78378 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 249 / Tuesday, December 30, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

1The OIG Semiannual Report to Congress can be 

accessed through the OIG Web site at http://

oig.hhs.gov/publications/semiannual.asp. 

December 27, 2013 (78 FR 78807). As 

required under section 205, a status 

report of the public comments related to 

safe harbors received in response to that 

notice is set forth in Appendix F of 

OIG’s Fall 2014 Semiannual Report.1

OIG is not seeking additional public 

comment on the proposals listed in 

Appendix F at this time. Rather, this 

notice seeks additional 

recommendations regarding the 

development of new or modified safe 

harbor regulations and new Special 

Fraud Alerts beyond those summarized 

in Appendix F. 

A detailed explanation of 

justifications for, or empirical data 

supporting, a suggestion for a safe 

harbor or Special Fraud Alert would be 

helpful and should, if possible, be 

included in any response to this 

solicitation. 

A. Criteria for Modifying and 

Establishing Safe Harbor Provisions 

In accordance with section 205 of 

HIPAA, we will consider a number of 

factors in reviewing proposals for new 

or modified safe harbor provisions, such 

as the extent to which the proposals 

would affect an increase or decrease in: 

• Access to health care services, 

• the quality of health care services, 

• patient freedom of choice among 

health care providers, 

• competition among health care 

providers, 

• the cost to Federal health care 

programs, 

• the potential overutilization of 

health care services, and 

• the ability of health care facilities to 

provide services in medically 

underserved areas or to medically 

underserved populations. 

In addition, we will also consider 

other factors, including, for example, 

the existence (or nonexistence) of any 

potential financial benefit to health care 

professionals or providers that may take 

into account their decisions whether to 

(1) order a health care item or service or 

(2) arrange for a referral of health care 

items or services to a particular 

practitioner or provider. 

B. Criteria for Developing Special Fraud 

Alerts 

In determining whether to issue 

additional Special Fraud Alerts, we will 

consider whether, and to what extent, 

the practices that would be identified in 

a new Special Fraud Alert may result in 

any of the consequences set forth above, 

as well as the volume and frequency of 

the conduct that would be identified in 

the Special Fraud Alert. 

Dated: December 18, 2014. 

Daniel R. Levinson, 

Inspector General. 

[FR Doc. 2014–30156 Filed 12–29–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4152–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

GENERAL SERVICES 

ADMINISTRATION 

NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND 

SPACE ADMINISTRATION 

48 CFR Part 6 

[FAR Case 2014–020; Docket No. 2014– 

0020; Sequence No. 1] 

RIN 9000–AM86 

Federal Acquisition Regulation; 

Clarification on Justification for Urgent 

Noncompetitive Awards Exceeding 

One Year 

AGENCY: Department of Defense (DoD), 

General Services Administration (GSA), 

and National Aeronautics and Space 

Administration (NASA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: DoD, GSA, and NASA are 

proposing to amend the Federal 

Acquisition Regulation (FAR) to clarify 

that a determination of exceptional 

circumstances is needed when a 

noncompetitive contract awarded on the 

basis of unusual and compelling 

urgency exceeds one year, either at time 

of award or due to post-award 

modifications. 

DATES: Interested parties should submit 

written comments to the Regulatory 

Secretariat at one of the addresses 

shown below on or before March 2, 

2015 to be considered in the formation 

of the final rule. 

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in 

response to FAR Case 2014–020 by any 

of the following methods: 

• Regulations.gov: http://

www.regulations.gov. Submit comments 

via the Federal eRulemaking portal by 

searching for ‘‘FAR Case 2014–020’’. 

Select the link ‘‘Comment Now’’ that 

corresponds with ‘‘FAR Case 2014– 

020’’. Follow the instructions provided 

at the ‘‘Comment Now’’ screen. Please 

include your name, company name (if 

any), and ‘‘FAR Case 2014–020’’ on your 

attached document. 

• Fax: 202–501–4067. 

• Mail: General Services 

Administration, Regulatory Secretariat 

(MVCB), ATTN: Ms. Flowers, 1800 F 

Street NW., 2nd Floor, Washington, DC 

20405. 

Instructions: Please submit comments 

only and cite FAR Case 2014–020, 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 2014–020. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

DoD, GSA, and NASA are revising the 

FAR in response to a Government 

Accountability Office (GAO) report, 

GAO–14–304, Federal Contracting: 

Noncompetitive Contracts Based on 

Urgency Need Additional Oversight, 

dated March 2014. On October 14, 2009, 

the FAR was amended to implement 

section 862 of the Duncan Hunter 

National Defense Authorization Act 

(NDAA) for Fiscal Year (FY) 2009 (Pub. 

L. 110–417) which restricted the length 

of contracts awarded noncompetitively 

under unusual and compelling urgency 

circumstances. Such contracts may not 

exceed one year unless the head of the 

executive agency determines that 

exceptional circumstances apply. 

GAO found that agencies did not 

make the required determination for the 

ten contracts in GAO’s sample that had 

a period of performance of more than 

one year. As a result, GAO 

recommended that DoD, U.S. 

Department of State and U.S. Agency for 

International Development provide 

guidance to improve data reliability and 

oversight for contracts awarded using 

the urgency exception. 

Additionally, GAO recommended that 

the Director of the Office of 

Management and Budget, through the 

Office of Federal Procurement Policy, 

provide guidance to clarify when 

determinations of exceptional 

circumstances are needed when a 

noncompetitive contract awarded on the 

basis of unusual and compelling 

urgency exceeds one year, either at the 

time of award or because it was 

modified after contract award. 

This rule clarifies that a 

determination of exceptional 

circumstances is needed whenever the 

period of performance of a 

noncompetitive contract awarded on the 

basis of unusual and compelling 

urgency is extended beyond a year. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 249 / Tuesday, December 30, 2014 / Proposed Rules 78379 

II. 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. 

III. Regulatory Flexibility Act 

DoD, GSA, and NASA do not expect 

this 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 only clarifies when 

determination of exceptional 

circumstances is needed. However, an 

Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

(IRFA) has been performed and is 

summarized as follows: 

The purpose of this rule is to clarify that 

a determination of exceptional circumstances 

is needed when the period of performance, 

inclusive of options and modifications, of a 

noncompetitive contract awarded on the 

basis of unusual and compelling urgency is 

greater than one year. This rule only impacts 

the internal procedures of the Federal 

government. 

There are no recordkeeping, reporting, or 

other compliance requirements associated 

with the proposed rule. The rule does not 

duplicate, overlap, or conflict with any other 

Federal rules. 

The Regulatory Secretariat has 

submitted a copy of the IRFA to the 

Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small 

Business Administration. A copy of the 

IRFA may be obtained from the 

Regulatory Secretariat. DoD, GSA, and 

NASA invite comments from small 

business concerns and other interested 

parties on the expected impact of this 

rule on small entities. 

DoD, GSA, and NASA will also 

consider comments from small entities 

concerning the existing regulations in 

subparts affected by the 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 2014–020), in 

correspondence. 

IV. 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 Subject in 48 CFR Part 6 

Government procurement. 

Dated: December 22, 2014. 

William Clark, 

Director, Office of Government-wide 

Acquisition Policy, Office of Acquisition 

Policy, Office of Government-wide Policy. 

Therefore, DoD, GSA, and NASA 

propose amending 48 CFR part 6 as set 

forth below: 

PART 6—COMPETITION 

REQUIREMENTS 

■ 1. The authority citation for 48 CFR 

part 6 continues to read as follows: 

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

chapter 137; and 51 U.S.C. 20113. 

■ 2. Amend section 6.302–2 by— 

■ a. Revising paragraph (d)(1)(ii); 

■ b. Redesignating paragraphs (d)(2) 

through (d)(4) as paragraphs (d)(3) 

through (d)(5), respectively; 

■ c. Adding a new paragraph (d)(2); and 

■ d. Revising newly redesignated 

paragraph (d)(3). 

The revised and added text reads as 

follows: 

6.302–2 Unusual and compelling urgency. 

* * * * * 

(d) * * * 

(1) * * * 

(ii) May not exceed one year, 

including all options, unless the head of 

the agency entering into the contract 

determines that exceptional 

circumstances apply. This 

determination must be documented in 

the contract file. 

(2)(i) A separate determination shall 

be made when executing any 

modification or option that extends the 

period of performance beyond one year. 

This requirement does not apply to the 

exercise of options previously addressed 

in the determination required at 

(d)(1)(ii) of this section. Any subsequent 

extension requires a new determination. 

(ii) The determination shall be 

approved at the same level as the level 

to which the agency head authority in 

(d)(1)(ii) of this section is delegated. 

(3) The requirements in paragraphs 

(d)(1) and (d)(2) of this section shall 

apply to any contract in an amount 

greater than the simplified acquisition 

threshold. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2014–30417 Filed 12–29–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6820–EP–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Fish and Wildlife Service 

50 CFR Part 20 

[Docket No. FWS–R9–HQ–2014–0064; 

FF09M21200–145–FXMB1231099BPP0] 

RIN 1018–BA67 

Migratory Bird Hunting; Service 

Regulations Committee Meeting 

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Notice of meeting. 

SUMMARY: The Fish and Wildlife Service 

(hereinafter Service) will conduct an 

open meeting on January 28, 2015, to 

identify and discuss preliminary issues 

concerning the 2015–16 migratory bird 

hunting regulations. 

DATES: The meeting will be held January 

28, 2015. 

ADDRESSES: The Service Regulations 

Committee meeting will be available to 

the public in the Rachel Carson 

conference room at 5275 Leesburg Pike, 

Falls Church, Virginia 22041. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Chief, Division of Migratory Bird 

Management, U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service, Department of the Interior, MS: 

MB, 5275 Leesburg Pike, Falls Church, 

VA 22041–3803; (703) 358–1714. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the 

authority of the Migratory Bird Treaty 

Act (16 U.S.C. 703–712), the Service 

regulates the hunting of migratory game 

birds. We update the migratory game 

bird hunting regulations, located at 50 

CFR part 20, annually. Through these 

regulations, we establish the 

frameworks, or outside limits, for season 

lengths, bag limits, and areas for 

migratory game bird hunting. To help us 

in this process, we have 

administratively divided the nation into 

four Flyways (Atlantic, Mississippi, 

Central, and Pacific), each of which has 

a Flyway Council. Representatives from 

the Service, the Service’s Migratory Bird 

Regulations Committee, and Flyway 

Council Consultants will meet on 

January 28, 2015, at 11:00 a.m. to 

identify preliminary issues concerning 

the 2015–16 migratory bird hunting 

regulations for discussion and review by 

the Flyway Councils at their March 

meetings. 

In accordance with Department of the 

Interior (hereinafter Department) policy 

regarding meetings of the Service 

Regulations Committee attended by any 

person outside the Department, these 

meetings are open to public observation. 

The Service is committed to providing 

access to this meeting for all 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS