82 FR 16211 - General Services Administration Acquisition Regulation; Submission for OMB Review; Industrial Funding Fee and Sales Reporting
GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION Federal Register Volume 82, Issue 62 (April 3, 2017)
Federal Register Volume 82, Issue 62 (April 3, 2017)
| Page Range | 16211-16214 | |
| FR Document | 2017-06520 |
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 62 (Monday, April 3, 2017)] [Notices] [Pages 16211-16214] From the Federal Register Online [www.thefederalregister.org] [FR Doc No: 2017-06520] ======================================================================= ----------------------------------------------------------------------- GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION [OMB Control No. 3090-0121; Docket No. 2017-0001; Sequence 1] General Services Administration Acquisition Regulation; Submission for OMB Review; Industrial Funding Fee and Sales Reporting AGENCY: Office of Acquisition Policy, General Services Administration (GSA). ACTION: Notice of request for comments regarding an extension to an existing OMB clearance. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: Under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, the Regulatory Secretariat Division is submitting a request to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to review and approve an extension of a previously approved information collection associated with General Services Administration Acquisition Regulation clause 552.238-74, Industrial Funding Fee and Sales Reporting. GSA uses this information to collect the Industrial Funding Fee and administer the Federal Supply Schedule (FSS) program. A notice was published in the Federal Register on January 13, 2017. No comments were received. DATES: Submit comments on or before: May 3, 2017. ADDRESSES: Submit comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden to: Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs of OMB, Attention: Desk Officer for GSA, Room 10236, NEOB, Washington, DC 20503. Additionally submit a copy to GSA by any of the following methods:Regulations.gov: http://www.regulations.gov. Submit comments via the Federal eRulemaking portal by searching the OMB control number. Select the link ``Submit a Comment'' that corresponds with ``Information Collection 3090-0121, Industrial Funding Fee and Sales Reporting.'' Follow the instructions provided at the ``Submit a Comment'' screen. Please include your name, company name (if any), and ``Information Collection 3090-0121, Industrial Funding Fee and Sales Reporting'' on your attached document. Mail: General Services Administration, Regulatory Secretariat Division (MVCB), 1800 F Street NW., Washington, DC 20405. ATTN: Ms. Sosa/IC 3090-0121, Industrial Funding Fee and Sales Reporting. Instructions: Please submit comments only and cite Information Collection 3090-0121, Industrial Funding Fee and Sales Reporting, in all correspondence related to this collection. 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: Matthew McFarland, Senior Policy Advisor, GSA Acquisition Policy Division, at 202-690-9232, or [email protected]. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A. Purpose GSA's Federal Supply Schedule (FSS) program, commonly known as the GSA Schedules program or Multiple Award Schedule (MAS) program provides federal agencies with a simplified process for acquiring commercial supplies and services. The FSS program is the Government's preeminent contracting vehicle, accounting for approximately 10 percent of all federal contract dollars with $33 billion of purchases made through the program in fiscal year 2016. Activities placing orders against a GSA Schedule contract must pay an Industrial Funding Fee (IFF) that reimburses GSA's Federal Acquisition Service (FAS) for the costs of operating the FSS program. FAS recoups its operating costs from ordering activities (i.e. customers) as set forth in 40 U.S.C. 321: Acquisition Services Fund. Net operating revenues generated by the IFF are also applied to fund initiatives [[Page 16212]] benefitting other authorized FAS programs, in accordance with 40 U.S.C. 321. The IFF, currently set at 0.75 percent, is included in the order price, so when a vendor is paid for an FSS order, it is also collecting the IFF. Collection is similar to a state sales tax, where a customer pays the tax due to a merchant, and then the merchant remits the taxes collected to the state government. GSA requires vendors to report their FSS sales each quarter so it can determine the amount of IFF the vendors have collected from customers, and therefore must remit to GSA. However, GSA also uses this information for other purposes, including budgeting, determining whether vendors have met the minimum sales requirement,\1\ evaluating the program's performance, and monitoring small business participation. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \1\ The FSS Contract Sales Criteria clause requires vendors to have at least $25,000 in sales over the first two years of a contract and then $25,000/year in sales for each year thereafter. Vendors that have not satisfied the minimum sales requirement are subject to cancellation in accordance with GSAR clause 552.238-73 Cancellation. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Vendor reporting and remittance requirements are set forth in General Services Administration Acquisition Regulation (GSAR) clause 552.238-74, Industrial Funding Fee and Sales Reporting, or Alternate I of that clause. While both clause versions govern how the IFF is calculated and remitted, the reporting requirements differ between the basic version and Alternate I: Clause 552.238-75: Basic Version: This version requires vendors to report their FSS contract sales to GSA once a quarter. GSA then calculates the IFF due based on the total amount of sales reported, and the vendor must remit that amount within 30 days after the end of the quarter. The basic version of the clause applies to approximately 72 percent of GSA Schedule contracts. Clause 552.238-75: Alternate I: While the basic version requires vendors to report their total FSS sales each quarter, Alternate I requires vendors to report the transactional data generated from orders each month. GSA then calculates the IFF due based on the transactional data reported, and the vendor must remit that amount within 30 days after the end of the quarter. Alternate I of the clause applies to FSS contracts participating in the Transactional Data Reporting pilot. The pilot commenced on June 23, 2016 and will run for at least a year before substantial changes are considered. Approximately 28 percent of GSA Schedule contracts are eligible to participate in the pilot. Since the reporting requirements vary by the two versions of clause 552.238-74, separate Paperwork Reduction Act information collections have been established for each version. The information collection associated with OMB control number 3090-0306, which expires on 8/31/ 2019, applies to Alternate I. This information collection (OMB control number 3090-0121) applies to the basic version of the clause. Information Collection Changes and Updates The population of vendors subject to this information collection is smaller than the previous version, as FSS contracts eligible to participate in the Transactional Data Reporting pilot (approximately 28 percent of all GSA Schedule contracts) are now included under OMB control number 3090-0306. Previous justifications for this information collection limited the burden to the amount of time needed for vendors to input sales data in the 72A Reporting System and remit IFF payments. However, GSA now recognizes recordkeeping, quality assurance, reporting, and remittance should be included in the burden estimates. Since recordkeeping and quality assurance are the largest burden drivers for both vendors and the Government, the burden estimates for both the public and Government have increased. B. Annual Reporting Burden Population Overview: The basic version of clause 552.238-74 is included in 14,306 contracts held by 12,254 vendors. This includes 1,128 new contracts awarded to 819 vendors.\2\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \2\ These are approximations based on FY2015 data. The number of vendors equals the number of unique Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS) numbers, which are assigned to business entities. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Cost Estimates: The estimated cost burden for respondents was calculated by multiplying the burden hours by an estimated cost of $68/ hour ($50/hour with a 36% overhead rate).\3\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \3\ The 36% overhead rate was used in reference Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular No. A-76. Circular A-76 requires agencies to use standard cost factors to estimate certain costs of government performance. These cost factors ensure that specific government costs are calculated in a standard and consistent manner to reasonably reflect the cost of performing commercial activities with government personnel. The standard cost factor for fringe benefits is 36.25%; GSA opted to round to the nearest whole number for the basis of its burden estimates. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Categorization of Vendors by Quarterly Sales Revenue: Sales reporting imposes a progressive burden--one that increases with a vendor's sales volume. Quarterly reporting times will increase with a vendor's applicable sales volume, as vendors with lower to no reportable sales will spend little time on quarterly reporting, while those with more reportable sales with face a higher reporting burden. GSA separated vendors into categories based on average quarterly sales volume \4\ in order to account for the differences in reporting burden. These categories are: --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \4\ Average quarterly sales volume was computed by taking a vendor's total annual sales volume and dividing it by 4. All sales data is from FY2015. Category 1: No sales activity (average quarterly sales of $0) Category 2: Average quarterly sales between $0 and $60,000 Category 3: Average quarterly sales between $60,000 and $600,000 Category 4: Average quarterly sales between $600,000 and $3 million Category 5: Average quarterly sales over $3 million The distribution of vendors by sales category is as follows: FSS and Vendors by Sales Category ------------------------------------------------------------------------ FSS vendors FSS vendors (count) (percentage) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Category 1.............................. 4,217 34 Category 2.............................. 4,020 33 Category 3.............................. 2,768 23 Category 4.............................. 970 8 Category 5.............................. 279 2 ------------------------------- Total............................... 12,254 100.00 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ [[Page 16213]] Automated vs. Manual Reporting Systems: Vendors subject to these clauses must create systems or processes to produce and report accurate data. Generally, vendors will use automated or manual systems to identify the quarter's reportable sales. An automated system is one that relies on information technology, such as an accounting system or data management software, to identify and compile reportable data. These systems can tremendously streamline the reporting process but require upfront configuration to perform the tasks, such as coding the sales types to be retrieved. Conversely, a manual system is one that incorporates little to no automation and instead relies on personnel to manually identify and compile the reportable data. An example of a manual system would be an accountant reviewing invoices to identify the reportable data and then transferring the findings to a spreadsheet. In contrast to automation, a manual system requires relatively little setup time but the reporting effort will generally increase with the vendor's sales volume. The likelihood of a vendor adopting an automated system increases with their applicable sales volume. Vendors with little to no reportable data are unlikely to expend the effort needed to establish an automated reporting system since it will be relatively easy to identify and report a limited amount of data. In fiscal year 2015, 34 percent of FSS vendors subject to this collection reported $0 sales, while another 33 percent reported average quarterly sales between $1 and $60,000 per quarter. However, as a vendor's applicable average quarterly sales increase, they will be increasingly likely to establish an automated system to reduce the quarterly reporting burden. Consequently, vendors with higher reportable sales will likely bear a higher setup burden to create an automated system, or absorb a high quarterly reporting burden if they choose to rely on manual reporting methods. The following chart depicts the likelihood of the population of vendors adopting manual and automated reporting systems: Vendors by Reporting System Type [Manual vs. Automated] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Manual system Automated Automated (vendor system (vendor Manual system system (vendor percentage) percentage) (vendor count) count) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Category 1...................................... 100 0 4,217 0 Category 2...................................... 100 0 4,020 0 Category 3...................................... 90 10 2,491 277 Category 4...................................... 50 50 485 485 Category 5...................................... 10 90 28 251 --------------------------------------------------------------- Total Vendor Count by System Type........... .............. .............. 11,241 1,013 Vendor Percentage by System Type............ .............. .............. 92% 8% ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Initial Setup: Vendors with active FSS contracts already have procedures in place to meet these longstanding reporting requirements. However, new FSS vendors will absorb a one-time setup burden to establish reporting systems. The estimated setup time varies between automated and manual reporting systems. Vendors implementing a manual system must acclimate themselves with the new reporting requirements and train their staff as accordingly, while those with automated systems must perform these tasks in addition to configuring information technology resources. GSA is attributing the setup burden by vendor, not by contracts, because a vendor holding multiple contracts subject to this rule will likely use a single reporting system. GSA estimates the average one-time setup burden is 8 hours for vendors with a manual system and 40 hours for those with an automated system. GSA also attributes the same system type probabilities (manual system 92%, automated system 8%) to the population of new vendors. These estimates apply to the 819 vendors awarded FSS contracts in fiscal year 2015. Quarterly Reporting: Vendors are required to report sales within 30 calendar days after the end of each quarter. The average reporting times vary by system type (manual or automated) and by sales categories. GSA estimates vendors using a manual system will have average quarterly reporting times ranging from 15 minutes (0.25 hours) per quarter for vendors with $0 sales, to an average of 8 hours per quarter for vendors with quarterly sales over $3 million. On the other hand, GSA projects vendors with automated systems will have reporting times of 2 hours per quarter, irrespective of quarterly sales volume, as a result of efficiencies achieved through automated processes. The following table shows GSA's projected quarterly reporting times per sales category and system type. Quarterly Reporting Hours by System Type and Category ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Automated Manual systems systems ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Category 1.............................. 0.25 2.00 Category 2.............................. 1.00 2.00 Category 3.............................. 2.00 2.00 Category 4.............................. 4.00 2.00 Category 5.............................. 8.00 2.00 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ [[Page 16214]] Annualized Public Burden Estimates The burden estimates consist of quarterly reporting times for all 12,254 participating vendors and a one-time setup burden for the 819 new vendors: Quarterly Reporting Annual Burden (Hours): 56,983. Annual Burden (Cost): $3,874,817. Initial Setup Annual Burden (Hours): 8,718. Annual Burden (Cost): $592,846. Total Information Collection Burden Number of Respondents: 12,254. Response per Respondent: 4. Total Annual Responses: 49, 016. Hours per Response: 1.3404. Total Burden (Hours): 65,701. Annual Burden (Cost): $4,467,663. C. Public Comments Public comments are particularly invited on: Whether this collection of information is necessary and whether it will have practical utility; whether our estimate of the public burden of this collection of information is accurate, and based on valid assumptions and methodology; ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected. Obtaining Copies of Proposals: Requesters may obtain a copy of the information collection documents from the General Services Administration, Regulatory Secretariat Division (MVCB), 1800 F Street NW., Washington, DC 20405, telephone 202-501-4755. Please cite OMB Control No. 3090-0235, Price Reductions Clause, in all correspondence. Dated: March 29, 2017. Jeffrey A. Koses, Director, Office of Acquisition Policy, Office of Government-wide Policy. [FR Doc. 2017-06520 Filed 3-31-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6820-61-P
![Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 62 / Monday, April 3, 2017 / Notices 16211
Estimated annual burden hours: Legal authorization and including suggestions for reducing this
75,563. confidentiality: The Board’s Legal burden to: Office of Information and
General Description of Report: Division has determined that section Regulatory Affairs of OMB, Attention:
Sections 701, 723, and 741 contain 3(a)(4)(F) of the Exchange Act (15 U.S.C. Desk Officer for GSA, Room 10236,
information collection requirements. 78c(a)(4)(F)) authorizes the Board and NEOB, Washington, DC 20503.
Details of the requirements for each the SEC to require the information Additionally submit a copy to GSA by
section are provided below. collection. The FR 4025 is required to any of the following methods:
Section 701. Section 701(a)(2)(i) and obtain a benefit because banks wishing • Regulations.gov: http://
(b) require banks (or their broker-dealer to utilize exemptions provided by the www.regulations.gov. Submit comments
partners) that utilize the exemption rules 701, 723, and 741 are required to via the Federal eRulemaking portal by
provided in this section to make certain comply with the recordkeeping and searching the OMB control number.
disclosures to high net worth or disclosure requirements. If an Select the link ‘‘Submit a Comment’’
institutional customers. Specifically, institution considers the information to that corresponds with ‘‘Information
these banks must clearly and be trade secrets and/or privileged such Collection 3090–0121, Industrial
conspicuously disclose (i) the name of information could be withheld from the Funding Fee and Sales Reporting.’’
the broker-dealer and (ii) that the bank public under the authority of the Follow the instructions provided at the
employee participates in an incentive Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. ‘‘Submit a Comment’’ screen. Please
compensation program under which the 552(b)(4)). Additionally, to the extent include your name, company name (if
bank employee may receive a fee of that such information may be contained any), and ‘‘Information Collection 3090–
more than a nominal amount for in an examination report such 0121, Industrial Funding Fee and Sales
referring the customer to the broker- information maybe also be withheld Reporting’’ on your attached document.
dealer and payment of this fee may be from the public (5 U.S.C. 552 (b)(8)). • Mail: General Services
contingent on whether the referral Administration, Regulatory Secretariat
results in a transaction with the broker- Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve
System, March 27, 2017. Division (MVCB), 1800 F Street NW.,
dealer. Washington, DC 20405. ATTN: Ms.
In addition, one of the conditions of Robert deV. Frierson,
Secretary of the Board. Sosa/IC 3090–0121, Industrial Funding
the exemption is that the broker-dealer Fee and Sales Reporting.
and the bank have a contractual or other [FR Doc. 2017–06401 Filed 3–31–17; 8:45 am]
Instructions: Please submit comments
written arrangement containing certain BILLING CODE 6210–01–P
only and cite Information Collection
elements, including notification and 3090–0121, Industrial Funding Fee and
information requirements. The bank Sales Reporting, in all correspondence
must provide its broker-dealer partner GENERAL SERVICES related to this collection. All comments
with the name of the bank employee ADMINISTRATION received will be posted without change
receiving a referral fee under the
[OMB Control No. 3090–0121; Docket No. to http://www.regulations.gov, including
exemption and certain other identifying 2017–0001; Sequence 1] any personal and/or business
information relating to the bank
confidential information provided.
employee. General Services Administration
Section 723. Section 723(e)(1) FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Acquisition Regulation; Submission
requires a bank that desires to exclude Matthew McFarland, Senior Policy
for OMB Review; Industrial Funding
a trust or fiduciary account in Advisor, GSA Acquisition Policy
Fee and Sales Reporting
determining its compliance with the Division, at 202–690–9232, or
chiefly compensated test in section 721, AGENCY: Office of Acquisition Policy, matthew.mcfarland@gsa.gov.
pursuant to a de minimis exclusion, to General Services Administration (GSA). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
maintain records demonstrating that the ACTION: Notice of request for comments
A. Purpose
securities transactions conducted by or regarding an extension to an existing
on behalf of the account were OMB clearance. GSA’s Federal Supply Schedule (FSS)
undertaken by the bank in the exercise program, commonly known as the GSA
of its trust or fiduciary responsibilities SUMMARY: Under the provisions of the Schedules program or Multiple Award
with respect to the account. Paperwork Reduction Act, the Schedule (MAS) program provides
Section 741. Section 741(a)(2)(ii)(A) Regulatory Secretariat Division is federal agencies with a simplified
requires a bank relying on this submitting a request to the Office of process for acquiring commercial
exemption, which permits banks to Management and Budget (OMB) to supplies and services. The FSS program
effect transactions in the shares of a review and approve an extension of a is the Government’s preeminent
money market fund, to provide previously approved information contracting vehicle, accounting for
customers with a prospectus for the collection associated with General approximately 10 percent of all federal
money market fund securities, not later Services Administration Acquisition contract dollars with $33 billion of
than the time the customer authorizes Regulation clause 552.238–74, purchases made through the program in
the bank to effect the transaction in such Industrial Funding Fee and Sales fiscal year 2016.
securities, if the class or series of Reporting. GSA uses this information to Activities placing orders against a
securities are not no-load. In situations collect the Industrial Funding Fee and GSA Schedule contract must pay an
where a bank effects transactions under administer the Federal Supply Schedule Industrial Funding Fee (IFF) that
the exemption as part of a program for (FSS) program. A notice was published reimburses GSA’s Federal Acquisition
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES
the investment or reinvestment of in the Federal Register on January 13, Service (FAS) for the costs of operating
deposit funds of, or collected by, 2017. No comments were received. the FSS program. FAS recoups its
another bank, the Section permits either DATES: Submit comments on or before: operating costs from ordering activities
the effecting bank or the deposit-taking May 3, 2017. (i.e. customers) as set forth in 40 U.S.C.
bank to provide the customer a ADDRESSES: Submit comments regarding 321: Acquisition Services Fund. Net
prospectus for the money market fund this burden estimate or any other aspect operating revenues generated by the IFF
securities. of this collection of information, are also applied to fund initiatives
VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:32 Mar 31, 2017 Jkt 241001 PO 00000 Frm 00056 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\03APN1.SGM 03APN1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/82_FR_16273/page/1.svg)
![Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 62 / Monday, April 3, 2017 / Notices 16213
Automated vs. Manual Reporting compile the reportable data. An FSS vendors subject to this collection
Systems: Vendors subject to these example of a manual system would be reported $0 sales, while another 33
clauses must create systems or processes an accountant reviewing invoices to percent reported average quarterly sales
to produce and report accurate data. identify the reportable data and then between $1 and $60,000 per quarter.
Generally, vendors will use automated transferring the findings to a However, as a vendor’s applicable
or manual systems to identify the spreadsheet. In contrast to automation, average quarterly sales increase, they
quarter’s reportable sales. An automated a manual system requires relatively will be increasingly likely to establish
system is one that relies on information little setup time but the reporting effort an automated system to reduce the
technology, such as an accounting will generally increase with the quarterly reporting burden.
system or data management software, to vendor’s sales volume. Consequently, vendors with higher
identify and compile reportable data. The likelihood of a vendor adopting reportable sales will likely bear a higher
These systems can tremendously an automated system increases with setup burden to create an automated
streamline the reporting process but their applicable sales volume. Vendors system, or absorb a high quarterly
require upfront configuration to perform with little to no reportable data are reporting burden if they choose to rely
the tasks, such as coding the sales types unlikely to expend the effort needed to on manual reporting methods.
to be retrieved. Conversely, a manual establish an automated reporting system The following chart depicts the
system is one that incorporates little to since it will be relatively easy to likelihood of the population of vendors
no automation and instead relies on identify and report a limited amount of adopting manual and automated
personnel to manually identify and data. In fiscal year 2015, 34 percent of reporting systems:
VENDORS BY REPORTING SYSTEM TYPE
[Manual vs. Automated]
Manual Automated Manual Automated
system system system system
(vendor (vendor (vendor (vendor
percentage) percentage) count) count)
Category 1 ....................................................................................................... 100 0 4,217 0
Category 2 ....................................................................................................... 100 0 4,020 0
Category 3 ....................................................................................................... 90 10 2,491 277
Category 4 ....................................................................................................... 50 50 485 485
Category 5 ....................................................................................................... 10 90 28 251
Total Vendor Count by System Type ....................................................... ........................ ........................ 11,241 1,013
Vendor Percentage by System Type ....................................................... ........................ ........................ 92% 8%
Initial Setup: Vendors with active FSS vendor holding multiple contracts automated) and by sales categories. GSA
contracts already have procedures in subject to this rule will likely use a estimates vendors using a manual
place to meet these longstanding single reporting system. system will have average quarterly
reporting requirements. However, new GSA estimates the average one-time reporting times ranging from 15 minutes
FSS vendors will absorb a one-time setup burden is 8 hours for vendors (0.25 hours) per quarter for vendors
setup burden to establish reporting with a manual system and 40 hours for with $0 sales, to an average of 8 hours
systems. The estimated setup time those with an automated system. GSA per quarter for vendors with quarterly
varies between automated and manual also attributes the same system type sales over $3 million. On the other
reporting systems. Vendors probabilities (manual system 92%, hand, GSA projects vendors with
implementing a manual system must automated system 8%) to the population automated systems will have reporting
acclimate themselves with the new of new vendors. These estimates apply
times of 2 hours per quarter, irrespective
reporting requirements and train their to the 819 vendors awarded FSS
of quarterly sales volume, as a result of
staff as accordingly, while those with contracts in fiscal year 2015.
automated systems must perform these Quarterly Reporting: Vendors are efficiencies achieved through automated
tasks in addition to configuring required to report sales within 30 processes. The following table shows
information technology resources. GSA calendar days after the end of each GSA’s projected quarterly reporting
is attributing the setup burden by quarter. The average reporting times times per sales category and system
vendor, not by contracts, because a vary by system type (manual or type.
QUARTERLY REPORTING HOURS BY SYSTEM TYPE AND CATEGORY
Manual Automated
systems systems
Category 1 ............................................................................................................................................................... 0.25 2.00
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES
Category 2 ............................................................................................................................................................... 1.00 2.00
Category 3 ............................................................................................................................................................... 2.00 2.00
Category 4 ............................................................................................................................................................... 4.00 2.00
Category 5 ............................................................................................................................................................... 8.00 2.00
VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:32 Mar 31, 2017 Jkt 241001 PO 00000 Frm 00058 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\03APN1.SGM 03APN1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/82_FR_16273/page/3.svg)
![16214 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 62 / Monday, April 3, 2017 / Notices
Annualized Public Burden Estimates Obtaining Copies of Proposals: Description: States, including the
The burden estimates consist of Requesters may obtain a copy of the District of Columbia, tribes, tribal
quarterly reporting times for all 12,254 information collection documents from organizations, and U.S. territories
participating vendors and a one-time the General Services Administration, applying for LIHEAP block grant funds
setup burden for the 819 new vendors: Regulatory Secretariat Division (MVCB), must, prior to receiving federal funds,
1800 F Street NW., Washington, DC submit an annual application (Model
Quarterly Reporting 20405, telephone 202–501–4755. Plan, ACF–122) that meets the LIHEAP
Annual Burden (Hours): 56,983. Please cite OMB Control No. 3090– statutory and regulatory requirements.
Annual Burden (Cost): $3,874,817. 0235, Price Reductions Clause, in all In addition to the Model Plan, grantees
correspondence. are also required to complete the
Initial Setup Mandatory Grant Application SF–424-
Dated: March 29, 2017.
Annual Burden (Hours): 8,718. Jeffrey A. Koses,
Mandatory, which is the first section of
Annual Burden (Cost): $592,846. the Model Plan.
Director, Office of Acquisition Policy, Office
of Government-wide Policy. The LIHEAP Model Plan is an
Total Information Collection Burden electronic form and is submitted to the
[FR Doc. 2017–06520 Filed 3–31–17; 8:45 am]
Number of Respondents: 12,254. Administration for Children and
BILLING CODE 6820–61–P
Response per Respondent: 4. Families (ACF), Office of Community
Total Annual Responses: 49, 016. Services (OCS) through the On-line Data
Hours per Response: 1.3404. Collection (OLDC) system within
Total Burden (Hours): 65,701. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND GrantSolutions, which is currently
Annual Burden (Cost): $4,467,663. HUMAN SERVICES being used by all LIHEAP grantees to
submit other required LIHEAP reporting
C. Public Comments Administration for Children and forms. In order to reduce the reporting
Public comments are particularly Families burden, all data entries from each
invited on: Whether this collection of Proposed Information Collection grantee’s prior year’s submission of the
information is necessary and whether it Activity; Comment Request Model Plan in OLDC is saved and re-
will have practical utility; whether our populated (cloned) into the form for the
estimate of the public burden of this Proposed Projects: following fiscal year’s application. OCS
collection of information is accurate, Title: Application Requirements for seeks renewal of this form without any
and based on valid assumptions and the Low Income Home Energy changes.
methodology; ways to enhance the Assistance Program (LIHEAP) Model Respondents: State, the District of
quality, utility, and clarity of the Plan. Columbia, U.S. Territories and Tribal
information to be collected. OMB No.: 0970–0075. governments.
ANNUAL BURDEN ESTIMATES
Number of Average
Number of Total burden
Instrument responses per burden hours
respondents hours
respondent per response
LIHEAP Detailed Model Plan .................................................................. 210 1 0.50 105
Estimated Total Annual Burden practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
Hours (all respondents): 105. agency’s estimate of the burden of the HUMAN SERVICES
In compliance with the requirements proposed collection of information; (c)
of Section 506(c)(2)(A) of the Paperwork the quality, utility, and clarity of the Health Resources and Services
Reduction Act of 1995, the information to be collected; and (d) Administration
Administration for Children and ways to minimize the burden of the
Families is soliciting public comment National Vaccine Injury Compensation
collection of information on Program; List of Petitions Received
on the specific aspects of the respondents, including through the use
information collection described above. of automated collection techniques or AGENCY: Health Resources and Services
Copies of the proposed collection of Administration (HRSA), Department of
other forms of information technology.
information can be obtained and Health and Human Services (HHS).
Consideration will be given to
comments may be forwarded by writing ACTION: Notice.
comments and suggestions submitted
to the Administration for Children and
Families, Office of Planning, Research within 60 days of this publication. SUMMARY: HRSA is publishing this
and Evaluation, 330 C Street SW., Robert Sargis, notice of petitions received under the
Washington, DC 20201. Attn: ACF Reports Clearance Officer. National Vaccine Injury Compensation
Reports Clearance Officer. Email Program (the program), as required by
[FR Doc. 2017–06521 Filed 3–31–17; 8:45 am]
address: infocollection@acf.hhs.gov. All the Public Health Service (PHS) Act, as
BILLING CODE 4184–01–P
requests should be identified by the title amended. While the Secretary of HHS is
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES
of the information collection. named as the respondent in all
The Department specifically requests proceedings brought by the filing of
comments on: (a) Whether the proposed petitions for compensation under the
collection of information is necessary program, the United States Court of
for the proper performance of the Federal Claims is charged by statute
functions of the agency, including with responsibility for considering and
whether the information shall have acting upon the petitions.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:32 Mar 31, 2017 Jkt 241001 PO 00000 Frm 00059 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\03APN1.SGM 03APN1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/82_FR_16273/page/4.svg)
Document Created: 2017-04-01 09:36:05
Document Modified: 2017-04-01 09:36:05
| 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 | Notices | |
| Action | Notice of request for comments regarding an extension to an existing OMB clearance. | |
| Dates | Submit comments on or before: May 3, 2017. | |
| Contact | Matthew McFarland, Senior Policy Advisor, GSA Acquisition Policy Division, at 202-690-9232, or [email protected] | |
| FR Citation | 82 FR 16211 |
2025 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR