81 FR 61646 - Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement: Rights in Technical Data and Validation of Proprietary Data Restrictions (DFARS Case 2012-D022)
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Defense Acquisition Regulations System Federal Register Volume 81, Issue 173 (September 7, 2016)
Defense Acquisition Regulations System
Federal Register Volume 81, Issue 173 (September 7, 2016)
| Page Range | 61646-61647 | |
| FR Document | 2016-21463 |
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 173 (Wednesday, September 7, 2016)] [Proposed Rules] [Pages 61646-61647] From the Federal Register Online [www.thefederalregister.org] [FR Doc No: 2016-21463] ======================================================================= ----------------------------------------------------------------------- DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Defense Acquisition Regulations System 48 CFR Parts 212, 227, and 252 [Docket DARS-2016-0017] RIN 0750-AI95 Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement: Rights in Technical Data and Validation of Proprietary Data Restrictions (DFARS Case 2012-D022) AGENCY: Defense Acquisition Regulations System, Department of Defense (DoD). ACTION: Proposed rule; extension of comment period. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: DoD is proposing to amend the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS) to implement a section of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 that revises the sections of title 10 of the United States Code (U.S.C.) that address technical data rights and validation of proprietary data restrictions. The comment period on the proposed rule is extended 16 days. DATES: For the proposed rule published on June 16, 2016 (81 FR 39481), submit comments by September 30, 2016. ADDRESSES: Submit comments identified by DFARS Case 2012-D022, using any of the following methods: [cir] Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Search for ``DFARS Case 2012-D022.'' Select ``Comment Now'' and follow the instructions provided to submit a comment. Please include ``DFARS Case 2012-D022'' on any attached documents. [cir] Email: [email protected]. Include DFARS Case 2012-D022 in the subject line of the message. [cir] Fax: 571-372-6094. [cir] Mail: Defense Acquisition Regulations System, Attn: Ms. Amy [[Page 61647]] Williams, OUSD(AT&L)DPAP/DARS, Room 3B941, 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. Amy G. Williams, telephone 571- 372-6106. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background On June 16, 2016, DoD published a proposed rule in the Federal Register at 81 FR 39481 to implement section 815 of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year (FY) 2012, which--Adds special provisions for handling technical data that are necessary for segregation and reintegration activities; Codifies and revises the policies and procedures regarding deferred ordering of technical data necessary to support DoD major systems or subsystems, weapon systems, or noncommercial items or processes; Expands the period in which DoD can challenge an asserted restriction on technical data from 3 years to 6 years; Rescinds changes to 10 U.S.C. 2320 from the NDAA for FY 2011; and Codifies Government purpose rights as the default rights for technical data related to technology developed with mixed funding. The comment period for the proposed rule is extended 16 days, from September 14, 2016 to September 30, 2016, to provide additional time for interested parties to comment on the proposed DFARS changes. List of Subjects in 48 CFR Parts 212, 227, and 252 Government procurement. Jennifer L. Hawes, Editor, Defense Acquisition Regulations System. [FR Doc. 2016-21463 Filed 9-6-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 5001-06-P
![61646 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 173 / Wednesday, September 7, 2016 / Proposed Rules
funding to provide family planning that considers only the ability of the § 59.3 Who is eligible to apply for a family
services for those most in need, and it subrecipients to meet the statutory planning services grant or to participate as
will prevent future attempts to provide objectives. a subrecipient as part of a family planning
project?
Title X funding to subrecipients for States remain entirely free to set their
reasons other than their ability to best (a) Any public or nonprofit private
policies and funding preferences as to entity in a State may apply for a grant
meet the objectives of the Title X
family planning services paid for with under this subpart.
program.
We estimate costs of $11,400–$24,600 state funds. While this proposed rule (b) No recipient making subawards for
in the first year following publication of will eliminate the ability of states to the provision of services as part of its
the final rule, and suggest that this rule restrict subawards with Title X funds for Title X project may prohibit an entity
is beneficial to society in increasing reasons unrelated to the statutory from participating for reasons unrelated
access to and quality of care. We note objectives of Title X, they remain free to to its ability to provide services
that the estimates provided here are set their own preferences in providing effectively.
uncertain. state-funded family planning services. [FR Doc. 2016–21359 Filed 9–2–16; 4:15 pm]
The rule does not impose any additional BILLING CODE 5140–34–P
E. Analysis of Regulatory Alternatives
requirements on states in their
We carefully considered the option of performance under the Title X grant,
not pursuing regulatory action. other than to avoid discrimination in DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
However, as discussed previously, not making subawards, should they choose
pursuing regulatory action means to make such subawards. And states Defense Acquisition Regulations
allowing the continued provision of System
remain free to apply for federal program
Title X funds to subrecipients for
funds, subject to the eligibility
reasons other than their ability to 48 CFR Parts 212, 227, and 252
provide high quality family planning conditions. For the reasons outlined
services. This, in turn, means accepting above, the proposed rule is designed to [Docket DARS–2016–0017]
reductions in access to and quality of achieve the objectives of Title X related RIN 0750–AI95
services to populations who rely on to providing effective family planning
Title X. As a result, we chose to pursue services to program beneficiaries with Defense Federal Acquisition
regulatory action. the minimal intrusion on the ability of Regulation Supplement: Rights in
project recipients to select their Technical Data and Validation of
F. Executive Order 13132 subrecipients. Proprietary Data Restrictions (DFARS
Federalism Review Case 2012–D022)
Executive Order 13132 establishes G. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
AGENCY: Defense Acquisition
certain requirements that an agency The amendments proposed in this Regulations System, Department of
must meet when it promulgates a final
rule will not impose any additional data Defense (DoD).
rule that imposes substantial direct
collection requirements beyond those ACTION: Proposed rule; extension of
requirement costs on state and local
already imposed under the current comment period.
governments, preempts state law, or
otherwise has federalism implications. information collection requirements
which have been approved by the Office SUMMARY: DoD is proposing to amend
The Department particularly invites the Defense Federal Acquisition
comments from states and local of Management and Budget.
Regulation Supplement (DFARS) to
governments, and will consult with List of Subjects in 42 CFR Part 59 implement a section of the National
them as needed in promulgating the Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
final rule. While we do not believe this Birth control, Family planning, Grant Year 2012 that revises the sections of
rule will cause substantial economic programs. title 10 of the United States Code
impact on the states, it will implicate Dated: August 31, 2016. (U.S.C.) that address technical data
some state laws if states wish to apply rights and validation of proprietary data
Sylvia M. Burwell,
for federal Title X funds. Therefore, the restrictions. The comment period on the
following federalism impact statement Secretary. proposed rule is extended 16 days.
is provided. DATES: For the proposed rule published
Therefore, under the authority of
E.O. 13132 establishes the need for on June 16, 2016 (81 FR 39481), submit
Federal agency deference and restraint section 1006 of the Public Health
Service Act as amended, and for the comments by September 30, 2016.
in taking action that would curtail the ADDRESSES: Submit comments
policy-making discretion of the states or reasons stated in the preamble, the
Department proposes to amend 42 CFR identified by DFARS Case 2012–D022,
otherwise have a substantial impact on using any of the following methods:
the expenditure of state funds. The part 59 as follows:
Æ Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://
proposed rule simply sets the www.regulations.gov. Search for
conditions to be eligible for federal PART 59—GRANTS FOR FAMILY
PLANNING SERVICES ‘‘DFARS Case 2012–D022.’’ Select
funding for both public and private ‘‘Comment Now’’ and follow the
entities. The proposed rule will not instructions provided to submit a
Subpart A—Project Grants for Family
have a significant impact on state funds comment. Please include ‘‘DFARS Case
as, by law, project grants must be Planning Services
ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
2012–D022’’ on any attached
funded with at least 90 percent federal documents.
funds. 42 U.S.C. 300a–4(a). ■ 1. The authority citation for subpart A
Æ Email: osd.dfars@mail.mil. Include
Furthermore, states that are the project continues to read as follows: DFARS Case 2012–D022 in the subject
recipients of Title X grants are not Authority: 42 U.S.C. 300a–4. line of the message.
required to issue subawards at all. Æ Fax: 571–372–6094.
However, those that choose to do so ■ 2. Section 59.3 is revised to read as Æ Mail: Defense Acquisition
would be required to do so in a manner follows: Regulations System, Attn: Ms. Amy
VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:04 Sep 06, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\07SEP1.SGM 07SEP1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/81_FR_61819/page/1.svg)
![Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 173 / Wednesday, September 7, 2016 / Proposed Rules 61647
Williams, OUSD(AT&L)DPAP/DARS, SURFACE TRANSPORTATION BOARD Stat. 803, Congress established a careful
Room 3B941, 3060 Defense Pentagon, balance between these two important
Washington, DC 20301–3060. 49 CFR Chapter X yet conflicting goals. On the one hand,
Comments received generally will be [Docket No. EP 665 (Sub–No. 1); Docket Congress permitted differential pricing
No. EP 665 (Sub–No. 2)] and removed regulatory controls over
posted without change to http://
railroad pricing for traffic with effective
www.regulations.gov, including any
Rail Transportation of Grain, Rate competition so that carriers would have
personal information provided. To greater ability to earn the revenues
Regulation Review; Expanding Access
confirm receipt of your comment(s), necessary to attract capital and reinvest
to Rate Relief
please check www.regulations.gov, in the network. On the other hand,
approximately two to three days after AGENCY: Surface Transportation Board. Congress made clear that railroad rates
submission to verify posting (except ACTION:Advance notice of proposed for traffic without effective competition
allow 30 days for posting of comments rulemaking. must be reasonable (see 49 U.S.C.
submitted by mail). 10702, 10707), and that shippers of
SUMMARY: The Surface Transportation grain, in particular, are entitled to some
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Board (Board) is seeking comments and additional protections (see, e.g., 49
Amy G. Williams, telephone 571–372– suggestions through this Advance U.S.C. 10709(g) (providing that shippers
6106. Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPR) may file a complaint with the Board
regarding the Board’s effort to develop asking it to review agricultural contracts
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: a new rate reasonableness methodology on certain grounds)).
I. Background for use in very small disputes, which By decision served in Rail
would be available to shippers of all Transportation of Grain, Rate
On June 16, 2016, DoD published a commodities. Regulation Review, Docket No. EP 665
proposed rule in the Federal Register at DATES: Comments are due by November (Sub–No. 1) on December 12, 2013, the
81 FR 39481 to implement section 815 14, 2016. Reply comments are due by Board invited public comment on how
of the National Defense Authorization December 19, 2016. to ensure that the Board’s existing rate
Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year (FY) 2012, ADDRESSES: Comments and replies may complaint procedures are accessible to
which— be submitted either via the Board’s e- grain shippers and provide effective
• Adds special provisions for filing format or in the traditional paper protection against unreasonable freight
handling technical data that are format. Any person using e-filing should rail transportation rates, including
necessary for segregation and attach a document and otherwise proposals for modifying existing
reintegration activities; comply with the instructions at the procedures or new alternative rate relief
‘‘E-FILING’’ link on the Board’s Web methodologies. The Board received
• Codifies and revises the policies opening and reply comments from
site, at ‘‘http://www.stb.dot.gov.’’ Any
and procedures regarding deferred interested shipper, railroad, and
person submitting a filing in the
ordering of technical data necessary to government entities. The Board then
traditional paper format should send an
support DoD major systems or held a public hearing on June 10, 2015,
original and 10 copies to: Surface
subsystems, weapon systems, or Transportation Board, Attn: Docket No. to further examine issues related to the
noncommercial items or processes; EP 665 (Sub–No. 2), 395 E Street SW., accessibility of rate relief for grain
• Expands the period in which DoD Washington, DC 20423–0001. shippers and to provide interested
can challenge an asserted restriction on Copies of written comments and persons the opportunity to comment on
technical data from 3 years to 6 years; replies will be posted to the Board’s the suggestions made during the public
Web site and will be available for comment period. Following the hearing,
• Rescinds changes to 10 U.S.C. 2320 the Board received supplemental
from the NDAA for FY 2011; and viewing and self-copying at the Board’s
Public Docket Room, Room 131. Copies comments from three parties.
• Codifies Government purpose rights will also be available (for a fee) by
The Board has considered all of the
as the default rights for technical data written comments and oral testimony
contacting the Board’s Chief Records
related to technology developed with received in Docket No. EP 665 (Sub–No.
Officer at (202) 245–0238 or 395 E Street
mixed funding. 1).1 A number of issues raised during
SW., Washington, DC 20423–0001.
the public comment period—related to
The comment period for the proposed FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: the accessibility of the Board’s existing
rule is extended 16 days, from Allison Davis at (202) 245–0378. rate review processes, modifications to
September 14, 2016 to September 30, Assistance for the hearing impaired is those processes, and alternative rate
2016, to provide additional time for available through the Federal review processes set forth by parties—
interested parties to comment on the Information Relay Service (FIRS) at merit further discussion, and the Board
proposed DFARS changes. (800) 877–8339. is seeking further comment on those
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the issues.2 Based on the comments and
List of Subjects in 48 CFR Parts 212, Interstate Commerce Act, Congress testimony received, the Board believes
227, and 252 charged the Board with protecting the that the existing rate review processes
Government procurement. public from unreasonable pricing by
freight railroads, while fostering a 1 For a list of the numerous parties that have
sound, safe, and efficient rail participated in Docket No. EP 665 (Sub–No. 1) at
ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Jennifer L. Hawes,
various stages, see Appendix A. To the extent this
Editor, Defense Acquisition Regulations transportation system by allowing decision refers to parties by abbreviations, those
System. carriers to earn adequate revenues. See abbreviations are listed in that appendix.
[FR Doc. 2016–21463 Filed 9–6–16; 8:45 am] 49 U.S.C. 10101. In the Staggers Rail Act 2 We note that other significant issues have been
of 1980, Public Law 96–448, 94 Stat. raised in this proceeding, such as the Board’s
BILLING CODE 5001–06–P regulations concerning agricultural rate
1895, and subsequent legislation, transparency and the standing required to bring a
including the ICC Termination Act of rate complaint. The Board will address these issues
1995 (ICCTA), Public Law 104–88, 109 in a subsequent decision.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:04 Sep 06, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\07SEP1.SGM 07SEP1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/81_FR_61819/page/2.svg)
Document Created: 2016-09-07 11:50:27
Document Modified: 2016-09-07 11:50:27
| Category | Regulatory Information | |
| Collection | Federal Register | |
| sudoc Class | AE 2.7: GS 4.107: AE 2.106: | |
| Publisher | Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration | |
| Section | Proposed Rules | |
| Action | Proposed rule; extension of comment period. | |
| Dates | For the proposed rule published on June 16, 2016 (81 FR 39481), submit comments by September 30, 2016. | |
| Contact | Ms. Amy G. Williams, telephone 571- 372-6106. | |
| FR Citation | 81 FR 61646 | |
| RIN Number | 0750-AI95 | |
| CFR Citation | 48
CFR
212 48 CFR 227 48 CFR 252 |
2024 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR