Attachment 4-November 23 FR Notice on FFR

sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

72446

Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 226 / Wednesday, November 23, 2011 / Notices

(1) Nominee’s contact information
and current employment or position;
(2) Nominee’s resume or curriculum
vitae, including prior membership on
ACCSH and other relevant organizations
and associations;
(3) Categories of membership
(employer, employee, public, State
safety and health agency) that the
nominee is qualified to represent;
(4) A summary of the background,
experience, and qualifications that
addresses the nominee’s suitability for
the nominated membership category;
(5) Articles or other documents the
nominee has authored that indicate the
nominee’s knowledge, experience, and
expertise in occupational safety and
health, particularly as it pertains to the
construction industry; and
(6) A statement that the nominee is
aware of the nomination, is willing to
regularly attend and participate in
ACCSH meetings, and has no conflicts
of interest that would preclude
membership on ACCSH.
Member selection. The Secretary will
select ACCSH members on the basis of
their experience, knowledge, and
competence in the field of occupational
safety and health, particularly in the
construction industry. Information,
received through this nomination
process, and other relevant sources of
information, will assist the Secretary in
appointing members to ACCSH. In
selecting ACCSH members, the
Secretary will consider individuals
nominated in response to this Federal
Register notice, as well as other
qualified individuals. OSHA will
publish the list of new ACCSH members
in the Federal Register.

concerning the delivery of materials by
hand, express delivery, and messenger
or courier service, please contact the
OSHA Docket Office.
OSHA will post all submissions,
including personal information
provided, in the docket without change;
therefore, OSHA cautions interested
parties about submitting personal
information such as Social Security
numbers and birthdates. Guidance on
submitting nominations and supporting
materials is available on-line at http://
www.regulations.gov and from the
OSHA Docket Office.
Access to the docket. All submissions
in response to this Federal Register
notice are available in the http://
www.regulations.gov index; however,
some documents (e.g., copyrighted
material) are not publicly available to
read or download from that Web page.
All submissions, including materials not
available on-line, are available for
inspection and copying at the OSHA
Docket Office. For information about
accessing materials in Docket No.
OSHA–2011–0124, including materials
not available on-line, contact the OSHA
Docket Office.
Access to this Federal Register notice.
Electronic copies of this Federal
Register document are available at
http://www.regulations.gov. This
document, as well as news releases and
other relevant information, also are
available at OSHA’s Web page at http://
www.osha.gov.

Public Participation
Instructions for submitting
nominations. All nominations,
supporting documents, attachments,
and other materials must identify the
Agency name and the docket number for
this notice (Docket No. OSHA–2011–
0124). You may submit materials: (1)
Electronically, (2) by FAX, or (3) by
hard copy. You may supplement
electronic submissions by attaching
electronic files. Alternatively, if you
wish to supplement electronic
submissions with hard copy documents,
you must submit them to the OSHA
Docket Office and clearly identify your
electronic submission by Agency name
and docket number (Docket No. OSHA–
2011–0124) so that the Docket Office
can attach the materials to the electronic
submission.
Because of security-related
procedures, materials submitted by mail
may experience significant delays. For
information about security procedures

David Michaels, Ph.D., MPH,
Assistant Secretary of Labor for
Occupational Safety and Health,
directed the preparation of this notice
under the authority granted by Section
7 of the Occupational Safety and Health
Act of 1970 (29 U.S.C. 656), Section 107
of the Contract Work Hours and Safety
Standards Act (40 U.S.C. 3704), the
Federal Advisory Committee Act (5
U.S.C. App. 2), 29 CFR part 1912, 41
CFR part 102–3, and Secretary of
Labor’s Order No. 4–2010 (75 FR
55335).

VerDate Mar<15>2010

17:03 Nov 22, 2011

Jkt 226001

Authority and Signature

Signed at Washington, DC, this November
17, 2011.
David Michaels,
Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational
Safety and Health.
[FR Doc. 2011–30194 Filed 11–22–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510–26–P

PO 00000

Frm 00060

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND
BUDGET
Information Collection Activities:
Proposed Collection; Comment
Request
Office of Federal Financial
Management, Office of Management and
Budget.

AGENCY:

ACTION:

Notice; request for comments.

In accordance with the
Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C.
3501 et seq.), the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB) invites the general
public and Federal agencies to comment
on the renewal of the Standard Form
425, Federal Financial Report and the
SF–425A, Federal Financial Report
Attachment (collectively known as ‘‘the
FFR’’). The FFR is used in reporting
financial information under grants and
cooperative agreements. The public was
invited to comment on the renewal of
the FFR in a notice published in the
Federal Register on July 28, 2011 (76 FR
45299). Some of the public comments
received in response to July notice
resulted in changes to the content of the
FFR and FFR instructions. The
proposed revised FFR and FFR
instructions are at http://
www.whitehouse.gov/omb/
grants_standard_report_forms/.

SUMMARY:

Comments must be received by
December 23, 2011. Due to potential
delays in OMB’s receipt and processing
of mail sent through the US 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.

DATES:

Comments may be sent
through regulations.gov, a Federal EGovernment Web site that allows the
public to find, review, and submit
comments on documents that agencies
have published in the Federal Register
and that are open for comment. Simply
type ‘‘FFR renewal-2’’ (in quotes) in the
Comment or Submission search box,
click Go, and follow the instructions for
submitting comments. Comments
received by the date specified above
will be included as part of the official
record.
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; email
[email protected].

ADDRESSES:

E:\FR\FM\23NON1.SGM

23NON1

Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 226 / Wednesday, November 23, 2011 / Notices
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Marguerite Pridgen at the addresses
noted above.
Debra J. Bond,
Deputy Controller.

In the
Paperwork Reduction Act notice
published on July 28, 2011 [76 FR
45299], OMB requested comments on
the Standard Form (SF) 425, Federal
Financial Report and Standard Form
(SF) 425A, Federal Financial Report
Attachment (collectively known as ‘‘the
FFR’’). We received comments from an
individual and five organizations. In
response to those comments, we made
changes to the FFR and FFR
instructions. The proposed revised
forms are posted at http://
www.whitehouse.gov/omb/
grants_standard_report_forms/.
Following is a summary of the
comments we received and our
responses.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Comments and Responses

sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

A. Agency Implementation
Comment: Several commenters were
in favor of the FFR and considered it to
be an improvement over the forms it
replaced (i.e., SF–269, SF–269A, SF–
272, and SF–272A). However, many
commenters expressed concern that
agencies were customizing the form
and/or form instructions. One
commenter stated that Federal agencies
don’t require them to use the FFR. A
state association commented that some
programs still require recipients to
report using the legacy standard forms
SF–269 and SF–272.
Response: No change has been made.
We agree that the FFR should be kept
uniform by all agencies as much as
possible to allow for consistency in
preparation by the grantee community.
Agencies are permitted to shade out
areas that they do not use, but may not
add additional data elements without
clearance from OMB. The SF–269, SF–
269A, SF–272, and SF–272A forms were
not renewed by OMB. Agencies may not
require recipients to use expired forms.
Recipients are not required to respond
to Federal information collections that
do not have a current and valid OMB
approval number. Agencies must ensure
they receive OMB approval when
required prior to collecting information
from recipients.
Comment: A commenter representing
a state association commented that the
main issue concerning data collection
seems to be the lack of standardization
across and within Federal agencies
regardless of whether the process occurs
via forms or other data models. The

VerDate Mar<15>2010

17:03 Nov 22, 2011

Jkt 226001

commenter also stated that if the
implementation of the Digital
Accountability and Transparency Act of
2011 (‘‘DATA Act’’) would include
reporting of all grant expenditures, it
could lead to the elimination of the FFR
or other financial reports.
Response: No change has been made.
We agree that standardization across
and within Federal agencies, whether
the process occurs via forms or other
data models, improves the information
collection process for agencies and
recipients. As of the date of this notice,
the DATA Act has not been enacted.
Comment: Several commenters raised
issues with how agency personnel and
systems access and process the FFR. A
commenter representing a state
association stated that some agency
personnel that deal with grant closeout
do not always have access to the online
reports that have been filed with their
system. The recipients then fax or mail
the FFR to the granting agency. Another
commenter provided details on
problems experienced with online
submissions of these forms through the
US Department of Health and Human
Service’s Payment Management System.
Response: Because these issues deal
with agency implementation, no change
has been made to the form in response
to these comments. We have shared the
comments with the managers of the
Payment Management System who are
working to address issues raised by the
commenters.
B. Form Content, Instructions, and
Format
Comment: Several commenters stated
that the FFR was an improvement over
the previous SF–269. One commenter
representing a state association stated
that the FFR is a more cumbersome
report to prepare than the SF–269 due
to the more complicated instructions
and the fact that both Federal draws and
actual Federal expenditures are on the
same report.
Response: The general feedback we
have received is that the FFR is an
improvement over the legacy forms it
replaces. In response to several other
public comments, we have made
changes to the form and form
instructions to foster consistency.
Comment: A commenter stated that
the instruction for program income on
line 10e is incorrect. Specifically, the
last sentence in instructions refers to
10o rather than 10m.
Response: We agree and have made a
change to the instruction. The last
sentence in the instruction for 10e
should read ‘‘10m’’ not ‘‘10o’’.
Comment: A commenter stated that
Line 10l is confusing by stating ‘‘total

PO 00000

Frm 00061

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

72447

Federal program income’’ suggesting it
would be clearer to remove the word
Federal. As an example, the commenter
stated that her grant program is on a
reimbursement basis of 75 percent
Federal financial participation. So in
many instances where program income
was earned, the grantee would only
report 75 percent of the total amount
that the project earned in program
income, because that was the Federal
portion. In other instances the grantee
will report the total amount, so it is not
consistent because many interpret the
instructions differently.
Response: We agree and have made a
change to the instruction. Line 10l is
intended to collect the total Federal
share of program income earned. Line
10l has been changed to ‘‘Total Federal
Share of Program Income Earned.’’ The
instruction for line 10l has been
changed to ‘‘Enter the amount of the
Federal share of program income
earned.’’
Comment: Several commenters
expressed support for certain features of
the FFR form while some commenters
expressed support for certain features of
the legacy SF–269. For instance, one
commenter stated that there was value
to having the cumulative totals on the
form (SF–269) while another commenter
stated that it is better that the
cumulative totals not be on the report
(FFR). Another commenter stated that
‘‘previously reported’’ and ‘‘this period’’
columns that were on the SF–269 made
it simpler to reconcile and monitor the
changes over each quarter while another
commenter expressed support for the
FFR not having these columns. One
commenter stated that the FFR doesn’t
allow for as much oversight on what is
occurring financially on each report,
such as if any refunds, credits, and type
of match, unless the grantee uses the
Remarks box. Another commenter
expressed support for the indirect
expense field being expanded to
accommodate split rates.
Response: No change has been made.
The feedback we have received since
the FFR has been implemented is that
it is easier for grantees to complete and
for agency staff to review than the SF–
269. For example, the intent of a single
column on the FFR was to keep the form
as simplified as possible and to reduce
the reporting burden on grantees.
Federal agencies and recipients are still
able to use the data in the form to
compute the changes in amounts from
the previous report. While we could
have added back those columns and
other data elements, we are concerned
that the burden of collecting and
reporting the data may outweigh the
utility of the data.

E:\FR\FM\23NON1.SGM

23NON1

sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

72448

Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 226 / Wednesday, November 23, 2011 / Notices

Comment: A commenter from a
Federal agency expressed support for
the FFR and recommended that OMB
clarify its position regarding
computation of interest earned on
advances of grant funds and add
corresponding data elements and
instructions to the FFR.
Response: We agree in part with the
comment. We have not added any
additional data elements to the form in
an effort to minimize reporting burden.
We will reexamine the need for
requiring recipients to report interest
when we review other requests for
changes to the form.
Recent findings in Federal audits of
recipient cash management policies and
procedures identified issues concerning
the methods that recipients used to
compute the amount of interest earned
on Federal Cash on Hand. Auditors
found that some recipients subtracted
the aggregated amount of disbursements
they had made under all of their Federal
awards from the aggregated amount of
payments they had received from the
Government under those awards to
compute the amount of Cash on Hand
from all payments, which then became
the basis for computing the amount of
interest to be remitted. Recipients
included in the computation awards
paid by the reimbursement method, as
well as awards paid by the advance
method for which disbursements at the
time of the computation exceeded the
amount of the advances they had
requested and received from the
Government. For reimbursement
method awards, the recipients had used
their own funds to cover cash needs,
pending receipt of future payments of
Federal funds. The calculated balances
of Federal Cash on Hand for those
awards were negative, which offset
positive balances for other Federal
awards and reduced the computed
amount of Federal Cash on Hand for all
Federal awards in the aggregate. It
therefore also reduced the computed
amount of interest to be remitted to the
Government. In light of these matters,
and the commenter’s recommendations,
we have added and instruction to line
10c ‘‘Cash on Hand’’ to read as follows:
‘‘Use of Aggregated Amounts of
Disbursements and Advances. A
recipient must compute the amount of
Federal Cash on Hand due to
undisbursed advance payments using
the same basis that it uses in requesting
the advances. Therefore, in doing the
computation, a recipient may only
aggregate the amounts of its advance
payments received and disbursements
of Federal funds under multiple awards
only if it is authorized to aggregate its
requests for advance payments in the

VerDate Mar<15>2010

17:03 Nov 22, 2011

Jkt 226001

same manner. The following examples
should help to illustrate what is
permissible:
• If a recipient is authorized to
consolidate its requests for advance
payment for a group of awards—i.e., it
requests a single amount to cover its
anticipated cash needs for the awards in
the aggregate, then it may similarly
compute the Cash on Hand by
subtracting the aggregated amount of
disbursements from the aggregated
amount of the advances received for
those awards.
• If the same recipient is required to
request payment individually for other
Federal awards, it must compute the
Cash on Hand for each of those awards
on an award by award basis and
correspondingly report these awards on
separate FFRs.
Exclusion of Negative Balances of
Cash on Hand. In computing the total
amount of Cash on Hand for its Federal
awards in the aggregate, a recipient
must exclude any negative balance of
Federal Cash on Hand for an individual
award or for a group of awards paid
through a consolidated payment
request. This includes each award paid
by the reimbursement method and any
award using the advance method that
has disbursements in excess of advances
received to date. The computation must
include only positive balances of cash
on hand.’’
On the form itself, we added the word
‘‘combined’’ to the instruction line 10
‘‘Transactions’’ which now reads ‘‘(Use
lines a-c for single or combined multiple
grant reporting)’’ and added the word
‘‘separately’’ to the instruction for
Federal Cash which now reads ‘‘Federal
Cash (To report multiple grants
separately, also use FFR Attachment).’’
Comment: A commenter expressed
concern with the limited amount of
space available on the FFR for inputting
data such as dates and indirect cost
information.
Response: We have not made changes
to the form. The Excel version of the
FFR on the OMB Web site is the
recommended version to use since it
allows the reporter to adjust the cell and
column sizes as appropriate. As all
agencies move to electronic entry and
submission, this problem should cease
to be an issue.
C. Timing of Submission
Comment: A commenter stated that
quarterly reporting on the FFR is better
for reconciling the grant close-out
because it is cumulative for all the grant
years included with each letter of credit.
However, there is an issue with timing
because of transactions that occur before
the grant closing, but that are not

PO 00000

Frm 00062

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

reported until the financial
department’s reporting quarter end date.
The cash transactions portion of the SF–
425 is still quarterly, but is populated
more quickly for reference during the
process of reconciling a grant for closeout.
Response: No change has been made.
This particular issue was raised in the
commenter’s discussion of how the US
Department of Health and Human
Services’ Payment Management System
processes the reports and was referred
to the system manager for review.
Comment: A commenter stated that
FFR due date (the 30th following the
end of the quarter) is the same day or
15 days prior to several Federal reports’
due date, which is 45 days. The
commenter stated that this is
problematic because it forces the grantee
to report draws or prior quarter
disbursements rather than current, and
the commenter has not been able to
consistently determine if the report can
be amended during the quarter.
Response: No change has been made.
The report may not be amended during
the quarter. The grantee has 30 days
past the quarter end date to report
expenditures. If information reported is
not current, the grantee is able to report
remaining expenditures on the
following quarter.
D. Reporting Burden
Comment: Several commenters
expressed concern that FFR does not
lessen their reporting burden.
Response: No change has been made.
The FFR is the combination of the SF–
272 and SF–269 forms streamlined into
one form. The consensus has been that
recipients prefer to fill out one form
instead of two. We recognize that a
recipient may be required to report
additional financial data through other
collection instruments, and we are
seeking ways to reduce overall reporting
burden in the future by scrutinizing
agency requests to collect this
additional financial data.
II. Next Steps
Once the revised FFR is approved by
OMB, agencies shall adopt it for use on
their grants and cooperative agreements,
and where appropriate, on other
assistance agreements. Agencies that use
customized (non-standard) forms to
collect financial data from their
recipients should discuss the need to
continue use of the customized forms
with OMB’s Office of Federal Financial
Management prior to seeking clearance
or renewal from OMB’s Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs.
OMB Control No.: 0348–0061.
Title: Federal Financial Report.

E:\FR\FM\23NON1.SGM

23NON1

Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 226 / Wednesday, November 23, 2011 / Notices
Form No.: SF–425, SF–425A.
Type of Review: Renewal of a
currently approved collection.
Respondents: States, Local
Governments, Universities, Non-Profit
Organizations.
Number of Responses: 1,200,000.
Estimated Time per Response: 60
minutes.
Needs and Uses: The SF–425 is used
to collect financial information for
recipients of grants and cooperative
agreements and related transactions
under nonconstruction grant programs.
[FR Doc. 2011–30283 Filed 11–22–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3110–01–P

NATIONAL ARCHIVES AND RECORDS
ADMINISTRATION
Agency Information Collection
Activities: Proposed Collection;
Comment Request
National Archives and Records
Administration (NARA).
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:

NARA is giving public notice
that the agency proposes to request
extension of a currently approved
information collection used to permit
the public and other Federal agencies to
use its official seal(s) and/or logo(s). The
public is invited to comment on the
proposed information collection
pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995.
DATES: Written comments must be
received on or before January 23, 2012
to be assured of consideration.
ADDRESSES: Comments should be sent
to: Paperwork Reduction Act Comments
(ISP), Room 4400, National Archives
and Records Administration, 8601
Adelphi Rd., College Park, MD 20740–
6001; or faxed to (301) 713–7409; or
electronically mailed to
[email protected].
SUMMARY:

sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Requests for additional information or
copies of the proposed information
collections and supporting statements
should be directed to Tamee Fechhelm
at telephone number (301) 837–1694, or
fax number (301) 713–7409.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant
to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(Pub. L. 104–13), NARA invites the
general public and other Federal
agencies to comment on proposed
information collections. The comments
and suggestions should address one or
more of the following points: (a)
Whether the proposed collection
information is necessary for the proper
performance of the functions of NARA;

VerDate Mar<15>2010

17:03 Nov 22, 2011

Jkt 226001

(b) the accuracy of NARA’s estimate of
the burden of the proposed information
collections; (c) ways to enhance the
quality, utility, and clarity of the
information to be collected; and (d)
ways to minimize the burden of the
collection of information on
respondents, including the use of
information technology; and (e) whether
small businesses are affected by this
collection. The comments that are
submitted will be summarized and
included in the NARA request for Office
of Management and Budget (OMB)
approval. All comments will become a
matter of public record. In this notice,
NARA is soliciting comments
concerning the following information
collection:
Title: Use of NARA Official Seals.
OMB number: 3095–0052.
Agency form number: N/A.
Type of review: Regular.
Affected public: Business or other forprofit, Not-for-profit institutions,
Federal government.
Estimated number of respondents: 10.
Estimated time per response: 20
minutes.
Frequency of response: On occasion.
Estimated total annual burden hours:
3 hours.
Abstract: The authority for this
information collection is contained in
36 CFR 1200.8. NARA’s three official
seals are the National Archives and
Records Administration seal; the
National Archives seal; and the
Nationals Archives Trust Fund Board
seal. The official seals are used to
authenticate various copies of official
records in our custody and for other
official NARA business. Occasionally,
when criteria are met, we will permit
the public and other Federal agencies to
use our official seals. A written request
must be submitted to use the official
seals, which we approve or deny using
specific criteria.
Dated: November 14, 2011.
Michael L. Wash,
Executive for Information Services/CIO.
[FR Doc. 2011–30242 Filed 11–22–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7515–01–P

NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION
Notice of Buy American Waiver Under
the American Recovery and
Reinvestment Act of 2009
AGENCY:

National Science Foundation

(NSF).
ACTION:

Notice.

NSF is hereby granting a
limited program-specific exemption of

SUMMARY:

PO 00000

Frm 00063

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

72449

section 1605 of the American Recovery
and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery
Act), Public Law 111–5, 123 Stat. 115,
303 (2009), for incidental items that
comprise, in total, an amount that is no
more than 5 percent of the total cost of
the iron, steel, and manufactured goods
used in and incorporated into a project
funded through the Academic Research
Infrastructure Recovery and
Reinvestment Program.
DATES: November 23, 2011.
ADDRESSES: National Science
Foundation, 4201 Wilson Blvd.,
Arlington, Virginia 22230.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms.
Kathleen Clark Baukin, Division of
Grants and Agreements, (703) 292–8210.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In
accordance with section 1605(c) of the
Recovery Act and section 176.80 of Title
2 of the Code of Federal Regulations, the
National Science Foundation (NSF)
hereby provides notice that on July 20,
2011, the NSF Chief Financial Officer,
in accordance with a delegation order
from the Director of the agency on 27
May 2010, granted a de minimis
exemption of section 1605 of the
Recovery Act (Buy American provision)
with respect to incidental items that
comprise, in total, an amount that is no
more than 5 percent of the total cost of
the iron, steel, and manufactured goods
used in and incorporated into a project
funded through the Academic Research
Infrastructure—Recovery and
Reinvestment Program. The basis for
this exemption is section 1605(b)(1) of
the Recovery Act, in that executing
individual exemptions for many of the
incidental items used in construction
and renovation, such as nuts, bolts,
wires, cables, switches, etc. is not in the
public interest. The total cost of
incidental items requiring use of this
limited exemption is expected to be less
than 5% of the total Recovery Act funds
awarded under the Academic Research
Infrastructure—Recovery and
Reinvestment Program or less than
$10,000,000. Award terms and
conditions still require awardees to Buy
American to the extent practicable for
items within the de minimis part of the
projects.
I. Background
The Recovery Act appropriated $200
million to NSF for projects being funded
by the Foundations Academic Research
Infrastructure—Recovery and
Reinvestment Program (ARI). This
Program funds renovation of
infrastructure for research at academic
institutions and non-profit research
organizations.

E:\FR\FM\23NON1.SGM

23NON1