Attachment 4-FFR Federal Register Notice - 30 day 12-07-07

69236

Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 235 / Friday, December 7, 2007 / Notices

the proposed actions. These
consultations were intended to provide
other agencies an opportunity to
comment on the proposed actions, and
to ensure that the requirements of
Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act, and Section 7 of the
Endangered Species Act were met with
respect to the proposed actions.
Commonwealth of Virginia
The staff, on October 10, 2007,
consulted with the Virginia Department
of Environmental Quality (VDEQ) and
the Virginia Department of Health
(VDH). The VDEQ reviewed the draft
and agreed with NRC’s conclusion that
no significant environmental impacts
would result from this proposed action,
if implemented. The VDH had technical
questions regarding the criticality
monitoring systems.
Fish and Wildlife
The staff has determined that
consultation for Section 7 of the
Endangered Species Act is not required
because the proposed action does not
involve construction or any other
change in physical environment,
therefore, will not affect listed species
or critical habitat.
Virginia Department of Historic
Resources
The staff has determined that the
proposed action does not have the
potential to effect on historic properties
because it does not involve construction
or any other change in physical
environment. Therefore, no further
consultation is required under Section
106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act.

CFR 70.24, Letter (May 2, 2007) to
Director, Office of Nuclear Material
Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission, Lynchburg,
Virginia: BWXT, Nuclear Products
Division (confidential)
2. NRC. NUREG 1748, Environmental Review
Guidance for Licensing Actions
Associated with NMSS Programs—Final
Report. (August 2003) Washington, DC:
NRC (ML032450279)
3. BWXT. Environmental Report for Renewal
of License SNM–42, March 10, 2004
(nonpublic)
4. BWXT. E-mail to NRC, Criticality
Exemption, dated May 14, 2007
(ML073180015)
5. NRC. Environmental Assessment Related
to the Renewal of License No. SNM–42.
Docket 70–027 (August 2005)
Washington, DC: NRC. (ML071300450)
6. NRC. E-mail to VDEQ, Pre-decisional EA,
dated October 9, 2007, (ML073180022)
7. NRC. E-mail to VDH, Pre-decisional EA,
dated October 10, 2007, (ML073180034)
8. VDH. Letter to NRC, Response to Predecisional EA, dated October 24, 2007
(ML73180017)
9. NRC. E-mail to VDH, Additional
Comments on Pre-decisional EA, dated
October 31, 2007 (ML073180027)
10. VDH. E-mail to NRC, Response to
Additional Comments on Pre-decisional
EA, dated October 31, 2007
(ML073180029)
11. VEQ. Letter to NRC, Response to Predecisional EA, dated October 17, 2007
(ML073230756)
Dated at Rockville, Maryland this 30th day
of November, 2007.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Kevin M. Ramsey,
Acting Chief, Fuel Manufacturing Branch,
Fuel Facility Licensing Directorate, Division
of Fuel Cycle Safety and Safeguards, Office
of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards.
[FR Doc. E7–23784 Filed 12–6–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

Conclusion
On the basis of the EA, the NRC
concludes that the proposed action will
not have a significant effect on the
quality of the human environment and
that preparation of an EIS is not
warranted.
III. Finding of No Significant Impact

Office of Management and
Budget, Office of Federal Financial
Management.
ACTION: Comment request; final notice.

pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES

Preparers
J. Wiebe, Project Manager, All Sections
A. Snyder, Project Manager, Sections
1.0, 4.0 and 5.0.
1. BWXT. Request for Exemption from 10

VerDate Aug<31>2005

16:30 Dec 06, 2007

Jkt 214001

Financial Reporting for Grants and
Cooperative Agreements: Federal
Financial Report (FFR)
AGENCY:

On the basis of this assessment, the
Commission has concluded that
environmental impacts that are
associated with the proposed action
would not be significant and the
Commission is making a finding of no
significant impact.

List of References

OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND
BUDGET

SUMMARY: The Office of Management
and Budget is consolidating and
replacing four existing financial
reporting forms (SF–269, SF–269A, SF–
272, and SF–272A) with a single Federal
Financial Report (FFR). The purpose of
the FFR is to give recipients of grants
and cooperative agreements a standard
format for reporting the financial status
of their grants and cooperative
agreements (hereby referred to

PO 00000

Frm 00056

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

collectively as awards). Federal
awarding agencies developed the FFR as
part of their implementation of the
Federal Financial Assistance
Management Improvement Act of 1999
(Pub. L. 106–107).
DATES: Comments must be received by
January 7, 2008.
ADDRESSES: Comments should be
addressed to Marguerite Pridgen, Office
of Federal Financial Management,
Office of Management and Budget, 725
17th Street, NW., Washington, DC
20503; telephone 202–395–7844; fax
202–395–3952; e-mail
[email protected]. Due to
potential delays in OMB’s receipt and
processing of mail sent through the U.S.
Postal Service, we encourage
respondents to submit comments
electronically to ensure timely receipt.
We cannot guarantee that comments
mailed will be received before the
comment closing date. Please include
‘‘FFR comments’’ in the subject line of
the e-mail message; please also include
the full body of your comments in the
text of the message and as an
attachment. Include your name, title,
organization, postal address, telephone
number, and e-mail address in your
message.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Marguerite Pridgen at the addresses
noted above.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background
On April 8, 2003, OMB announced in
the Federal Register its intent to
establish a new Federal Financial
Report (FFR) (68 FR 17097). This new
report would consolidate into a single
report the current Financial Status
Report (SF–269 and SF–269A) and the
Federal Cash Transactions Report (SF–
272 and SF–272A). This consolidation,
consistent with government-wide grant
streamlining efforts being carried out
under the Federal Financial Assistance
Management Improvement Act of 1999
(Pub. L. 106–107), is intended to
streamline and simplify award-reporting
requirements. This form was an
undertaking of the interagency Post
Award Workgroup that supports the
Federal Grants Streamlining Initiative.
Additional information on the Federal
Grants Streamlining Initiative, which
focuses on implementing Public Law
106–107, was announced in the Federal
Register on September 13, 2006 (71 FR
54098). An overview of the FFR and five
other report forms being developed
under the Initiative was provided
during a webcast of the Grants Policy
Committee of the U.S. Chief Financial

E:\FR\FM\07DEN1.SGM

07DEN1

pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 235 / Friday, December 7, 2007 / Notices
Officer Council held on March 8, 2007
(72 FR 7090).
The FFR standardizes reporting
information by providing a pool of data
elements from which agencies can
choose to use for reporting purposes. As
a result, Federal agencies are not
required to collect all of the information
included in the FFR. Instead, they will
identify, prior to or at time of award, the
data elements that recipients must
complete, the reporting frequency, the
periods covered by each report, the
dates that the reports are due, and the
locations to which the reports are to be
submitted.
Consistent with Federal efforts to
promote standardization while giving
agencies more flexibility in post-award
administration, agencies may require
recipients to submit interim FFRs on a
quarterly, semi-annual, or annual basis,
all in accordance with standard period
end dates. The immediate availability of
the FFR may be in a paper format or
portable document format (PDF).
However, the FFR’s data elements are
intended to be used in the future for the
electronic submission and collection of
financial information. Note that the
establishment of the government-wide
FFR will necessitate amendments to
OMB Circulars A–110 (2 CFR 215) and
A–102 which OMB will subsequently
publish in the Federal Register.
The April 8, 2003 announcement in
the Federal Register generated nearly
200 comments from Federal agencies
and a wide range of recipients including
state and local governments, non-profit
entities, institutions of higher
education, and associations representing
academic institutions. Those comments,
which are summarized below, were
considered in developing this Federal
Register notice.
Due to the number of the comments
received and form revisions made, OMB
announced that it intended to issue a
second 60-day notice (68 FR 44975).
However, instead of issuing a second
60-day notice, OMB chose other
avenues such as a webcast and posting
of the forms on Grants.gov to allow for
public viewing and feedback (72 FR
7090). The primary concern raised to
OMB through this interaction is that as
the draft form was written, different
officials could be responsible for the
‘‘Federal cash’’ and the ‘‘Federal
Expenditures and Unobligated
Balances’’ sections of the form. OMB
determined that this was an issue for the
submitting organization and therefore,
OMB did not make any changes to the
form based upon this concern. No other
substantive comments were received
during the webcast and posting and
OMB did not make any changes based

VerDate Aug<31>2005

16:30 Dec 06, 2007

Jkt 214001

upon the posting. We anticipate that
this will be the last notice before the
form and instructions are finalized.
II. Comments and Responses on 2003
Federal Register Notice
Comment 1: Six comments expressed
strong support for the proposed FFR,
viewing it as a welcome initiative to
simplify and streamline grant-reporting
requirements, consistent with the
Federal Financial Assistance
Management Improvement Act (Pub. L.
106–107).
Response: The government-wide
workgroup made a diligent effort to
streamline and simplify Federal grant
reporting requirements.
Comment 2: Six comments suggested
changes to the FFR’s format to provide
additional clarity.
Response: In response to those
comments, a page number block was
added to the FFR Attachment, the OMB
approval number was moved to the
lower right corner of the FFR, section
titles such as ‘‘Federal Expenditures and
Unobligated Balance’’ are now in bold
font, and references to sections of the
FFR consistently state the line or box
number followed by a reference to
specific letters, if applicable.
Comment 3: Ten comments suggested
ways to strengthen and clarify the FFR’s
instructions.
Response: In response to these
suggestions, the following modifications
were made to the FFR Instructions: (1)
Noted the possible impact of the FFR on
an agency’s internal business processes;
(2) Explained how the FFR could be
used to provide reporting data on single
and multiple awards; (3) Explained how
the FFR could be used to report cash
management and financial status
activity; and (4) Requested additional
supplemental pages if recipients needed
more space.
Comment 4: One comment indicated
that the clearances conducted by OMB’s
Office of Information and Regulatory
Affairs, as required under the
Paperwork Reduction Act, were not
shown on the FFR.
Response: A burden statement has
been added to the bottom of the FFR and
the updated FFR has been cleared by the
Office of Information and Regulatory
Affairs.
Comment 5: Three comments
suggested that the frequency of reports
should be based on the risk level
associated with specific awards.
Response: The FFR allows agencies to
determine the frequency that recipients
submit reports for each award or
program. That frequency can be based
on the agency’s assessment of the level
of risk associated with the award or

PO 00000

Frm 00057

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

69237

program. Since agencies can base the
frequency of reports on risk levels, no
changes were made to either the FFR or
its instructions.
Comment 6: Two comments indicated
that the timeframes for reporting on the
cash management of a grant and the
financial status of a grant differ and
requested that the instructions provide
directions on using the same form to
meet these different reporting
timeframes.
Response: The workgroup is mindful
of the differences between the current
SF–269 and SF–272 reporting
timeframes as well as the varying size,
complexity, and risk associated with
grant programs and individual awards.
As a result, the FFR allows agencies to
determine the cash management and
financial status reporting requirements
for each award. FFR Instructions have
been updated to state: ‘‘For a particular
award, agencies may require cash
management reporting more or less
frequently than financial status
reporting. Alternatively, agencies may
request, for a particular award, the
submission of FFRs at a given reporting
interval (e.g., quarterly) to reflect cash
management activity and a separate FFR
at a different reporting interval (e.g.,
annually) to reflect financial status
activity.’’
Comment 7: Two comments
highlighted that a program’s authorizing
statutes should require the submission
of monthly financial status reports.
Response: The FFR instructions were
amended to indicate that agencies
requiring more frequent reporting may
do so if more frequent reporting is
prescribed by statute and/or consistent
with the provisions in OMB Circulars
A–102 or A–110 dealing with special
award conditions and exceptions to
standard reporting frequencies. If an
agency wants to deviate from any of
these requirements, it must obtain
approval from OMB.
Comment 8: One comment suggested
substituting ‘‘funding or grant period’’
for ‘‘project’’ in the instructions
concerning the submission of final
reports: ‘‘Final reports shall be
submitted no later than 90 days after the
project end date.’’ The primary reason
for this comment was that each budget
period has its own final report.
Response: In accordance with OMB’s
administrative circulars, agencies
should request final reports only at the
completion of the project or grant
period. The FFR instructions have not
changed and continue to state ‘‘Final
reports shall be submitted no later than
90 days after the project or grant period
end date.’’ If an agency wants to deviate
from this requirement by submitting

E:\FR\FM\07DEN1.SGM

07DEN1

pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES

69238

Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 235 / Friday, December 7, 2007 / Notices

final reports for each budget period, it
must obtain approval from OMB.
Comment 9: One comment pertained
to the instructions on due-date
extensions: ‘‘Extensions of reporting due
dates may be approved by the Federal
awarding agency upon request of the
recipient.’’ Specifically, the comment
expressed concern that requesting
extensions past a 30-day timeframe
would be an additional burden.
Response: Due dates are necessary,
but circumstances may dictate that due
dates be extended to help ensure the
submission of complete and accurate
reports. As a result, the workgroup did
not limit the extension period to 30
days.
Comment 10: One comment
recommended that the second bullet
entitled ‘‘Instructions to Federal
Agencies, Reporting Frequency,’’ be
removed because the language ‘‘may be
used’’ is confusing when compared to
the language in the three other bullets
that is more prescriptive because the
word ‘‘shall’’ is used.
Response: The section called
‘‘Instructions to Federal Agencies,
Reporting Frequency’’ has been
removed; however, we have reviewed
language in other parts of the
instructions to ensure that the wording
on reporting frequency is consistent.
Comment 11: One comment suggested
changing ‘‘30 days’’ to ‘‘one month’’ and
‘‘90 days’’ to ‘‘three months.’’
Response: Days were used instead of
months because of the need to establish
consistent report submission periods.
The periods are now 45 days and 90
days.
Comment 12: Several comments
objected to reducing the timeframe for
submission of interim annual reports
from 90 days to 30 days. One comment
requested 120 days to submit the FFR.
Response: The instructions have been
changed to state: ‘‘Quarterly, semiannual, and annual interim reports are
due 45 days after the end of the
reporting period. Final reports are due
no later than 90 days after the project or
grant period end date. Extensions of
reporting due dates may be approved by
the Federal agency upon request by the
recipient.’’ The due dates for submitting
interim reports allow for
standardization. The workgroup
concluded that sound fiscal grant
management throughout the annual
reporting period, combined with the use
of electronic systems to collect and
transmit data, would allow recipients
sufficient time to complete the annual
reports within the 45 day timeframe.
The shortened timeframe for the
submission of annual interim reports
would also allow Federal agencies to

VerDate Aug<31>2005

16:30 Dec 06, 2007

Jkt 214001

obtain financial data in a more timely
manner. Additionally, the timeframe for
submission of quarterly and semiannual reports was increased from 30
days to 45 days. The workgroup further
concluded that 120 days for submission
of annual and final reports was too
lengthy and would not provide agencies
with the data necessary to monitor
projects or grants effectively and to
make timely funding decisions.
Moreover, recipients are provided the
opportunity to request extensions for
submitting reports in both OMB Circular
A–110 (2 CFR 215) and FFR
Instructions.
Comment 13: One comment noted
that under existing timelines, the SF–
269 Financial Status Report is due no
later than 45 days after the end of each
reporting period and requested that this
existing 45-day timeline remain in
place. Another comment requested
reinstatement of the 90-day due date for
interim reports, while still another
disagreed with reducing the due date
from 90 days to 30 days for final reports.
Response: The existing timelines for
submission of the SF–269, as stated in
OMB Circular A–110 (2 CFR 215), are 30
days for quarterly and semi-annual
reports and 90 days for annual and final
reports. As a result, there currently is no
provision for submission of interim
reports 45 days after the reporting
period end date. Moreover, only annual
interim reports (not quarterly or semiannual) are allowed to be submitted 90
days after the reporting period end date.
The proposed notice stated: ‘‘Final
reports shall be submitted no later than
90 days after the project end date.’’ The
due date for final reports has not been
reduced to 30 days in the final notice.
Comment 14: One comment expressed
concern regarding the costs of system,
policy, and other changes associated
with revised due dates.
Response: In an effort to be responsive
to public comments regarding grants
streamlining and ensuing legislation,
Federal agencies and recipients may
need to make several system, policy,
and other changes. The costs of these
changes, which will be borne by both
Federal agencies and recipients, are
necessary to achieve long-term grants
streamlining efficiencies and promote
greater customer service. In some
instances, provisions have been made to
accommodate financial hardships that
may be experienced by recipients with
the advent of government-wide grants
streamlining. For example, recipients
may still be given the option of
submitting forms and reports on paper
rather than having to create or modify
electronic systems that may be cost
prohibitive. Also, Federal agencies that

PO 00000

Frm 00058

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

use grants data systems that are
maintained by OMB-approved Grants
Management Line of Business
consortium leads will not be updating
their agency’s legacy systems to
accommodate the receipt of the forms.
Federal agencies that have not yet
migrated to an OMB-approved Grants
Management Line of Business
consortium are required to coordinate
with OMB prior to performing
enhancements or interim improvements
to legacy systems.
Comment 15: One comment noted
that the requirement to submit final
reports no later than 90 days after the
project end date conflicts with the
instruction in section 23, ‘‘Grants
Management Common Rule,’’ that
requires grantees to liquidate all
obligations incurred no later than 90
days after the end date.
Response: No conflict exists.
Recipients should strive to liquidate
obligations within 90 days of the project
or grant period end date before they
submit the final FFR, which is also due
within 90 days after the project or grant
period end date. If, however, the timing
of liquidating obligations precludes
submission of the final FFR within 90
days of the project or grant period end
date, recipients can request an
extension.
Comment 16: Seven comments
requested that reporting period end
dates be based on award dates,
consistent with current practice, rather
than on the proposed reporting period
end dates: 3/31, 6/30, 9/30, or 12/31.
Response: The decision to adopt
calendar quarters for the reporting
period end dates was made to promote
standardization, thereby reducing the
current reporting burden associated
with different reporting period end
dates among different grants. If a
Federal agency wants to use reporting
period end dates other than 3/31, 6/30,
9/30, or 12/31, it must obtain approval
from OMB.
Comment 17: Eight comments
requested greater standardization. Some
of the comments suggested using one
standardized format that could not be
changed or modified. Others indicated
that allowing agencies to determine the
data elements to be submitted would
diminish the objective of
standardization and suggested having
one set of data elements that all
recipients must complete. Still other
comments suggested that the FFR
simply combines the data elements
contained in the current SF–269, SF–
269A, SF–272, and SF–272A, so it does
not advance streamlining objectives.
Response: The proposed FFR
advances standardization by providing a

E:\FR\FM\07DEN1.SGM

07DEN1

pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 235 / Friday, December 7, 2007 / Notices
pool of data elements from which
agencies can customize their reporting
requirements without imposing an
undue burden on recipients by adding
or modifying elements. In addition,
agencies cannot add or modify FFR data
elements unless they submit compelling
requests to OMB for approval. OMB will
evaluate all requests for changes and
modifications, and exercise utmost
prudence in approving exceptions in
order to prevent the proliferation of
multiple financial reporting forms.
Requiring agencies to use all of the
data elements in the proposed FFR is
not practical. As an example, ‘‘Recipient
Share and Program Income’’ does not
apply to some programs and awards.
Furthermore, the FFR is designed to
accommodate reporting on the cash
management of single or multiple
awards and on the financial status of a
single award, so this flexibility is not
conducive to mandating the completion
of a required set of elements. Finally,
the data that each agency needs to
adequately monitor awards differ greatly
because of the wide variety of governing
statutes, regulations, and policies. As a
result, requiring recipients to report on
all data on a standardized FFR could
actually result in the submission of data
that would not be useful or required,
while increasing the reporting burdens
to recipients.
In developing the standard pool of
data elements, the workgroup assessed
the SF–269, SF–269A, SF–272, and SF–
272A, eliminating or combining many of
the existing data elements. The FFR also
promotes standardization through the
development of one set of instructions
and definitions for reports submitted to
a single location within an agency, and
the use of standardized timeframes for
reporting period end dates and due
dates.
Comment 18: Five comments
suggested that OMB follow a standard
frequency for report submissions.
Response: The degree to which
monitoring is needed varies in view of
the risks, statutes, regulations, and
policies governing programs and
awards, so the frequency of reporting
should be commensurate with these
factors. In addition, adopting a
standardized frequency for report
submissions could be detrimental to an
agency’s ability to adequately monitor a
program or award.
The FFR promotes standardization by
requiring the use of reporting period
end dates for quarterly, semi-annual,
and annual interim reports: 3/31, 6/30,
9/30, or 12/31. It further requires the
submission of quarterly, semi-annual,
and annual interim reports 45 days after
the end of each reporting period and

VerDate Aug<31>2005

16:30 Dec 06, 2007

Jkt 214001

final reports no later than 90 days after
the project or grant period end date.
Extensions of reporting due dates may
be approved by the Federal agency upon
request by the recipient.
Comment 19: Eleven comments
questioned use of the FFR to report on
single and multiple awards. Some
comments indicated that reporting
financial status information for multiple
awards on one report would be
meaningless and an administrative
burden. Other comments questioned
why detailed data were required for
individual awards, but not for multiple
awards. One comment asked whether
the Federal agency could require a
recipient to report all Federal and
recipient expenditures for a single
award rather than multiple awards.
Another comment stated that the FFR
Attachment does not provide reporting
for ‘‘Cash Receipts’’ or ‘‘Cash on Hand,’’
so the FFR cannot be used to determine
if a recipient has excess cash on hand.
Response: The FFR Instructions have
been clarified to better explain the
procedures for reporting on single and
multiple awards.
A single FFR will not be used to
report totals on the financial status of
multiple awards. Instead, a separate FFR
must be completed for each award when
the financial status (Lines 10d through
10q) for more than one award is
requested by the agency. Currently,
agencies have the choice between
collecting detailed financial status data
on a single award (using the SF–269 or
SF–269A) or collecting summary cash
management data on multiple awards
(using the SF–272 or SF–272A). The
FFR preserves this flexibility while
allowing recipients to submit these data
on one form. If an agency wants to
obtain detailed financial status data on
more than one award, it must instruct
recipients to complete a separate FFR
(the FFR Attachment would not be
required) for each award. Conversely, if
less detailed data are needed on
multiple awards, agencies should
instruct recipients to complete
designated lines and boxes on the FFR
as well as the FFR Attachment.
According to the FFR Instructions, an
agency can require a recipient to report
cash management activity for a single
award and for multiple awards. In doing
so, the FFR will capture ‘‘Cash
Receipts’’ and ‘‘Cash on Hand,’’ which
can be used to determine if a recipient
has excess cash on hand. The FFR
Attachment does not provide this
capability.
Comment 20: Five comments
indicated that the FFR does not capture
certain data elements that currently
exist within agency- or program-specific

PO 00000

Frm 00059

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

69239

reports that have been approved by
OMB. One comment requested that the
final notice clarify that the FFR is
intended to replace the SF–269, SF–
269A, and SF–270 and that agencies
using alternative program-specific forms
could continue to do so.
Response: The FFR replaces the SF–
269, SF–269A, SF–272 and SF–272A,
and OMB-approved agency-specific and
program-specific financial forms, but
not the SF–270 or SF–271. The FFR
Instructions have been clarified to state
that the FFR is replacing the SF–269,
SF–269A, SF–272, and SF–272A and, in
doing so, it is now the standard
government-wide financial report that
all agencies and recipients will be
required to use. Furthermore, the use of
new or existing agency-specific or
program-specific financial reports will
require approval by OMB.
Comment 21: Five comments
requested that the FFR be modified to
depict ‘‘Total Outlays,’’ which would be
the sum of ‘‘Total Federal Share,’’
‘‘Total Recipient Share,’’ and
‘‘Expended Program Income.’’ Two
comments requested that the FFR be
modified to include ‘‘Total
Unliquidated Obligations,’’ the sum of
‘‘Federal Share of Unliquidated
Obligations’’ and ‘‘Recipient Share of
Unliquidated Obligations.’’
Response: The ‘‘Total Outlays’’ and
‘‘Total Unliquidated Obligations’’ line
items were not added to the FFR
because the agencies and recipients that
need this information can do so by
performing simple calculations, without
imposing additional requirements on all
recipients.
Comment 22: One comment noted
that additional fields, which are
currently not required on the SF–269,
may be required by agencies submitting
an individual grant expenditure report,
thereby increasing the overall number of
data elements that must be reported.
The additional data elements include
the following: ‘‘Status of Federal Cash
(previous, current, cumulative),’’ ‘‘Total
Federal Funds Authorized (previous,
current),’’ ‘‘Total Federal Share of
Unliquidated Obligations (current),’’
‘‘Total Recipient Share Required
(previous, current, cumulative),’’
‘‘Required Recipient Share of
Unliquidated Obligations (current,
cumulative),’’ ‘‘Program Income
Expended in Accordance with the
Addition Alternative (previous,
current),’’ and ‘‘Unexpended Program
Income (current).’’
Response: The FFR has been modified
to only collect cumulative totals. This
action eliminates Column I (Previously
Reported) and Column II (Current
Period) for all line items. The ‘‘Federal

E:\FR\FM\07DEN1.SGM

07DEN1

pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES

69240

Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 235 / Friday, December 7, 2007 / Notices

Cash’’ section has been modified to
include Line 10a, ‘‘Cash Receipts;’’ Line
10b, ‘‘Cash Disbursements;’’ and Line
10c, ‘‘Cash on Hand.’’ By requiring only
cumulative totals, this modification will
allow the FFR to highlight activities that
took place during the reporting period
and facilitate the calculation of cash on
hand as of the reporting period end
date. With respect to ‘‘Total Federal
Funds Authorized,’’ only one entry is
required in the cumulative column.
Accordingly, the instructions for Line
10d have been changed to state: ‘‘Enter
the total Federal funds authorized as of
the reporting period end date.’’ ‘‘Federal
Share of Unliquidated Obligations,’’
‘‘Recipient Share of Unliquidated
Obligations,’’ ‘‘Program Income
Expended in Accordance with the
Addition Alternative,’’ and
‘‘Unexpended Program Income’’ are
now reported only as cumulative totals.
‘‘Total Recipient Share Required’’ was
added to mirror the approach used to
account for Federal dollars, while the
‘‘Federal Expenditures and Unobligated
Balance’’ section begins with ‘‘Total
Federal Funds Authorized’’ and depicts
the manner in which authorized funds
have been managed. Similarly, the
‘‘Recipient Share’’ section begins with
‘‘Total Recipient Share Required’’ and
depicts the manner in which the
recipient’s required share is managed.
Comment 23: One comment suggested
that the proposed FFR cannot serve as
a compiled Cash Transactions Report
because it does not start with ‘‘Cash on
Hand, Beginning of Reporting Period,’’
as does the current SF–272. Another
comment suggested an alternative
method to report cash management
activity for multiple awards and
requested an additional column, ‘‘Total
Obligated,’’ on the FFR Attachment.
Still another comment suggested an
alternative method for reporting on the
financial management of an award.
Response: By requiring only
cumulative totals, the FFR will be more
useful in highlighting activity that took
place during the reporting period and
facilitating the calculation of cash on
hand as of the reporting period end
date. The alternative methods proposed
to report cash and financial
management activities for an award are
more detailed and require more
calculations by recipients than the
proposed FFR requirements. As a result,
adopting these methods would be
counter to grant streamlining and
improved customer service efforts.
Comment 24: One comment requested
adding a data element with the name of
a particular person at each agency to
whom the FFR should be submitted.
Another comment requested including

VerDate Aug<31>2005

16:30 Dec 06, 2007

Jkt 214001

the recipient’s Automated
Clearinghouse (ACH) account number,
two comments requested including the
Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance
(CFDA) number on the FFR, and one
comment requested including a glossary
and definitions in the final FFR notice.
Response: A data element was not
added to identify a particular person at
each agency to whom the report should
be submitted. During the course of the
reporting period for a particular award,
contact points may vary and requiring
recipients to provide this information
prior to the submission of the FFR
would be an undue burden. Instead, the
required FFR identifying grant
information, including the ‘‘Federal
Agency and Organizational Element to
Which Report is Submitted’’ (Box 1) and
‘‘Federal Grant or Other Identifying
Number’’ (Box 2), is sufficient for
agencies to route the FFR to the
appropriate person. Furthermore, the
FFR Attachment includes information
on multiple awards, which would make
the identification of a point of contact
for each award impractical. The ACH
account number was not added to the
FFR because this report will not be used
to facilitate payment or drawdown
activity. As a result, including the ACH
account number would be extraneous to
the FFR’s purpose. Furthermore, the
information disclosed on the ACH form
is considered confidential and if
included on the FFR would increase the
risk of fraud. The CFDA number was not
added to the FFR because it is not
needed. The ‘‘Federal Grant or Other
Identifying Number Assigned by the
Federal Agency’’ (Box 2 of the FFR) and
‘‘Federal Grant Number’’ (Box 5 on the
FFR Attachment) provide sufficient
information. OMB Circulars A–102, A–
110, and A–133, combined with the FFR
Instructions, provide sufficient
information to facilitate understanding
and completion of the FFR. As such, a
glossary and definition of terms are not
added.
Comment 25: One comment suggested
that the policy requiring the submission
of one original and two copies of paperbased FFR submission should be
retained.
Response: A statement was added that
‘‘The Federal agency shall request that
the recipient submit the original and no
more than two copies of the FFR.’’
Comment 26: One comment requested
the retention of the instruction on the
current SF–272 that requires an
explanation when more than 3 days of
cash remains on hand at the end of the
reporting period. Two comments asked
whether there were alternative methods
for assessing excess cash, such as OMB
Circular A–133 audits, rather than using

PO 00000

Frm 00060

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

the FFR. Another comment noted that
the requirement for recipients to have
no more than 3 days of cash on hand is
burdensome because it is difficult to
estimate the amount of money needed to
meet immediate cash needs. One
comment asked how recipients are
expected to report on cash advances to
subgrantees and subcontractors when
they are unable to provide expenditure
reports within the timeframe required
for the recipient’s FFR submission.
Response: A statement was added to
the FFR Instructions requiring an
explanation if more than 3 days of cash
remains on hand at the end of the
reporting period.
The FFR is one tool that agencies may
use to assess the cash management and
financial status of an award. As a result,
agencies must determine how they wish
to use this tool, in conjunction with
other tools, such as OMB Circular A–
133 audits and site visits. However, the
FFR is considered to be one of the most
viable tools, primarily because all
recipients are not subject to OMB
Circular A–133 audits and conducting
site visits may be cost and resource
prohibitive. Award recipients are
discouraged from having more than 3
days of cash on hand in order to
maximize the government’s opportunity
to collect interest on unspent funds and
ensure compliance with the Cash
Management Improvement Act.
Through the use of automated processes
to request funds and facilitate electronic
fund transfers, recipients should be able
to accurately estimate their funding
needs, thereby minimizing instances in
which they have more than 3 days of
cash on hand. Furthermore, the
management of an award does not
necessarily preclude having more than 3
days of excess cash on hand; instead, it
requires that the reasons for such excess
be reported to ensure appropriate
stewardship of Federal funds.
Recipients are expected to report the
amount of cash disbursed, including
advances to subrecipients and
subcontractors, but they are not
expected to report on how these
disbursements and advances were
actually expended. As a result,
determining subrecipient and
subcontractor expenditures will not
affect the timely completion and
submission of the FFR.
Comment 27: Several comments
requested clarification on the cash
versus accrual basis reporting on the
FFR. One comment indicated that the
instructions for Line 10f, ‘‘Federal Share
of Unliquidated Obligations (current
period),’’ states: ‘‘For accrual basis
reporting, this is the amount of
obligations incurred for which an

E:\FR\FM\07DEN1.SGM

07DEN1

pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 235 / Friday, December 7, 2007 / Notices
expenditure has not been recorded.’’
However, if an organization that
accounts on an accrual basis incurred
obligations for which an expenditure
had not been incurred, it would need to
record those expenditures and include
them in its total expenditures reported
on an accrual basis. The need to report
on expenditures that have not been
recorded should only exist in an
organization that maintains its books on
a cash basis. Similarly, another
comment stated that it might be
advisable to require that reporting be
done on an accrual basis even if the
organization maintains its accounting
on a cash basis because the requirement
on Line 10f has the effect of requiring
recipients to report an accrual on the
FFR regardless whether the accrual is
actually entered on its books or only
used in producing the FFR. Another
comment stated that OMB Circular A–
110 defines obligations as ‘‘the amounts
of orders placed, contracts and grants
awarded, services received and similar
transactions during a given period that
require payment by the recipient during
the same or a future period.’’ ‘‘Orders
placed’’ and ‘‘awards’’ and other
obligations for ‘‘future periods’’ are not
accrued, so these transactions would not
be reported as unliquidated obligations.
As a result, the comment requested
clarification on whether these futureperiod obligations would be included in
the ‘‘Federal Share of Unliquidated
Obligations’’ and ‘‘Recipient Share of
Unliquidated Obligations.’’
Response: The instructions for Line
10f have been clarified to provide one
definition for ‘‘Federal Share of
Unliquidated Obligations,’’ whether the
recipient maintains a cash or accrual
basis accounting system. The FFR
Instructions have also been updated to
indicate that, in accordance with OMB
Circulars A–110 and A–102, if the
Federal awarding agency requires
accrual information and the recipient’s
accounting records are kept on the cash
basis, the recipient shall not be required
to convert its accounting system.
Instead, the recipient must develop such
accrual information through best
estimates using available
documentation. Consistent with the
approach used to develop one definition
for ‘‘Federal Share of Unliquidated
Obligations,’’ regardless of whether the
recipient maintains a cash or accrual
basis accounting system, the FFR
Instructions have been updated to
include common definitions for Line
10e, ‘‘Federal Share of Expenditures;’’
Line10j, ‘‘Recipient Share of
Expenditures;’’ and Line 10k,

VerDate Aug<31>2005

16:30 Dec 06, 2007

Jkt 214001

‘‘Recipient Share of Unliquidated
Obligations.’’
Comment 28: One comment asked
why the ‘‘Status of Federal Cash’’ (Lines
10a through 10c) requires totals on a
cash basis (Cash Disbursements) while
the ‘‘Status of Federal Expenditures’’
(Lines 10e through 10k) require
reporting on an accrual basis. Another
comment stated that Box 7, ‘‘Basis of
Accounting,’’ appears to apply only to
Lines 10e through 10h because Lines
10a through 10c require cash basis
reporting even if the recipient maintains
an accrual basis accounting system. The
same comment also asked how it was
decided that cash or accrual accounting
would be the appropriate basis for FFR
reporting purposes.
Response: The ‘‘Federal Cash’’ portion
of the FFR enables agencies to
determine the amount of a recipient’s
Federal cash on hand. This portion of
the report also enables agencies to
reconcile their internal cash receipt and
disbursement records with Federal cash
receipt and disbursement records
maintained by recipients. The ‘‘Federal
Expenditures and Unobligated Balance’’
portion of the FFR enables agencies to
determine, for a single award, how
much money has actually been
expended and the expenses that have
been incurred but not yet paid. This
information gives agencies an overview
of the amount of encumbered and
unencumbered funds, at a given point in
time, which is useful when assessing
the financial status of an award.
Obtaining cash and accrual information
serves different, yet complimentary
purposes, and determining the type of
information to submit is left to the
discretion of the agency. The
instructions for Box 7, ‘‘Basis of
Accounting,’’ have been clarified to
indicate that recipients should specify
whether they use a cash or accrual basis
accounting system for recording
transactions related to the award. The
form permits agencies to request cash
basis information (Lines 10a through
10c and the FFR Attachment) from
recipients maintaining an accrual basis
accounting system and accrual basis
information (Lines 10f and 10k) from
recipients maintaining a cash basis
accounting system. If the Federal
awarding agency requires accrual
information and the recipient’s
accounting records are kept on a cash
basis, the recipient shall not be required
to convert its accounting system.
Instead, it should develop the required
accrual information through best
estimates based on available
information.
Comment 29: One comment indicated
that the FFR duplicates reporting now

PO 00000

Frm 00061

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

69241

required for recipients using the Federal
government’s automated payment
systems.
Response: The FFR is used to show
the activity of a single award or the
amount of funds expended for multiple
awards. The information collected
through the FFR is required by Federal
agencies to aid in monitoring their grant
funds. Conversely, payment forms are
used to generate disbursements in
response to a specific request, and
agencies utilize multiple payment
systems and forms. The information
required on these diverse payment
forms may not be adequate for agencies
to fulfill their fiscal stewardship
responsibilities. Furthermore, agencies
should instruct recipients to submit the
FFR to a single location within the
agency. Each agency will then modify
its internal business processes to
coordinate the distribution of the FFR to
payment and financial offices that
require the information.
Comment 30: One comment asked
whether using electronic payment
mechanisms or receiving funds on a
reimbursement basis obviate the need to
account for cash disbursements by
grant. Three comments questioned the
usefulness of the SF–272 and,
consequently, the FFR Attachment,
given that agencies can obtain cash
management information on a grant
using the Payment Management System
(PMS) and the Automated Standard
Application for Payments (ASAP)
systems.
Response: Not all electronic payment
mechanisms obviate the need to account
for cash disbursements by grant because
all funds obtained through cash
advances may not be expended
immediately and agencies may want to
monitor cash disbursements and,
consequently, cash on hand at a given
point in time. Agencies may also want
to obtain cash disbursement information
by grant, even for recipients on a
reimbursement basis, as a means of
monitoring cash disbursements for
which reimbursement has not been
sought. For recipients on an advance
payment system and the ASAP, agencies
can readily determine the amount of
cash advanced but these systems do not
capture the amount of cash actually
disbursed by recipients. Similarly, for
recipients on a reimbursement payment
system and ASAP, agencies cannot
capture cash disbursements for which
recipients have not requested
reimbursement. Moreover, not all
agencies use PMS or ASAP. Cash
disbursement information, as provided
on the FFR and the optional FFR
Attachment sections which replace the

E:\FR\FM\07DEN1.SGM

07DEN1

pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES

69242

Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 235 / Friday, December 7, 2007 / Notices

SF–272A, is deemed useful to many
agencies.
Comment 31: One comment noted
that the April 8, 2003, notice in the
Federal Register did not reference
continued use of SF–270. It was
suggested that the SF–270 is the source
of some of the reporting problems
experienced by recipients and that there
is a strong relationship between the SF–
270 and the new forms. The comment
further indicated that the SF–270 was
created to meet the need for a paper
document on which recipients could
request cash, when such payments were
also being made by paper check.
However, with the required movement
by Federal agencies to payment by
electronic funds transfer, the form now
serves, in some agencies, as a
duplicative financial reporting tool.
Response: The SF–269 and SF–272
are used to monitor the financial
activity of a single award or multiple
awards, while the SF–270 is used to
obtain funds. These forms serve
different purposes, which were
considered in the development of the
FFR proposal. Specifically, agencies are
currently using various payment
systems, some of which may require the
submission of the SF–270 if funds
cannot be requested electronically. As a
result, eliminating the SF–270 through
the current FFR proposal could have a
negative effect on a recipient’s ability to
obtain funds, which would be an
unacceptable consequence.
Comment 32: Several comments
requested delaying implementation of
the FFR until a fully automated version
was available, which would provide for
calculation macros, carry forward prior
period-ending balances to the current
period report, automate comparisons
between recipient and agency data, and
support electronic submissions and Web
accessibility.
Response: The workgroup’s primary
goals included reducing the number of
required financial forms and
standardizing the resulting product. The
FFR achieves these goals by
consolidating four existing forms into
one report and using standard data
elements, instructions, definitions,
reporting period end dates, and the due
date for report submissions. Given the
numerous benefits associated with the
FFR, the workgroup does not want to
delay its implementation. Instead, it
seeks to proceed with implementation
to achieve immediate benefits, while
concurrently moving forward with
automation initiatives. Under OMB’s
overall direction, the Federal awarding
agencies began to address electronic
solutions for financial reporting in
February 2004. Those solutions include

VerDate Aug<31>2005

16:30 Dec 06, 2007

Jkt 214001

the electronic submission of the FFR
through unified and common Federal
electronic solutions. In the interim,
agencies, using methods similar to those
for automating the SF–269 and SF–272,
may proceed, once they request and
receive approval from OMB, with
automating the FFR. This includes
incorporating macros for facilitating
calculations, linking the FFR to payment
systems to facilitate electronic
comparisons between recipient-reported
figures and those maintained by the
agency, allowing for electronic
submission to agencies, and providing
Web accessibility. As part of the
approval request, agencies must confirm
if automating the FFR will require either
minor system enhancements or interim
system improvements, and if
development, modernization and
enhancement (DME) funding would be
necessary. These measures are not
anticipated to be costly or timeintensive because the FFR includes only
four new data elements that are not
currently resident on either the SF–269
or SF–272.
Comment 33: One comment requested
that the paper format of the
consolidated financial report be made
available so that it can be completed
using a computer keyboard either in
Microsoft Word or ‘‘writeable’’ PDF. The
comment further stated that applicants
prefer filling out documents and forms
using a computer keyboard and that the
old-style PDF forms are difficult to use
because they must be printed and then
completed using a typewriter. Another
comment requested that the paper FFR
show a Web address that would provide
specific instructions and information for
completing the FFR.
Response: As described previously,
the Federal awarding agencies began
addressing electronic solutions for
financial reporting in February 2004,
including the electronic submission of
the FFR through unified and common
Federal electronic solutions. The
workgroup concluded that URL
references should be included on Web
sites rather than the FFR forms because
the URL references may change.
Comment 34: One comment requested
assurance that security controls be
established to prevent the electronic
submission of an FFR report that had
not been approved by the appropriate
individuals.
Response: Potential solutions for
electronic submissions include
submission and electronic
authentication by an Authorized Agency
Representative. In addition, existing
payment systems only allow access by
Authorized Agency Representatives.
These agency security measures must be

PO 00000

Frm 00062

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

supplemented by the recipient’s internal
security measures to preclude the
submission of reports by unauthorized
representatives.
Comment 35: One comment stated
that there is a need to ensure that
subrecipients and subcontractors be
subject to the same requirements as
recipients for reporting purposes.
Another comment noted that States
serving in a pass-through capacity
should also adopt the FFR, which would
then reap the FFR’s benefits across the
grant community. Another comment
stated that the FFR does not contain a
line item showing funds disbursed to
subrecipients.
Response: The Federal government
may not impose prime recipient
reporting requirements on subrecipients
and subcontractors as a means of
securing the contractual relationship
between the prime and the sub. Instead,
OMB, through its administrative
circulars, requires recipients to manage
and monitor each project, program,
function, and activity supported by the
award. Furthermore, agencies may
obtain information regarding the
subrecipient and subcontractor aspects
of an award by requiring recipients to
indicate the amount of monies advanced
or disbursed to subrecipients and
contractors through FFR submissions.
Requesting that States adopt the FFR is
beyond the scope of the workgroup, but
it is considered to be an area worthy of
continued exploration. ‘‘Cumulative
Cash Disbursements,’’ as shown in the
FFR Attachment, include funds
disbursed to subrecipients. A separate
line item was not added to capture
disbursements to subrecipients because,
in the interest of streamlining,
recipients will only be required to
report disbursements without detailing
specific types of expenditures.
Comment 36: One comment proposed
enlarging Box 1, ‘‘Federal Agency and
Organizational Element to Which Report
is Submitted;’’ two comments noted the
absence of instructions advising on the
level to which reports should be
submitted within an agency,
particularly for multiple grants captured
on the FFR; and a fourth comment
stated that OMB should establish a
single location for submission of the
report, which would eliminate the
submission of identical reports to
multiple locations within an agency.
Response: The size of Box 1 was not
changed because recipients may use
acronyms to depict the Federal agency
and organizational element. The ability
to group multiple grants will be at the
discretion of the Federal awarding
agency. Agencies can provide guidance
on identifying ‘‘the organizational

E:\FR\FM\07DEN1.SGM

07DEN1

pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 235 / Friday, December 7, 2007 / Notices
element’’ for recipients reporting on
multiple grants. The instructions for
Box 1 have been clarified to state ‘‘Enter
the name of the Federal agency and
organizational element identified in the
award document or as instructed by the
agency.’’ Even though electronic
solutions for the FFR are pending, some
recipients may still elect to submit
paper-based reports. Agencies will not
be required to request submissions to
one location. However, the instructions
have been modified to state: ‘‘Agencies
should instruct recipients to submit the
FFR to one single location within the
agency.’’ This language states that
submission to one location in the
agency is not required, but strongly
encouraged.
Comment 37: One comment requested
that Box 4 be changed from ‘‘Universal
Identifier’’ to ‘‘DUNS Number.’’ Another
comment asked if ‘‘Universal Identifier’’
is the DUNS Number or the Employer
Identification Number (EIN).
Response: The DUNS number is the
universal identifier for grants and
cooperative agreements. As such, the
term ‘‘Universal Identifier Number’’ has
been changed to ‘‘DUNS Number.’’ Box
4 on the FFR has been modified to
include separate entries of the ‘‘DUNS
Number’’ (Box 4a) and ‘‘Employer
Identification Number (EIN)’’ (Box 4b).
The FFR Instructions have been
amended to incorporate this change.
Comment 38: Several comments were
raised about the requirement for
recipients to provide their DUNS
number. One comment requested a
reference in the FFR Instructions on
how to obtain a DUNS number, another
asked what mechanism OMB intends to
employ to ensure that recipients use the
correct DUNS number. Still another
comment requested OMB to provide
guidance on how to manage multiple
DUNS numbers for organizations and
their affiliates. Finally, three comments
expressed overall concern with the
requirement to obtain a DUNS number.
Response: All of these comments
pertain to pre-award activities and are
outside of the scope of the FFR
proposal. Instead, they should have
been submitted in response to OMB’s
Federal Register notice dated June 27,
2003, ‘‘Use of a Universal Identifier by
Grant Applicants.’’ Although these
comments did not result in any changes
to the FFR, they still warrant some
clarification. Use of the DUNS will
allow Federal agencies and recipients to
readily identify a DUNS ‘‘family tree,’’
allowing for more effective management
of multiple grants. Also, a DUNS
number is required for registering in the
Business Partner Network (BPN), which
includes the Central Contract Registry

VerDate Aug<31>2005

16:30 Dec 06, 2007

Jkt 214001

(CCR). The BPN/CCR maintains an
applicant and recipient profile, which
reduces the amount of data required for
electronic submission of information to
Grants.gov.
Comment 39: Three comments
addressed continued use of the EIN,
along with the DUNS number, on the
FFR. One comment requested that
recipients furnish either the EIN or
DUNS number, while another requested
that the EIN be added to the FFR. One
comment asked if the EIN was actually
intended to be dropped.
Response: On June 27, 2003, an OMB
notice in the Federal Register, ‘‘Use of
a Universal Identifier by Grant
Applicants,’’ established the
requirement for recipients to obtain a
DUNS number when applying for
Federal grants and cooperative
agreements. This policy has since been
revised to apply to all forms of Federal
financial assistance pursuant to the
Federal Funding Accountability and
Transparency Act of 2006 (Pub. L. 109–
282). It stipulated that Federal agencies
could continue to use their EIN or
similar vendor identification for their
internal use. In response, the FFR has
been modified to include both the
DUNS number and EIN. The addition of
the EIN to the FFR does not preclude
furnishing a DUNS number. Instead,
recipients providing an EIN (or similar
vendor identification number) on the
FFR will still be required to provide a
DUNS number.
Comment 40: Two comments
indicated that basic information about a
recipient, including financial
information, should be stored in a
password protected site that recipients
could access to update their information
annually or when major changes occur
such as the name of a contact person.
After the standard application is
submitted to the clearinghouse, an
applicant or recipient could access the
information and submit a new grant
application without having to fill out
another form with the same information.
This practice should be possible
because standard information is
required with every application, but
rarely changes from one application to
another.
Response: These comments pertain to
pre-award activity, so they are outside
the scope of the FFR proposal. Although
no changes were made to the FFR in
response to these comments, some
clarification is warranted. The Federal
government is currently using BPN/CCR
for grant applicants and recipients to
help centralize applicant and recipient
information, and to provide a central
location for applicants and recipients to
change organizational information. Use

PO 00000

Frm 00063

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

69243

of BPN/CCR provides one location for
applicants and recipients to change
information about their organization for
use by all Federal agencies. Currently,
recipients will use the BPN/CCR
template that is in place for vendors and
contractors conducting business with
the Federal government.
Comment 41: Three comments
pertained to Box 5, ‘‘Recipient Account
Number or Identifying Number.’’ One
comment requested an example of ‘‘any
other identifying number,’’ while
another asked that ‘‘For Recipient Use
Only; Not Required by Federal Funding
Agency’’ be replaced with ‘‘This
Account Number May be the Same
Number as Shown in Item 2, Federal
Grant or Other Identifying Number.’’
One comment suggested that Box 5 does
not serve a useful purpose and it should
be eliminated.
Response: As stated in the FFR
Instructions, Box 5 is intended for
recipient use only, such as providing a
tracking mechanism for reconciliation
purposes. For example, a recipient
could assign a number to an award that
is automatically generated from its
financial system, which would make
Box 5 very useful in reconciling the
recipient’s internal data with that
maintained by the Federal government.
The language was not modified because
the proposed language better depicts the
intent and appropriate use of Box 5.
Comment 42: One comment requested
that the shading be removed from all the
Column II, Current Period, cells because
this information could be useful if the
FFR is to be used for Current Cash
Transactions.
Response: The FFR has been modified
to collect only cumulative totals. This
action would eliminate Column I
(Previously Reported) and Column II
(Current Period) for all line items. The
overall financial status of the award, as
shown in the ‘‘Cumulative’’ column,
should serve as the basis from which
assessments and decisions are made.
The ‘‘Federal Cash’’ section has been
modified to include Line 10c, ‘‘Cash On
Hand.’’ By requiring only cumulative
totals, this modification will allow the
FFR to provide a good overview of
activity that took place during the
reporting period and facilitate the
calculation of cash on hand as of the
reporting period end date. The FFR
Instructions have been amended to
show these changes.
Comment 43: One comment suggested
revising the last sentence of the
instructions for Line 10, ‘‘Transactions,’’
to state: ‘‘If you need to adjust amounts
entered on previous reports, include a
note in Line 12 of the Remarks section.’’

E:\FR\FM\07DEN1.SGM

07DEN1

pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES

69244

Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 235 / Friday, December 7, 2007 / Notices

Response: The statement ‘‘If you need
to adjust amounts entered on previous
reports, include a note in Line 12 of the
Remarks section’’ has been added to the
instructions for Line 10. Any
information deemed necessary to
support or explain FFR information
should be noted in Line 12, ‘‘Remarks.’’
Comment 44: One comment noted
that recipients are now instructed to
report adjustments to prior report
periods in Column I (Previously
Reported). This instruction is consistent
with generally accepted accounting
principles, which require publicly
traded corporations to report prior
period adjustments as revisions to
retained earnings rather than as results
of current year operations. Nevertheless,
the comment requests that recipients be
allowed to report adjustments in the
period in which they are recognized
(Column II, Current Period) because the
FFR is a cumulative document. The
amount that ultimately is of interest to
the agency is the amount captured in
Column III (Cumulative) and an
adjustment has the same effect on
Column III whether the recipient enters
it in Column I or Column II.
Response: The FFR has been modified
to collect only cumulative totals. This
action eliminates Column I (Previously
Reported) and Column II (Current
Period) for all line items. Since the
practice of reflecting adjustments within
the period that the error occurred is a
generally accepted accounting principle,
no changes will be imposed on the
recipient community. If an agency has
unique reporting situations requiring
adjustments in the prior period, it can
request an exemption from OMB.
Comment 45: One comment requested
that the instructions for Line 10a be
changed to read: ‘‘Enter the amount of
actual cash received to date from the
Federal awarding agency.’’
Response: The instructions for Line
10a, ‘‘Cash Receipts,’’ have been
amended to include the requested
language.
Comment 46: One comment asked if
Line 10d, ‘‘Total Federal Funds
Authorized,’’ includes the amount of
Federal increase resulting from program
income reported on Line 10o, ‘‘Program
Income Expended in Accordance with
the Addition Alternative.’’
Response: Line 10d, ‘‘Total Federal
Funds Authorized,’’ does not include
program income since, by definition,
program income is generated by award
activities and not provided by the
awarding agency. The instructions for
Line 10d have been modified to provide
clarification.
Comment 47: One comment noted
that recipients are given a total award

VerDate Aug<31>2005

16:30 Dec 06, 2007

Jkt 214001

amount without limitations on when
those funds can be spent, other than the
restrictions on the start and end dates of
each award. However, the instructions
for Line 10d, ‘‘Total Federal Funds
Authorized,’’ request recipients to
report on ‘‘Total Federal funds
authorized for the current funding
period.’’ This information is currently
requested on SF–269 on a cumulative
basis for an award, not for the current
reporting period. The comment further
requests that the same option be
available to recipients on the FFR and
that this detail be included in the line
item instructions.
Response: Columns I and II for ‘‘Total
Federal Funds Authorized’’ have been
eliminated, requiring a cumulative total
entry only. The instructions for Line
10d, ‘‘Total Federal Funds Authorized,’’
have been changed to state: ‘‘Enter the
total Federal funds authorized as of the
reporting period end date.’’
Comment 48: One comment noted
that the instruction for Line 11e,
‘‘Indirect Expense, Federal Share,’’
should explain that this is the amount
of indirect expense that has been
combined with direct expenses and
reported in Lines 10e, 10f, and 10g.
Response: The FFR instruction at Line
11e was not modified because we felt it
would be clearer to the user if we
modified the instructions at 10e, f and
g. The FFR instructions at Line 10e,
‘‘Federal Share of Expenditures,’’have
been modified to read: ‘‘Expenditures
are the sum of actual cash
disbursements for direct charges for
goods and services, the amount of
indirect expenses charged to the award,
and the amount of cash advances and
payments made to subrecipients and
subcontractors, minus program income
expended in accordance with the
deduction alternative, rebates, refunds
or other credits.’’ The instructions for
Line 10f, ‘‘Federal Share of
Unliquidated Obligations,’’ have been
modified to read: ‘‘Unliquidated
obligations reflect expenses incurred
that have not yet been paid, as of the
reporting period end date (cash basis),
or expenses that have been incurred but
not yet recorded (accrual basis). Enter
the Federal portion of unliquidated
obligations, which includes direct and
indirect expenses incurred but not yet
paid or charged to the award, including
amounts due to subrecipients and
subcontractors. On the final report, this
line should be zero unless the awarding
agency has provided specific
instructions.’’ The instructions for Line
10g, ‘‘Total Federal Share,’’ were not
changed because Total Federal Share is
the sum of Line 10e, ‘‘Federal Share of
Expenditures’’ and Line 10f, ‘‘Federal

PO 00000

Frm 00064

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

Share of Unliquidated Obligations,’’ and
the instructions for these two lines have
been modified to reflect the treatment of
indirect expenses.
Comment 49: One comment noted
that it is unclear what resources are
contemplated in the instructions for
Line 10e, ‘‘Federal Share of
Expenditures,’’ particularly the phrase
‘‘the value of in-kind contributions
applied.’’ OMB’s use of the term ‘‘inkind contributions’’ in circulars and
related documentation is confined to
resources related to the non-Federal
share and is usually modified by the
term ‘‘third-party’’ to indicate that such
non-cash contributions come from a
party other than the Federal agency and
recipient. As a result, such discussion
should be included in the section of the
report related to ‘‘Status of Recipient
Share.’’
Response: The reference to ‘‘the value
of in-kind contributions applied’’ has
been removed from the definition of
Line 10e, ‘‘Federal Share of
Expenditures.’’ The instructions for Line
10j, ‘‘Recipient Share of Expenditures,’’
have been clarified to state: ‘‘This
amount may include the value of
allowable in-kind match contributions
* * *.’’
Comment 50: One comment stated
that the sentence ‘‘Do not include any
amounts on Line 10f that have been
included on Line 10e’’ in the current
SF–269 instructions for reporting
unliquidated obligations has been
dropped from the FFR Instructions for
Lines 10f and 10k. This sentence is
needed to control against ‘‘double
dipping.’’
Response: The instructions for Line
10f have been clarified to state: ‘‘Do not
include any amount in Line 10f that has
been reported in Line 10e.’’ Also, the
instructions for Line 10k have been
clarified to state: ‘‘Do not include any
amount in Line 10k that has been
reported in Line 10j.’’
Comment 51: One comment indicated
that the instructions for Line 10i, ‘‘Total
Recipient Share Required,’’ on the new
FFR requests recipients to report on
total recipient share required by
reporting period, yet some awards
require recipients to agree to a specific
match for the entire grant period, which
means that recipients would be able to
report their required share only on a
cumulative basis, rather than on a
period-by-period basis. Another
comment asked if the recipient share to
be provided relates only to mandatory
cost sharing amounts or if it also
included committed cost sharing. A
similar comment requested clarification
for Lines 10i through 10m to show that
the terms ‘‘recipient share’’ and

E:\FR\FM\07DEN1.SGM

07DEN1

pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 235 / Friday, December 7, 2007 / Notices
‘‘recipient funds’’ include all matching
and cost sharing funds that have been
committed to the project by the
recipient and other providers. A fourth
comment asked whether the amount
reported on Line 10i includes level of
effort requirements.
Response: The FFR has been modified
to collect only cumulative totals. This
action eliminates Column I (Previously
Reported) and Column II (Current
Period) for all line items. The
instructions for Line 10i, ‘‘Total
Recipient Share Required,’’ have been
amended to state: ‘‘Enter the total
required recipient share for budget,
funding, and project periods. The
required recipient share to be provided
includes all matching and cost sharing
provided by recipients and third-party
providers to meet the level required by
the Federal agency. This amount should
not include cost sharing and match
amounts in excess of the amount
required by the Federal agency (such as
cost overruns for which the recipient
incurs additional expenses and,
therefore, contributes a greater level of
cost sharing or matching than the level
required by the Federal agency).’’
Comment 52: One comment indicated
that the current long version of SF–269
allows the agency to break the
recipient’s share of outlays into in-kind
and cash matches, while the proposed
FFR combines in-kind and cash match
totals and reports them as one figure on
Line 10i, ‘‘Total Recipient Share
Required.’’ The comment further asked
that the FFR be revised to show a break
in the recipient’s share between in-kind
and cash matches. Another comment
suggested using the term ‘‘mandatory’’
cost sharing instead of recipient’s share,
while another comment asked that the
word ‘‘required’’ used in front of
‘‘recipient funds’’ and ‘‘match or cost
sharing amount’’ be deleted because the
match actually received may be
different than what was committed.
Response: Since documentation
requirements for third-party and in-kind
contributions and cash matches are
virtually the same, no purpose would be
served by differentiating between the
two on the FFR. If an agency wants to
obtain this information, it may do so
through progress reporting mechanisms.
Recipients may not universally
understand the terms ‘‘mandatory’’ and
‘‘committed’’ in reference to cost
sharing. As such, introducing these
terms may result in greater confusion
than the term ‘‘required recipient
share,’’ which is currently used. The
word ‘‘required’’ was not removed from
the line item instructions because it
ensures a correct, mutual understanding
between the recipient and the agency

VerDate Aug<31>2005

16:30 Dec 06, 2007

Jkt 214001

regarding the precise amount of match
required against the funds awarded. The
match or cost sharing reported may be
different from the required amount, but
the amount required has significance for
this report because adjustments can be
made prior to or during closeout to
reconcile differences between actual
cost sharing amounts and the amount
required by the Federal agency.
Comment 53: One comment requested
that the phrases—(current period only)
and (This period)—be removed from
Line 10k, ‘‘Recipient Share of
Unliquidated Obligations.’’ The shaded
and unshaded cells for each line item
are sufficient for determining the period
of time for which the information needs
to be reported. As a result, (current
period only) and (This period) are
redundant.
Response: The two phrases were not
on Line 10k of the form but were in the
instructions for Line 10k. The two
phrases have been removed from the
instructions. The FFR has been modified
to collect only cumulative totals. The
instructions for Line 10k now state:
‘‘Unliquidated obligations reflect
expenses incurred that have not yet
been paid, as of the reporting period end
date. Enter the recipient’s portion of
unliquidated obligations which includes
direct and indirect expenses incurred
but not yet paid or charged to the award,
including amounts due to subrecipients
and subcontractors.’’
Comment 54: One comment stated
that the proposed form includes a new
line item, Line 10m, ‘‘Remaining
Recipient Share to be Provided,’’ that
requires the total recipient share less the
total recipient share disbursed and
obligated leaving the remaining
recipient share to be provided. The
comment further indicated that this
information is not useful because the
recipient frequently does not spend the
entire grant award, so it does not need
to provide the entire match shown in
the grant award.
Response: Even if the entire amount
of the award is not spent, the
information on Line 10m enables the
Federal agency to readily view required
and actual recipient share activity and
make necessary adjustments prior to or
at time of closeout. The information also
provides a valuable tool for agencies to
assess the sufficiency of the recipient’s
contributions throughout the project or
grant period, enabling agencies to
monitor awards, identify deficiencies,
and make adjustments, as necessary.
Comment 55: One comment indicated
that the FFR does not address the three
methods in which program income can
be treated. Two comments requested a
separate line item for identifying

PO 00000

Frm 00065

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

69245

program income that is used to finance
the non-Federal share of the project.
Response: The FFR and instructions
capture the three ways in which
program income can be treated.
Specifically, Line 10o is used for
program income expended in
accordance with the deduction
alternative; Line 10p is used for program
income expended in accordance with
the addition alternative; and Line 10j
may include program income expended
to meet the recipient’s share of the
program or project. A separate line item
for program income used to finance the
recipient’s share is not necessary
because the instructions for Line 10j
state: ‘‘This amount may include the
value of allowable in-kind match
contributions and recipient share of
program income used to finance the
non-Federal share of the project or
program.’’
Comment 56: One comment asked
whether it would be better to include a
question or a pair of boxes to be checked
on whether the award in question
requires the use of the deduction or the
addition alternative. Alternatively, if the
award does not include such a
provision, indicate whether the
recipient should be required to choose
one or the other. The form would then
be arranged so that if the deduction
alternative were indicated, the Federal
share of expenditures would be shown
in total and the amount of program
income would be deducted from the
total to arrive at a net, which the federal
government would need to reimburse. If
the addition alternative were indicated,
the recipient would then demonstrate
the total program income earned, the
total spent on costs of the program, and
the amount not used.
Response: The FFR was not modified
to ask a question or show boxes
indicating whether the deduction or
addition method for program income
was used because the method used to
account for program income should be
evident by virtue of the line items
completed by the recipient. It should
also be noted that if the award is silent
with respect to the treatment of program
income, the recipient does not have the
option of choosing the method to be
utilized. Instead, it is the agency’s
decision regarding which method is
used to account for program income
and, if applicable, the expenditure of
program income. The instructions for
Lines 10e and 10o have been modified
in response to the portion of the
comment regarding the manner in
which program income, utilizing the
deduction alternative, is reported. The
instruction for Line 10e states: ‘‘Enter
the amount of Federal fund

E:\FR\FM\07DEN1.SGM

07DEN1

pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES

69246

Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 235 / Friday, December 7, 2007 / Notices

expenditures. Expenditures are the sum
of actual cash disbursements for direct
charges for goods and services, the
amount of indirect expenses charged to
the award, and the amount of cash
advances and payments made to
subrecipients and subcontractors, minus
program income expended in
accordance with the deduction
alternative, rebates, refunds, or other
credits.’’ Program Income expended in
accordance with the deduction
alternative should be reported
separately on Line 10o. The instructions
for Line 10o state: ‘‘Enter the amount of
program income that was used to reduce
the Federal share of the total project
costs.’’ No change was made regarding
the depiction of program income
utilizing the addition alternative
because the current proposal presents
the amount expended and unexpended
without requesting extraneous
information.
Comment 57: Two comments
requested that two phrases—(current
period) and (This Period)—be removed
from Line 10p,—‘‘Unexpended Program
Income,’’ because the shaded and
unshaded cells for each line item are
sufficient for determining for what
period of time the information needs to
be reported. As such, (current period)
and (This Period) are redundant.
Response: The phrase (This Period)
appeared in the instructions for Line
10p but not on Line 10p of the form.
The phrase (current period) appeared on
Line 10p of the form. The phrase
(current period only) appeared in the
instructions for Line 10p. These phrases
have been removed from the
instructions of the form. The FFR has
been modified to collect only
cumulative totals. The instructions for
Line 10q now state: ‘‘Enter the amount
of Line 10n minus Line 10o on Line
10p. This is the amount of program
income that has been earned but not
expended, as of the reporting period end
date.’’
Comment 58: One comment indicated
that the instructions should include a
title line for indirect expense; otherwise,
it appears that indirect expense falls
under program income.
Response: The FFR section for
Indirect Expense has not been modified
because the separate line number and
block formatting of the section makes it
stand out from the preceding section.
Comment 59: One comment requested
that Box 11a, ‘‘Indirect Expense, Type of
Rate,’’ be amended by changing the term
‘‘Fixed’’ to ‘‘Fixed with Carry-Forward’’
to conform to current practices used by
Federal agencies. Another comment
requested that definitions be provided
for the types of rate identified in Box

VerDate Aug<31>2005

16:30 Dec 06, 2007

Jkt 214001

11a (provisional, predetermined, final,
or fixed).
Response: The FFR has not been
modified because the terminology
‘‘Fixed’’ is currently used in OMB
Circulars. Also, the type of indirect
expense rate should be identified in the
negotiated indirect cost rate agreement
with the Federal agency or identified in
the grant agreement. Definitions for each
type of rate were not added to the FFR
because at this post-award phase of the
award cycle, recipients should already
be aware of their indirect cost rates and
their meanings. If recipients need
additional information on indirect cost
rates, they should consult the cognizant
agency or OMB cost principles circulars.
Comment 60: One comment requested
that the instructions for Line 11b,
‘‘Indirect Expense Rate,’’ should be
revised to state: ‘‘Enter the actual
approved rate in effect during this
reporting period. This rate should be
contained in the grant agreement or
otherwise negotiated.’’ Two comments
requested that guidance be added to the
instructions for Line 11b advising
recipients on how to complete the FFR
when multiple indirect cost rates apply
to the reporting period.
Response: The FFR instructions have
been modified to state ‘‘Enter the
indirect cost rate in effect during the
reporting period. This rate should be
contained in the grant agreement or
agreement negotiated with the cognizant
federal agency.’’
Comment 61: One comment asked
whether the amount reported in Box
11e, ‘‘Indirect Expense, Federal Share,’’
was also included in Line 10e, ‘‘Federal
Share of Expenditures,’’ and Line 10f,
‘‘Federal Share of Unliquidated
Obligations.’’
Response: The FFR instructions have
been modified to explain that the
amount of indirect expense is combined
with the Federal share of direct
expenses and is to be reported on Lines
10e and 10f.
Comment 62: One comment noted
that the language associated with Box
13, ‘‘Certification,’’ does not convey that
civil or criminal penalties exist for
making a knowingly false statement or
willful misrepresentation in regards to
the reported information including cash
receipts and disbursements, and
expenditures and unliquidated
obligations. Including such a
certification would ensure that
recipients are aware of their
responsibilities and provide a stronger
basis for the Federal government to take
legal action if recipients knowingly
make a false certification or willful
misrepresentation. Another comment
indicated that the instructions should

PO 00000

Frm 00066

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

state who qualifies as an ‘‘authorized
certifying official.’’ Still another
comment asked that the instructions for
Box 13e, ‘‘Date Report Submitted,’’
prescribe the date format to be used (for
example, month, day, year).
Response: Determining who qualifies
as an ‘‘authorized certifying official’’
should be made by the recipient, not the
Federal agency. In general, the
‘‘authorized certifying official’’ has the
authority to commit the recipient to a
course of action and agreement, and
ensure compliance with that action and
agreement. The FFR has been modified
to specify a date format and instructions
for Box 13e have been modified to state:
‘‘Enter the date the FFR is submitted to
the Federal agency in the format of
month, day, year.’’
Comment 63: One comment requested
that Box 2, ‘‘Federal Grant or Other
Identifying Number Assigned by the
Federal Agency,’’ also ask for the name
of the Federal grant. A second comment
asked that the legal name of the
recipient be provided in Box 3,
‘‘Recipient Organization,’’ while a third
comment asked that the agency be
identified on the FFR. A fourth
comment asked that the recipient’s fax
number be provided on the FFR.
Response: Box 2 is intended for the
award number or other identifying
number that the Federal awarding
agency assigns to the grant or
cooperative agreement. This unique
number precludes the need to ask
recipients to provide additional
identifying information, such as the
name of the grant program. In addition,
the recipient’s legal name and fax
number should be obtained in the preaward phase, if that information is
pertinent. There is no need to impose an
undue burden on recipients by
requesting this information again during
the reporting phase.
Comment 64: One comment requested
that the instructions for Box 8, ‘‘Project/
Grant Period,’’ and Box 9, ‘‘Period
Covered by the Report,’’ be clarified to
indicate that the two reporting periods
may not agree since awards are sent out
late and project activities are often not
completed by the project or grant period
end date. Another comment asked that
the instructions for Box 9 be revised to
state: ‘‘Enter beginning and ending dates
of the current reporting period * * *.’’
Response: The first comment most
likely pertains to the submission of final
FFRs, in which case the ‘‘Reporting
Period End Date’’ (Box 9) end date
should be the same as the ‘‘Project/
Grant Period’’ (Box 8) end date. If
project activities are not completed by
the project or grant period end date,
then the recipient should request an

E:\FR\FM\07DEN1.SGM

07DEN1

69247

Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 235 / Friday, December 7, 2007 / Notices
extension. If the extension is approved,
the project or grant period end date (Box
8) would be extended and the reporting
period end date (Box 9) on the final FFR
would be the same as the extended
project or grant period end date. The
instructions for Box 9 have been revised
to state: ‘‘Enter the ending date of the
reporting period.’’
Comment 65: One agency stated that
the existing financial reporting forms
are not inherently burdensome, but they
often become so because of misuse and
misinterpretation of their instructions
by some Federal agencies. One comment
indicated that the current SF–269 and
SF–272 function well on their own
since the recipients for each report are
distinct and the combined FFR merely
combines the information requested on
the current forms into one form, which
does not decrease the amount of time
required to submit financial data.
Another comment indicated that several
opportunities for streamlining were
missed. They included eliminating
interim financial status reports and
relying on nearly identical data
submitted quarterly on the Federal Cash
Transactions Report, reducing the
frequency with which agencies may
require reports, and standardizing
reporting requirements like those for
outstanding obligations and carry
forward of unobligated balances. One
comment asked whether a standardized
report comparing budgets to actual
expenditures will be required or will
this function continue to be left to
individual program officials.
Response: Four individual financial
reports have been combined into one
FFR with standardized informational
reporting requirements. Agencies may
require recipients to provide all of the
information included on the FFR, but no
agency can require recipients to provide
additional information, without

approval from OMB. The FFR allows for
flexibility in the frequency of reporting,
but it establishes uniform reporting
period end dates and uniform due dates
for the submission of interim reports.
Furthermore, the FFR Instructions
provide clarification and
standardization with respect to
reporting on the cash management
activity and financial status of single or
multiple awards. Use of the FFR and its
instructions across the government will
minimize instances of misuse and
misinterpretation. Some recipients
currently complete the SF–269; others
complete the SF–272, while others
complete both forms, depending on
agency reporting requirements. These
forms serve both distinct and
overlapping populations. As such,
having an FFR that encompasses both
financial status activity (currently
resident on the SF–269) and cash
management activity (the SF–272)
allows agencies to preserve reporting
flexibilities while serving distinct and
overlapping populations with one form.
Furthermore, completing the FFR
reduces the number of data elements
that are currently required on the
current SF–269 and SF–272. Interim
FFRs were not eliminated because the
information submitted on those reports
depicts information that does not appear
on the Federal Cash Transaction Report.
Many agencies need that information
during interim timeframes throughout
the project or grant period to adequately
monitor the financial status of their
awards. The frequency with which
agencies may require submission of
FFRs remains flexible because their
needs differ in terms of the related risks
associated with a particular program or
award. The scope of the FFR proposal
was not designed to address an agency’s
internal policies regarding financial

management of grant and cooperative
agreement funds, nor was it designed to
be used as a tool to compare budgets to
actual expenditures. Instead, the FFR
provides a standardized format through
which recipients report on the cash
management and financial status of
grants and cooperative agreements in
accordance with each agency’s existing
internal policies.
Comment 66: One comment indicated
that the proposed change does not
contain information about OMB’s plans
to revise Circulars A–102 and A–110.
Those circulars prescribe the use of the
current forms that would be replaced by
the FFR.
Response: OMB issued the proposed
revisions to Circulars A–102 and A–110
as a way of initiating changes associated
with several government-wide grant
streamlining initiatives.
III. Paperwork Reduction Act
Submission for OMB Review;
Comment Request.
Title: Federal Financial Report (FFR).
OMB No.: New Collection.
Description: In furtherance of Public
Law 106–107, and its goal of
streamlining the Federal grant process,
the Federal Financial Report (FFR) will
reduce the burden and reporting effort
on recipients by consolidating four
forms into one. The purpose of the FFR
is to give recipients of grants and
cooperative agreements a standard
format for reporting the financial status
of their grants and cooperative
agreements (hereby referred to
collectively as awards).
Respondents: Federal agencies and
their assistance recipients.
Estimated Total Annual Burden
Hours: 2.00.
Estimated Cost: There is no expected
cost to the respondents or to OMB.

ANNUAL BURDEN ESTIMATES

pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES

Number of
responses per
respondent

Number of
respondents

Instrument

Average burden
hours per
response

Total burden
hours

Federal Financial Report (FFR) .......................................................
Federal Financial Report (FFR) Attachment ...................................

1
1

1
1

1.50
0.50

1.50
0.50

Total ..........................................................................................

............................

............................

............................

2.00

Agencies and the public are asked to
comment on:
• Whether the collection of
information is necessary for the proper
performance of the functions of the
agency, including whether the
information will have practical utility;

VerDate Aug<31>2005

16:30 Dec 06, 2007

Jkt 214001

• The accuracy of the agency’s
estimate of the burden of the collection
of information;
• Ways to enhance the quality, utility,
and clarity of the information to be
collected;
• Ways to minimize the burden of the
collection of information on
respondents, including through the use

PO 00000

Frm 00067

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

of automated collection techniques or
other forms of information technology;
and
• Estimates of capital or start-up costs
and costs of operation, maintenance,
and purchase of services to provide
information.

E:\FR\FM\07DEN1.SGM

07DEN1

69248

Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 235 / Friday, December 7, 2007 / Notices

pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES

IV. Summary of Actions
OMB, through this Federal Register
publication, is establishing the
government-wide FFR. The FFR
provides a standard format from which
agencies can determine data elements
that recipients must complete to report
on the cash management and financial
status of single or multiple awards.
Consistent with government-wide grant
streamlining objectives, the FFR will
result in the use of standard reporting
period end dates and due dates for the

VerDate Aug<31>2005

16:30 Dec 06, 2007

Jkt 214001

submission of cash management and
financial information.
This establishment of the governmentwide FFR requires amendments to OMB
Circulars A–110 (2 CFR part 215) and
A–102. Those amendments will be
published under a separate notice. We
also recognize that a transition period
will be necessary to provide agencies
and grantees with time to adapt their
processes to the new form and phase out
the use of old ones. When the FFR is
approved by OMB, the SF–269, SF–

PO 00000

Frm 00068

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

269A, SF–272 and SF–272A may
continue to be accepted by agencies
until September 30, 2008. Agencies
must determine the earliest practical
time that their recipients will transition
to using the FFR on or before September
30, 2008.
Danny Werfel,
Acting Controller.

Attachments
BILLING CODE 3110–01–P

E:\FR\FM\07DEN1.SGM

07DEN1

VerDate Aug<31>2005

16:30 Dec 06, 2007

Jkt 214001

PO 00000

Frm 00069

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4725

E:\FR\FM\07DEN1.SGM

07DEN1

69249

EN07DE07.027

pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 235 / Friday, December 7, 2007 / Notices

VerDate Aug<31>2005

Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 235 / Friday, December 7, 2007 / Notices

16:30 Dec 06, 2007

Jkt 214001

PO 00000

Frm 00070

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4725

E:\FR\FM\07DEN1.SGM

07DEN1

EN07DE07.028

pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES

69250

VerDate Aug<31>2005

16:30 Dec 06, 2007

Jkt 214001

PO 00000

Frm 00071

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4725

E:\FR\FM\07DEN1.SGM

07DEN1

69251

EN07DE07.029

pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 235 / Friday, December 7, 2007 / Notices

VerDate Aug<31>2005

Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 235 / Friday, December 7, 2007 / Notices

16:30 Dec 06, 2007

Jkt 214001

PO 00000

Frm 00072

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4725

E:\FR\FM\07DEN1.SGM

07DEN1

EN07DE07.030

pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES

69252

VerDate Aug<31>2005

16:30 Dec 06, 2007

Jkt 214001

PO 00000

Frm 00073

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4725

E:\FR\FM\07DEN1.SGM

07DEN1

69253

EN07DE07.031

pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 235 / Friday, December 7, 2007 / Notices

VerDate Aug<31>2005

Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 235 / Friday, December 7, 2007 / Notices

16:30 Dec 06, 2007

Jkt 214001

PO 00000

Frm 00074

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4725

E:\FR\FM\07DEN1.SGM

07DEN1

EN07DE07.032

pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES

69254

VerDate Aug<31>2005

16:30 Dec 06, 2007

Jkt 214001

PO 00000

Frm 00075

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4725

E:\FR\FM\07DEN1.SGM

07DEN1

69255

EN07DE07.033

pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 235 / Friday, December 7, 2007 / Notices

VerDate Aug<31>2005

Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 235 / Friday, December 7, 2007 / Notices

16:30 Dec 06, 2007

Jkt 214001

PO 00000

Frm 00076

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

E:\FR\FM\07DEN1.SGM

07DEN1

EN07DE07.034

pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES

69256

Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 235 / Friday, December 7, 2007 / Notices
for Congressional Affairs. Effective
October 03, 2007.

[FR Doc. 07–5941 Filed 12–6–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3110–01–C

Section 213.3304
OFFICE OF PERSONNEL
MANAGEMENT
Excepted Service
U.S. Office of Personnel
Management (OPM).
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:

SUMMARY: This gives notice of OPM
decisions granting authority to make
appointments under Schedules A, B,
and C in the excepted service as
required by 5 CFR 6.6 and 213.103.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: C.
Penn, Group Manager, Executive
Resources Services Group, Center for
Human Resources, Division for Human
Capital Leadership and Merit System
Accountability, 202–606–2246.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Appearing
in the listing below are the individual
authorities established under Schedules
A, B, and C between October 1, 2007,
and October 31, 2007. Future notices
will be published on the fourth Tuesday
of each month, or as soon as possible
thereafter. A consolidated listing of all
authorities as of June 30 is published
each year.

Schedule A
No Schedule A appointments were
approved for October 2007.
Schedule B
No Schedule B appointments were
approved for October 2007.
The following Schedule C
appointments were approved during
October 2007.
Section 213.3303
the President

Executive Office of

BOGS70031 Executive Assistant to the
Associate Director for Natural
Resource Programs. Effective October
11, 2007.
Office of National Drug Control Policy

pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES

QQGS70016 Legislative Assistant to
the Associate Director Office of
Legislative Affairs. Effective October
19, 2007.
Office of the United States Trade
Representative
TNGS70008 Deputy Assistant United
States Trade Representative for
Congressional Affairs to the Assistant
United States Trade Representative

16:30 Dec 06, 2007

Jkt 214001

Department of

DDGS17113 Staff Assistant to the
Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense
(Western Hemisphere Affairs).
Effective October 02, 2007.
DDGS17117 Special Assistant to the
Assistant Secretary of Defense
(Legislative Affairs). Effective October
03, 2007.
DDGS17108 Staff Assistant to the
Principal Deputy to the Deputy Under
Secretary of Defense (Asian and
Pacific Security Affairs). Effective
October 09, 2007.
DDGS17095 Staff Assistant for
Correspondence to the Special
Assistant to the Secretary and Deputy
Secretary of Defense. Effective
October 11, 2007.
Department of

DJGS00067 Chief of Staff to the
Assistant Attorney General, Office of
Justice Programs. Effective October
02, 2007.
DJGS00229 Public Affairs Specialist to
the Director, Office of Public Affairs.
Effective October 10, 2007.

Office of Management and Budget

VerDate Aug<31>2005

Section 213.3306
Defense

Section 213.3310
Justice

Schedule C

Department of State

DSGS61264 Special Assistant to the
Director, Policy Planning Staff.
Effective October 02, 2007.
DSGS61263 Special Assistant to the
Assistant Secretary for Democracy
Human Rights and Labor. Effective
October 10, 2007.
DSGS61260 Staff Assistant to the
Ambassador-At-Large (War Crimes).
Effective October 11, 2007.
DSGS61262 Legislative Management
Officer to the Assistant Secretary for
Legislative and Intergovernmental
Affairs. Effective October 16, 2007.
DSGS61265 Senior Advisor to the
Secretary of State. Effective October
26, 2007.

Section 213.3311 Department of
Homeland Security
DMGS00717 Special Assistant to the
Assistant Secretary for Private Sector.
Effective October 03, 2007.
DMGS00719 Confidential Assistant to
the White House Liaison. Effective
October 11, 2007.
DMGS00721 Confidential Assistant to
the Executive Secretary. Effective
October 11, 2007.
DMGS00722 Advisor to the Executive
Officer. Effective October 17, 2007.
DMGS00720 Confidential Assistant to
the Chief of Staff. Effective October
24, 2007.

PO 00000

Frm 00077

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

69257

DMGS00724 Advisor to the Assistant
Secretary for Policy. Effective October
31, 2007.
Section 213.3312 Department of the
Interior
DIGS01109 Associate Director—
Congressional and Legislative Affairs
to the Director, Congressional and
Legislative Affairs. Effective October
16, 2007.
DIGS01108 Special Assistant for
Public Affairs to the Director, Take
Pride In America. Effective October
24, 2007.
DIGS01110 Chief of Staff to the
Director Minerals Management
Service. Effective October 25, 2007.
Section 213.3313 Department of
Agriculture
DAGS00921 Confidential Assistant to
the Assistant Secretary for
Congressional Relations. Effective
October 03, 2007.
DAGS00917 Special Assistant to the
Under Secretary for Natural Resources
and Environment. Effective October
11, 2007.
DAGS00922 Associate Administrator
to the Administrator, Rural Housing
Service. Effective October 11, 2007.
DAGS00924 Staff Assistant to the
Administrator for Risk Management.
Effective October 29, 2007.
Section 213.3314 Department of
Commerce
DCGS00684 Director for
Speechwriting to the Director of
Public Affairs. Effective October 04,
2007.
DCGS00353 Confidential Assistant to
the Assistant Secretary and Director
General of United States/For
Commercial Services. Effective
October 19, 2007.
DCGS00161 Confidential Assistant to
the Director, Office of Legislative
Affairs. Effective October 26, 2007.
DCGS00448 Confidential Assistant to
the Assistant Secretary for Market
Access and Compliance. Effective
October 26, 2007.
Section 213.3315 Department of Labor
DLGS60093 Staff Assistant to the
Director of Scheduling. Effective
October 03, 2007.
DLGS60113 Special Assistant to the
Deputy Assistant Secretary, Office of
Disability Employment Policy.
Effective October 03, 2007.
DLGS60081 Legislative Assistant to
the Assistant Secretary for
Congressional and Intergovernmental
Affairs. Effective October 17, 2007.
DLGS60194 Special Assistant to the
Associate Deputy Secretary. Effective
October 17, 2007.

E:\FR\FM\07DEN1.SGM

07DEN1