54560 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 173 / Wednesday, September 8, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

levels of functionality (e.g., operating 

capabilities, features offered, prices). 

Each provider may determine the 

criteria for determining these differing 

levels of functionality, and must 

disclose its methodology to the 

Commission pursuant to paragraph 

(i)(3)(vii) of this section. 

* * * * * 

(f) * * * 

(3) Disclosure requirement relating to 

handsets that allow the user to reduce 

the maximum power for GSM operation 

in the 1900 MHz band. Handsets that 

meet the technical standard for radio 

frequency interference pursuant to 

paragraph (b)(1)(iii) of this section shall 

be labeled as meeting an M3 rating. 

* * * * * 

(l) In-store testing. Any entity that 

sells wireless handsets to consumers 

through a physical location must make 

available for consumers to test, in each 

retail store that it owns or operates, all 

of its handset models that comply with 

paragraph (b)(1) or (b)(2) of this section. 

[FR Doc. 2010–22254 Filed 9–7–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6712–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

GENERAL SERVICES 

ADMINISTRATION 

NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND 

SPACE ADMINISTRATION 

48 CFR Part 53 

[FAR Case 2009–029; Docket 2010–0096, 

Sequence 1] 

RIN 9000–AL72 

Federal Acquisition Regulation; 

Clarification of Standard Form 26— 

Award/Contract 

AGENCIES: Department of Defense (DoD), 

General Services Administration (GSA), 

and National Aeronautics and Space 

Administration (NASA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Civilian Agency 

Acquisition Council and the Defense 

Acquisition Regulations Council (the 

Councils) are proposing to amend the 

Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) to 

revise (a) the header for blocks 17 and 

18 and (b) block 18 of the Standard 

Form (SF) 26 to clarify that block 18 

should not be used when awarding a 

negotiated procurement and should 

only be checked when awarding a 

sealed-bid contract. 

DATES: Interested parties should submit 

written comments to the Regulatory 

Secretariat on or before November 8, 

2010 to be considered in the 

formulation of a final rule. 

ADDRESSES: Submit comments 

identified by FAR Case 2009–029 by any 

of the following methods: 

• Regulations.gov:http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Submit comments 

via the Federal eRulemaking portal by 

inputting ‘‘FAR Case 2009–029’’ under 

the heading ‘‘Enter Keyword or ID’’ and 

selecting ‘‘Search’’. Select the link 

‘‘Submit a Comment’’ that corresponds 

with ‘‘FAR Case 2009–029’’. Follow the 

instructions provided at the ‘‘Submit a 

Comment’’ screen. Please include your 

name, company name (if any), and ‘‘FAR 

Case 2009–029’’ on your attached 

document. 

• Fax: 202–501–4067. 

• Mail: General Services 

Administration, Regulatory Secretariat 

(MVCB), ATTN: Hada Flowers, 1800 F 

Street, NW., Room 4041, Washington, 

DC 20405. 

Instructions: Please submit comments 

only and cite FAR Case 2009–029, in all 

correspondence related to this case. All 

comments received will be posted 

without change to http:// 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal and/or business confidential 

information provided. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. 

Michael O. Jackson, Procurement 

Analyst, at (202) 208–4949, for 

clarification of content. For information 

pertaining to status or publication 

schedules, contact the Regulatory 

Secretariat at (202) 501–4755. Please 

cite FAR Case 2009–029. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

A. Background 

This case was initiated after an agency 

identified an inconsistency in the use of 

the SF 26 by contracting officers. 

Although block 18 of the form is 

intended for use only with sealed-bid 

procurements, contracting officers have 

used block 18 with negotiated 

procurements, which has had 

unintended negative consequences in 

certain contract disputes. 

FAR 53.214(a) prescribes the SF 26 for 

use in contracting for supplies and 

services by sealed bidding (except for 

construction and architect-engineer 

services). The SF 26 is used to award 

sealed-bid contracts after obtaining bids 

using a SF 33, Solicitation, Offer, and 

Award. FAR 14.408–1(d)(1) specifies 

that, if an offer made using a SF 33 leads 

to further changes, the resulting contract 

must be prepared as a bilateral 

document using the SF 26. 

This case is based on instances where 

contracting officers have mistakenly 

checked block 18 when awarding 

negotiated, not sealed bid, contracts. 

Such use has created the potential for 

disputes in situations where the 

Government’s intent was not to accept 

the terms of the offer in its entirety, as 

the current wording of block 18 may 

imply. 

The Councils believe that revising the 

header for blocks 17 and 18 and block 

18 of the form will eliminate the issue. 

In addition to the recent enhancements 

to the instructions for use of the form, 

at FAR 53.214 and 53.215–1, the 

Councils propose to add ‘‘sealed bid’’ to 

the title of block 18, change ‘‘offer’’ to 

‘‘bid’’ each time it occurs in block 18, 

and add a new sentence at the end of 

the block stating that block 18 should 

only be checked when awarding a 

sealed-bid contract. 

These changes will not prohibit the 

use of the SF 26 for awarding negotiated 

procurements; it will only prohibit the 

use of block 18 of the SF 26 when 

awarding negotiated procurements. 

This is not a significant regulatory 

action and, therefore, was not subject to 

review under Section 6 of Executive 

Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and 

Review, dated September 30, 1993. This 

rule is not a major rule under 5 U.S.C. 

804. 

B. Regulatory Flexibility Act 

The Councils do 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 the 

rule does not impose any additional 

requirements on small businesses, but 

rather clarifies an area open to 

confusion. Therefore, an Initial 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis has not 

been performed. The Councils will 

consider comments from small entities 

concerning the affected FAR part 53 in 

accordance with 5 U.S.C. 610. Interested 

parties must submit such comments 

separately and should cite 5 U.S.C. 601, 

et seq. (FAR Case 2009–029), in all 

correspondence. The Councils will also 

consider comments from small entities 

concerning the existing regulations in 

parts 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 (FAR Case 

2009–029), in all correspondence. 

C. Paperwork Reduction Act 

The Paperwork Reduction Act does 

not apply because the proposed changes 

to the FAR do not impose information 

collection requirements that require the 

approval of the Office of Management 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 173 / Wednesday, September 8, 2010 / Proposed Rules 54561 

and Budget under 44 U.S.C. chapter 35, 

et seq. 

List of Subjects in 48 CFR Part 53 

Government procurement. 

Dated: August 27, 2010. 

Edward Loeb, 

Director, Acquisition Policy Division. 

Therefore, DoD, GSA, and NASA 

propose amending 48 CFR part 53 as set 

forth below: 

PART 53—FORMS 

1. The authority citation for 48 CFR 

part 53 continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 40 U.S.C. 121(c); 10 U.S.C. 

chapter 137; and 42 U.S.C. 2473(c). 

§ 53.214 [Amended] 

2. Amend section 53.214 in paragraph 

(a) by removing ‘‘SF 26 (APR 2008)’’ and 

adding ‘‘SF 26 (Date)’’ in its place. 

§ 53.215–1 [Amended] 

3. Amend section 53.215–1 in 

paragraph (a) by removing ‘‘SF 26 (APR 

2008)’’ and adding ‘‘SF 26 (Date)’’ in its 

place. 

[FR Doc. 2010–22346 Filed 9–7–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6820–EP–S 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Fish and Wildlife Service 

50 CFR Part 17 

[Docket No. FWS-R3-ES-2009-0009] 

[MO 92210-0-0008-B2] 

RIN 1018-AV94 

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife 

and Plants; Proposed Rule To List the 

Ozark Hellbender Salamander as 

Endangered 

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service (Service), propose 

endangered status under the 

Endangered Species Act of 1973, as 

amended (Act), for the Ozark hellbender 

(Cryptobranchus alleganiensis bishopi) 

throughout its entire range. The species 

is found in southern Missouri and 

northern Arkansas. If we finalize this 

proposed rule, it would extend the Act’s 

protection to the Ozark hellbender. 

However, we find that designation of 

critical habitat is not prudent for the 

Ozark hellbender at this time, because 

the increased threat to the species from 

illegal collection and trade outweighs 

the benefits of designating critical 

habitat. We seek data and comments 

from the public on this proposed listing 

rule and prudency determination. 

DATES: We will accept comments 

received on or before November 8, 2010. 

We must receive requests for public 

hearings, in writing, at the address 

shown in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT section by October 25, 2010. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

by one of the following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments to 

Docket No. FWS-R3-ES-2009-0009. 

• U.S. mail or hand-delivery: Public 

Comments Processing, Attn: Docket No. 

FWS-R3-ES-2009-0009; Division of 

Policy and Directives Management; U.S. 

Fish and Wildlife Service; 4401 N. 

Fairfax Drive, Suite 222; Arlington, VA 

22203. 

We will not accept e-mail or faxes. We 

will post all comments on http:// 

www.regulations.gov. This generally 

means that we will post any personal 

information you provide us (see the 

Public Comments section below for 

more information). 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Charles Scott, Field Supervisor, at the 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Columbia Missouri Ecological Services 

Field Office, 101 Park De Ville Dr., Suite 

A, Columbia, MO 65203 (telephone 573- 

234-2132). If you use a 

telecommunications device for the deaf 

(TDD), please call the Federal 

Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 800- 

877-8339. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Public Comments 

We intend that any final action 

resulting from this proposal will be as 

accurate and as effective as possible. 

Therefore, we request comments or 

suggestions from the public, other 

concerned governmental agencies, the 

scientific community, industry, or any 

other interested party concerning this 

proposed rule to list the Ozark 

hellbender as endangered. We 

particularly seek comments concerning: 

(1) Population survey results for the 

Ozark hellbender, as well as any studies 

that may show distribution, status, 

population size, or population trends, 

including indications of recruitment. 

(2) Pertinent aspects of life history, 

ecology, and habitat use of the Ozark 

hellbender. 

(3) Current and foreseeable threats 

faced by the Ozark hellbender in 

relation to the five factors (as defined in 

section 4(a)(1) of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 

et seq.)): 

(a) The present or threatened 

destruction, modification, or 

curtailment of the species’ habitat or 

range; 

(b) Overutilization for commercial, 

recreational, scientific, or educational 

purposes; 

(c) Disease or predation; 

(d) The inadequacy of existing 

regulatory mechanisms; or 

(e) Other natural or manmade factors 

affecting its continued existence and 

threats to the species or its habitat. 

(4) Our determination of ‘‘not 

prudent’’ for critical habitat. 

(5) Whether there is a need for us to 

consider developing a ‘‘similarity of 

appearance’’ listing for the eastern 

hellbender. Section 4(e) of the Act 

(similarity of appearance cases) allows 

the Secretary to treat any species as an 

endangered or threatened species under 

the Act if he finds that: (A) It (in this 

case, the eastern hellbender) closely 

resembles a listed species (in this case, 

the Ozark hellbender) and enforcement 

personnel would have substantial 

difficulty differentiating between the 

listed and unlisted species; (B) the effect 

of this difficulty is an additional threat 

to the listed species: and (C) such 

treatment of the unlisted species would 

substantially facilitate enforcement of 

the Act for Ozark hellbender. 

You may submit your comments and 

materials concerning this proposed rule 

by one of the methods listed in the 

ADDRESSES section. We will not accept 

comments sent by e-mail or fax or to an 

address not listed in the ADDRESSES

section. 

We will post your entire comment— 

including your personal identifying 

information—on http:// 

www.regulations.gov. If you provide 

personal identifying information in 

addition to the required items specified 

in the previous paragraph, such as your 

street address, phone number, or e-mail 

address, you may request at the top of 

your document that we withhold this 

information from public review. 

However, we cannot guarantee that we 

will be able to do so. 

Comments and materials we receive, 

as well as supporting documentation we 

used in preparing this proposed rule, 

will be available for public inspection 

on http://www.regulations.gov, or by 

appointment, during normal business 

hours at the Columbia Missouri 

Ecological Services Field Office (see FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section). 

Background 

Species Description 

The Ozark hellbender is a large, 

strictly aquatic salamander endemic to 

streams of the Ozark plateau in southern 

Missouri and northern Arkansas. Its 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS