

has also considered the effects of this

rulemaking action in relation to the

Regulatory Flexibility Act. I certify that

this rulemaking action will not have a

significant economic effect upon a

substantial number of small entities.

Although manufacturers who receive

temporary exemptions are generally

small businesses within the meaning of

the Regulatory Flexibility Act, the

agency estimates that there will be no

cost to conform to the final rule.

Further, small organizations and

governmental jurisdictions will not be

significantly affected as the price of new

exempted motor vehicles will not be

impacted. Accordingly, no Regulatory

Flexibility Analysis has been prepared.

Executive Order 12612 (Federalism).

This rulemaking action has been

analyzed in accordance with the

principles and criteria contained in

Executive Order 12612 on

‘‘Federalism.’’ It has been determined

that the rule does not have sufficient

federalism implications to warrant the

preparation of a Federalism Assessment.

National Environmental Policy Act.

NHTSA has analyzed this rulemaking

action for purposes of the National

Environmental Policy Act. The rule will

not have a significant effect upon the

environment. Manufacturers subject to

this regulation must already provide a

certification label for their vehicles. The

rule will not have an effect upon fuel

consumption.

Civil Justice. This rule does not have

any retroactive effect. Under 49 U.S.C.

30103, whenever a Federal motor

vehicle safety standard is in effect, a

state may not adopt or maintain a safety

standard applicable to the same aspect

of performance which is not identical to

the Federal standard. Section 30161 of

Title 49 sets forth a procedure for

judicial review of final rules

establishing, amending or revoking

Federal motor vehicle safety standards.

That section does not require

submission of a petition for

reconsideration or other administrative

proceedings before parties may file suit

in court.

List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 555

Imports, Motor vehicle safety, Motor

vehicles.

PART 555—TEMPORARY

EXEMPTIONS FROM MOTOR VEHICLE

SAFETY STANDARDS

In consideration of the foregoing, 49

CFR part 555 is amended as follows:

1. The authority citation for part 555

is revised to read as follows:

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30113; delegation of

authority at 49 CFR 1.50.

2. Section 555.9 is amended by

revising paragraph (c)(1) to read as

follows:

§ 555.9 Temporary exemption labels.

* * * * *

(c) * * *

(1) The statement required by

§ 567.4(g)(5) of this chapter shall end

with the phrase ‘‘except for Standards

Nos. [listing the standards by number

and title for which an exemption has

been granted] exempted pursuant to

NHTSA Exemption No.

llllllll.’’

* * * * *

Issued on December 28, 1994.

Ricardo Martinez,

Administrator.

[FR Doc. 95–100 Filed 1–4–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–59–P

49 CFR Part 571

[Docket No. 80–9; Notice 10]

RIN 2127–AE86

Lamps, Reflective Devices, and

Associated Equipment

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic

Safety Administration (NHTSA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: This notice amends the trailer

conspicuity requirements of Motor

Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108 to

provide clarifications of the existing

rule with respect to tank trailers and to

the width of retroreflective conspicuity

sheeting.

DATES: The final rule is effective

February 6, 1995.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Patrick Boyd, Office of Vehicle Safety

Standards, NHTSA (202–366–6346).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Motor

Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108 Lamps,

Reflective Devices and Associated

Equipment was amended on December

10, 1992, to add S5.7 Conspicuity

Systems, and associated Figure 30,

requirements establishing a visibility

enhancement scheme for large trailers

(57 FR 58406). In response to petitions

for reconsideration, S5.7 was amended

on October 6, 1993 (58 FR 52021).

The requirements, which became

effective December 1, 1993, have been

the subject of a number of questions

which the agency has answered through

interpretation letters. After due

consideration, NHTSA has decided that

incorporating these interpretations into

the standard by making minor changes

in the regulatory text and Figure 30

would better serve the needs of trailer

manufacturers and users. These changes

are not intended to create additional

burdens on any person, and should not

be interpreted as requiring a change in

practice by any manufacturer who has

been certifying conformance to S5.7 and

Figure 30 of Standard No. 108 on the

basis of Standard No. 108 as it existed

before the effective date of these

amendments.

Upper Rear Treatment of Tank Trailers

The notice proposing conspicuity

treatment for trailers (December 4, 1991,

56 FR 63474) contained an alternative

that dealt specifically with trailers such

as tank trailers whose rear configuration

was other than rectangular. On such

trailers, under proposed S5.7.1.4.1(d),

the conspicuity treatment would ‘‘be

applied to follow the contours of the

rear in the uppermost and outermost

areas of the rear of the trailer body on