[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 76 (Monday, April 21, 2014)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 22042-22043]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-08856]



Defense Acquisition Regulations System

48 CFR Part 252

RIN 0750-AI02

Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement: Clauses With 
Alternates--Contract Financing (DFARS Case 2013-D014)

AGENCY: Defense Acquisition Regulations System, Department of Defense 

ACTION: Final rule.


SUMMARY: DoD is issuing a final rule amending the Defense Federal 
Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS) as part of a project to 
review clauses with alternates to create basic and alternate clauses 
structured in a manner to facilitate use of automated contract writing 
systems. This final rule addresses a contract financing clause.

DATES: Effective April 21, 2014.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Annette Gray, telephone 571-372-


I. Background

    DoD published a proposed rule in the Federal Register at 78 FR 
48404 on August 8, 2013, to amend the DFARS to revise the presentation 
in the DFARS of a part 232 contract financing clause with an alternate. 
The rule also proposed to add a separate prescription for the basic 
clause as well as the alternate. No public comments were submitted in 
response to the proposed rule.

II. Discussion

    This final rule addresses the single DFARS part 232 clause that has 
an alternate, 252.232-7007, Limitation of Government's Obligation. In 
developing the final rule, DoD determined that the need for an 
alternate to the basic clause could be eliminated by making a minor 
change to paragraph (a) of the basic clause. The only difference 
between the basic clause and the alternate is the number of line items 
subject to incremental funding, which is information inserted by the 
contracting officer into paragraph (a) of the basic clause or the 
alternate clause. In the final rule, the alternate clause is being 
eliminated in its entirety as a result of an editorial change made to 
paragraph (a) of the basic clause. This change enables the contracting 
officer to tailor and use the basic clause, whether a single line item 
or multiple line items are being incrementally funded.

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

    A final regulatory flexibility analysis has been performed and is 
summarized as follows:
    This final rule amends the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation 
Supplement (DFARS) clause 252.232-7007, Limitation of Government's 
Obligation. Paragraph (a) of clause 252.232-7007 is being modified to 
be used for single or multiple line items that are to be incrementally 
funded. The modification of paragraph (a) in the basic clause 
eliminates the need for an alternate clause; therefore the alternate 
clause is removed by this final rule.
    The public did not raise any issues in response to the initial 
regulatory flexibility analysis. The Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the 
Small Business Administration did not submit any comments in response 
to the rule.
    Potential offerors, including small businesses, may be affected by 
this rule by seeing an unfamiliar format for this part 232 clause. 
According to the Federal Procurement Data System, in fiscal year 2012, 
DoD made approximately 270,000 contract awards (not including 
modification and orders) that exceeded the micro-purchase threshold, of 
which approximately 180,000 (67%) were awarded to small businesses. It 
is unknown how many of these contracts were awarded that included 
incremental funding. Nothing substantive will change in solicitations 
or contracts for potential offerors. 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. 
No alternatives were identified that will accomplish the objectives of 
the rule.

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 252

    Government procurement.

Manuel Quinones,
Editor, Defense Acquisition Regulations System.

    Therefore, 48 CFR part 252 is amended as follows:


1. The authority citation for 48 CFR part 252 continues to read as 

    Authority:  41 U.S.C. 1303 and 48 CFR chapter 1.

2. Amend section 252.232-7007 by--
a. Removing the clause date ``(MAY 2006)'' and adding ``(APR 2014)'' in 
its place;
b. Revising paragraph (a); and
c. Removing Alternate I.
    The revision reads as follows.

252.232-7007  Limitation of Government's obligation.

* * * * *
    (a) Contract line item(s) [Contracting Officer insert after 
negotiations] is/are incrementally funded. For this/these item(s), 
the sum of $---- [Contracting Officer insert after negotiations] of 
the total price is presently available for payment and allotted

[[Page 22043]]

to this contract. An allotment schedule is set forth in paragraph 
(j) of this clause.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2014-08856 Filed 4-18-14; 8:45 am]