Information Collection; Request for Public Comments, 76581-76583 [2015-30986]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 236 / Wednesday, December 9, 2015 / Notices
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
But it is undisputed that no participant
in the proceeding in fact proposed rates
or terms that differentiated among
licensors and, accordingly, such a
structure was not understood to be a
subject of litigation.52 Moreover, based
on the parties’ briefs in response to the
referred question and the Copyright
Office’s review of the Web IV docket,
there is no indication that the CRJs went
beyond their general invitation at the
outset of the proceeding to require that
such differentiation be addressed.53 As
a result, no party addressed the question
of ‘‘segmentation by licensor,’’ 54 and
‘‘no participant had the opportunity, or
any reason, to introduce evidence or to
respond to any such proposal, or to
demonstrate the potential
‘‘the potential applicability or inapplicability of
price discrimination within the commercial
webcaster segment of the market as well.’’ Id. at
413–14. But the CRJs’ discussion focused on price
discrimination by sellers—i.e., where sellers charge
different prices for identical goods with the price
differences based on the status of the buyers. Id. at
413. That, of course, is the type of price
discrimination expressly contemplated by the
statute, which requires the CRJs to adopt ‘‘rates and
terms [that] distinguish among the different types
of [services] then in operation.’’ 17 U.S.C. 114(f)(2).
52 See NAB/NRBNMLC Response Br. at 1;
SiriusXM Initial Br. at 6; Independent Labels and
Unions Initial Br. at 11–12; see also Direct
Testimony of Kurt Hanson Submitted on behalf of
AccuRadio, LLC, 16–18 (Oct. 6, 2014); Written
Direct Statement of College Broadcasters, Inc. (Oct.
7, 2014) (attaching proposed regulations); Letter
from David Oxenford on behalf of Educational
Media Foundation to Copyright Royalty Board (Oct.
7, 2014) (joining in the rate proposal submitted by
NRBNMLC); Written Direct Statement of Geo Music
Group, 4–5 (Oct. 10, 2014); Written Testimony of
Michael Papish on behalf of Harvard Radio
Broadcasting Co., Inc. (WHRB) (Oct. 7, 2014);
Written Testimony of Frederick J. Kass on behalf of
Intercollegiate Broadcasting System (Oct. 7, 2014);
Proposed Rates and Terms of iHeartMedia, Inc.
(Oct. 7, 2014); Written Direct Statement of the
National Association of Broadcasters, Vol. 1B (Oct.
7, 2014); Written Direct Case of the Corporation for
Public Broadcasting, on behalf of National Public
Radio, Inc., including National Public Radio, Inc.’s
Member Stations, American Public Media, Public
Radio International, and Public Radio Exchange
Broadcasting, 6–8 (Oct. 7, 2014); Written Direct
Statement of the National Religious Broadcasters
Noncommercial Music License Committee,
Including Educational Media Foundation (Oct. 7,
2014); Proposed Rates and Terms of Pandora Media,
Inc.; Written Direct Statement of Sirius XM Radio
Inc., 1–2 (Oct. 7, 2014); Proposed Rates and Terms
of SoundExchange, Inc. (Oct. 7, 2014).
53 See Notice of Participants, Commencement of
Voluntary Negotiation Period, and Case Scheduling
Order, Docket No. 14–CRB–0001–WR (2016–2020),
1 (Feb. 19, 2014) (asking parties to ‘‘address
expressly issues relating to categories of licensees,’’
but omitting any mention of issues relating to
categories of licensors).
54 SoundExchange Initial Br. at 2. In this regard,
it is notable that SoundExchange finds itself unable
to put forth a unified view on the question of
differentiated rates. Presumably SoundExchange
could not have acted as the representative of
virtually all of the rightsholders in the proceeding
if the question of a differentiated rate structure was
actually in contention. See Independent Labels and
Unions Initial Br. at 14.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:21 Dec 08, 2015
Jkt 238001
administrative difficulties or
consequences of such rates and
terms.’’ 55
In this regard, the Register further
observes that the CRJs are statutorily
required to make determinations that
are ‘‘supported by the written record’’ 56
and based ‘‘on economic, competitive
and programming information presented
by the parties.’’ 57 Significantly, the U.S.
Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit has
twice vacated CRJ determinations that
relied on theories ‘‘first presented in the
Judges’ determination and not advanced
by any participant.’’58 Here—consistent
with their rate proposals—the
participants’ respective proposed
findings of fact and conclusions of law
submitted at the conclusion of the
proceeding uniformly fail to advocate
for statutory rates and terms that
distinguish among licensors.59
Moreover, in briefing the question now
before the Register, no party has
identified any basis upon which the
CRJs could reasonably rely to adopt a
differentiated rate structure.60 Thus,
even assuming for the sake of argument
that they possess the legal authority to
establish rates that differentiate by
licensor,61 it seems that under the
current circumstances, the CRJs could
not meet their basic obligation ‘‘to make
55 See
NAB/NRBNMLC Response Br. at 1.
U.S.C. 803(c)(3).
57 Id. § 114(f)(2)(B).
58 Settling Devotional Claimants v. Copyright
Royalty Bd., 797 F.3d 1106, 1121 (D.C. Cir. 2015)
(quoting Intercollegiate Broad. Sys. v. Copyright
Royalty Bd., 574 F.3d 748, 767 (D.C. Cir. 2009)
(internal quotation marks omitted)).
59 See Proposed Findings and Conclusions of
Intercollegiate Broadcasting Systems, 13 (July 19,
2015); Proposed Findings of Fact of iHeartMedia,
Inc., 207 (June 24, 2015); National Association of
Broadcasters’ Proposed Findings of Fact and
Conclusions of Law (July 19, 2015) (attaching
NAB’s Proposed Rates and Terms); The National
Religious Broadcasters Noncommercial Music
License Committee’s Corrected Proposed Findings
of Fact and Conclusions of Law (June 24, 2015)
(attaching NRBNMLC’s Proposed Noncommercial
Webcaster Rates and Terms); Pandora Media, Inc.’s
Proposed Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law,
1–2 (June 19, 2015); Sirius XM Radio Inc.’s
Proposed Findings of Fact, 1 (June 19, 2015);
Proposed Findings of Fact of SoundExchange, Inc.,
94–96 (June 19, 2015); Proposed Findings and
Conclusions on behalf of Harvard Radio
Broadcasting Co., Inc. (WHRB) (June 19, 2015).
60 Although the Major Labels suggest that the CRJs
could ‘‘credit evidence supporting a different rate
structure than they have adopted in the past,’’ they
do not point to any actual argument or evidence in
the record that would support such an approach.
See Majors Labels Supp. Br. at 14. In any event, as
noted, such an approach would appear to run afoul
of controlling precedent. See Settling Devotional
Claimants, 797 F.3d at 1121 (reversing CRJ
determination where theory was ‘‘first presented in
the Judges’ determination and not advanced by any
participant’’).
61 In considering these procedural issues, the
Register does not mean to suggest any conclusion
concerning the CRJs’ legal authority to adopt rates
and terms that distinguish among licensors.
56 17
PO 00000
Frm 00139
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
76581
[a] reasoned decision[] supported by the
written record before them.’’ 62
In sum, given the posture of the case,
the question referred by the CRJs
appears to be only a theoretical one in
that the Register is unable to discern
how a written decision at this juncture
could substantively impact the conduct
or outcome of this proceeding.63 Indeed,
the question itself is presented in
hypothetical terms: it asks the Register
to ‘‘assum[e] a factual basis in the
evidentiary record’’ for a distinction
among licensors. As significant as the
question of a differentiated rate
structure for licensors might be under
different circumstances, the Register
does not believe that the statute
contemplates the issuance of a written
opinion when the inquiry is wholly
theoretical in nature.
The language of the Act makes clear
that the referral procedure under section
802(f)(1)(B) is limited to novel material
questions of substantive law that are
actually ‘‘presented.’’ As the Register
has concluded that the question set
forth in the CRJs’ September 11, 2015
order is not actually presented in this
proceeding, she leaves the answer for
another day.
November 24, 2015
Maria A. Pallante
Register of Copyrights and Director,
United States Copyright Office
[FR Doc. 2015–30910 Filed 12–8–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 1410–30–P
OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND
BUDGET
Information Collection; Request for
Public Comments
Executive Office of the
President, Office of Management and
Budget.
ACTION: Notice and request for
comments.
AGENCY:
In compliance with the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) invites
the general public and Federal agencies
to comment on a revision of an
approved information collection, Form
SF–SAC, that is used to report audit
results, audit findings, and questioned
costs as required by the Single Audit
Act Amendments of 1996 (31 U.S.C.
7501 et seq.) and 2 CFR part 200,
‘‘Uniform Administrative Requirements,
Cost Principles, and Audit
SUMMARY:
62 Settling Devotional Claimants, 797 F.3d at
1121.
63 Referral Order at 2.
E:\FR\FM\09DEN1.SGM
09DEN1
76582
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 236 / Wednesday, December 9, 2015 / Notices
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Requirements for Federal Awards.’’ A
draft of the proposed Form SF–SAC can
be reviewed at the OMB Grants
Management Internet home page at
https://www.whitehouse.gov/OMB/
grants/grants_docs.html. The Form SF–
SAC instructions contain a detailed
listing of the proposed changes to the
Form SF–SAC.
DATES: Submit comments on or before
February 8, 2016. Late comments will be
considered to the extent practicable.
ADDRESSES: 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
mailed comments will be received
before the comment closing date.
Electronic mail comments may be
submitted to: Gilbert Tran at hai_m._
tran@omb.eop.gov. Please include
‘‘2016 Form SF–SAC Comments’’ in the
subject line and the full body of your
comments in the text of the electronic
message, not as an attachment. Please
include your name, title, organization,
postal address, telephone number and
email address in the text of the message.
Comments may also be submitted via
facsimile to 202–395–3952 (with ‘‘2016
Form SF–SAC Comments’’ as title page).
Comments may be mailed to Gilbert
Tran, Office of Federal Financial
Management, Office of Management and
Budget, Room 6025, New Executive
Office Building, Washington, DC 20503.
In general, responses will be
summarized and included in the request
for OMB approval. All comments will
also be a matter of public record.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Gilbert Tran, Office of Federal Financial
Management, Office of Management and
Budget, (202) 395–3052. The proposed
revisions to the Information Collection
Form, Form SF–SAC can be obtained by
contacting the Office of Federal
Financial Management as indicated
above or by download from the OMB
Grants Management home page on at
https://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/
grants_forms
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Abstract
This is a revision of a currently
approved form with changes of Form
SF–SAC, OMB Control Number 0348–
0057.
Non-Federal entities (states, local
governments, Indian tribes, institutions
of higher education, and nonprofit
organizations) that expend a total
amount of Federal awards equal to or in
excess of $750,000 in any fiscal year are
required by the Single Audit Act
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:21 Dec 08, 2015
Jkt 238001
Amendments of 1996 (31 U.S.C. 7501,
et. seq.) (Act) and 2 CFR part 200,
‘‘Uniform Administrative Requirements,
Cost Principles, and Audit
Requirements for Federal Awards,’’
(Uniform Guidance) to have audits of
their Federal awards and file the
resulting reporting packages and data
collection forms (Single Audit reports)
with the Federal Audit Clearinghouse
(FAC). The data collection form (Form
SF–SAC) is Appendix X to 2 CFR part
200. The Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) has designated the U.S.
Bureau of the Census as the FAC, which
serves as the government-wide
repository of record for Single Audit
reports. The Uniform Guidance imposes
new reporting requirements effective for
non-Federal entity fiscal years
beginning on or after December 26,
2014. The first year under the new
requirements is the fiscal year ending on
or after December 26, 2015.
The Single Audit process is the
primary method Federal agencies and
pass-through entities use to provide
oversight for Federal awards and reduce
risk of non-compliance and improper
payments. This includes following up
on audit findings and questioned costs.
The proposed changes make revisions to
the Form SF–SAC that reflect Uniform
Guidance requirements; revise some
existing data elements; and add data
elements that would make the reports
easier for Federal agencies, pass-through
entities, and the public to use. The
changes would also delete data elements
that are no longer needed.
In particular, the Uniform Guidance
requires the FAC to make Single Audit
reports publically available on a Web
site. This represents a change as the
FAC previously only made publically
available the Form SF–SAC data. The
Uniform Guidance also requires nonFederal entities to sign a statement that
the reporting package does not include
protected personally identifiable
information and that the FAC is
authorized to make the reporting
package and the data collection form
publicly available on a Web site. An
exception is provided in 2 CFR
200.512(b)(2) for Indian tribes and tribal
organizations to opt not to authorize the
public display of their reporting
packages on the FAC Web site. The
revised form reflects the Uniform
Guidance’s requirements.
For fiscal year starting on or after
December 26, 2014, the FAC also plans
to allow Non-Federal entities who did
not meet the threshold requiring
submission of a Single Audit report to
voluntarily notify the FAC that they did
not meet the reporting threshold. This
information helps the Federal agencies
PO 00000
Frm 00140
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
in the review of applicants that fall
below the reporting requirements. The
FAC plans to put this information on
their Web site.
In addition, we are planning a pilot
project to combine the reporting of this
form and the Schedule of Expenditures
of Federal Awards into a singular form
to streamline the Non-Federal entities
reporting process. This proposal will be
included under a separate notice.
II. Method of Collection
The information will be collected
electronically through FAC’s Web based
Internet Data Entry System available at
https://harvester.census.gov/facweb.
III. Data
OMB Control Number: 0348–0057.
Title: Data Collection Form.
Form Number(s): SF–SAC.
Type of Review: Revision of a
currently approved collection.
Respondents: States, local
governments, non-profit organizations
(Non-Federal entities) and their
auditors.
Estimated Number of Respondents:
80,000 (40,000 from auditees and 40,000
from auditors).
Estimated Time per Response: 65
hours for each of the 400 large
respondents and 20 hours for each of
the 79,600 small respondents.
Estimated Total Annual Burden
Hours: 1,618,000.
Estimated Number of Responses per
Respondent: 1.
Frequency of Response: Annually.
Legal Authority: Title 31 U.S.C. Section
7501 et. seq. and 2 CFR Part 200.
Needs and Uses: Reports from
auditors to auditees and reports from
auditees to the Federal government are
used by non-Federal entities, passthrough entities and Federal agencies to
ensure that Federal awards are
expended in accordance with applicable
laws and regulations. The FAC
(designated by the U.S. Bureau of the
Census) uses the information on the
Form SF–SAC to ensure proper
distribution of audit reports to Federal
agencies and identify non-Federal
entities who have not filed the required
reports. The FAC also uses the
information on the Form SF–SAC to
create a government-wide database,
which contains information on audit
results. This database is publicly
accessible on the Internet at https://
harvester.census.gov/fac/. It is used by
Federal agencies, pass-through entities,
non-Federal entities, auditors, the
Government Accountability Office,
OMB and the general public for
management of and information about
Federal awards and the results of audits.
E:\FR\FM\09DEN1.SGM
09DEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 236 / Wednesday, December 9, 2015 / Notices
IV. Request for Comments
Comments are invited on: (a) Whether
the proposed collection of information
is necessary for the proper performance
of the functions of the agency, including
whether the information shall have
practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the
agency’s estimate of the burden
(including hours and cost) of the
proposed collection of information; (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 through the
use of automated collection techniques
or other forms of information
technology.
In general, comments submitted in
response to this notice will be
summarized and/or included in the
request for OMB approval of this
information collection; they also will
become a matter of public record.
Mark Reger,
Deputy Controller.
[FR Doc. 2015–30986 Filed 12–8–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
NATIONAL CREDIT UNION
ADMINISTRATION
Agency Information Collection
Activities: Submission for Office of
Management and Budget Review;
Comment Request; for Reinstatement
With Change of a Previously Approved
Collection; Organization and Operation
of Federal Credit Unions—Loan
Participation
National Credit Union
Administration (NCUA).
ACTION: Request for comment.
AGENCY:
National Credit Union
Administration is announcing that a
proposed collection of information has
been submitted to the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) for
review and clearance under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(PRA). This is related to NCUA’s
regulation 701.22 that outlines
requirements for loan participation
programs. The rule requires various
information collections, which NCUA
uses to ensure credit unions have
implemented a safe and sound loan
participation program.
DATES: Comments will be accepted until
January 8, 2016.
ADDRESSES: Interested persons are
invited to submit written comments on
the information collection to:
NCUA Contact: Tracy Crews, National
Credit Union Administration, 1775
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:21 Dec 08, 2015
Jkt 238001
Duke Street, Alexandria, Virginia
22314–3428, Fax No. 703–837–2861,
Email: OCIOPRA@ncua.gov
OMB Reviewer: Office of Management
and Budget, ATTN: Desk Officer for
the National Credit Union
Administration, Office of Information
and Regulatory Affairs, Washington,
DC 20503
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Requests for additional information
should be directed to:
NCUA Contact: Tracy Crews, National
Credit Union Administration, 1775
Duke Street, Alexandria, Virginia
22314–3428, Fax No. 703–837–2861,
Email: OCIOPRA@ncua.gov
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Abstract and Request for Comments
NCUA is requesting comments on
3133–0141; Organization and Operation
of Federal Credit Unions—Loan
Participation, 12 CFR part 701.22.
NCUA’s regulation, 12 CFR (§ 701.22),
outlines loan participation
requirements. Loan participations pose
inherent risk to the NCUSIF due to the
interconnectedness between
participants. Section 741.225 extends
the requirements of Section 701.22 of
NCUA’s regulations to Federally Insured
State Chartered Credit Unions (FISCUs),
noting there are strong indications of
potential risk to the NCUSIF from
FISCUs’ loan participation activity.
Section 701.22 includes three collection
requirements (1) maintenance of a
written policy, (2) requirements on the
purchasing credit union to have a
written loan participation agreement, (3)
options to apply for waivers from
concentration limits.
In the Federal Register of August 28,
2015, (80 FR 52344), NCUA published
a 60-day notice requesting public
comment on the proposed collection of
information. NCUA received no
comments.
An agency may not conduct or
sponsor, and a person is not required to
respond to, a collection of information
unless it displays a currently valid OMB
control number.
NCUA requests that you send your
comments on this collection to the
location listed in the addresses section.
Your comments should address: (a) The
necessity of the information collection
for the proper performance of NCUA,
including whether the information will
have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of
our estimate of the burden (hours and
cost) of the collection of information,
including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used; (c)
ways we could enhance the quality,
utility, and clarity of the information to
PO 00000
Frm 00141
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
76583
be collected; and (d) ways we could
minimize the burden of the collection of
the information on the respondents such
as through the use of automated
collection techniques or other forms of
information technology. It is NCUA’s
policy to make all comments available
to the public for review.
II. Data
Title: Organization and Operation of
Federal Credit Unions—Loan
Participation, 12 CFR part 701.22.
OMB Number: 3133–0141.
Form Number: None.
Type of Review: Reinstatement with
change.
Description: Section 701.22 of
NCUA’s regulations, 12 CFR 701.22,
outlines the requirements for the
administration of a loan participation
program. Section 741 of NCUA’s
regulations, 12 CFR 741.225, extends 12
CFR 701.22 to Federally Insured State
Chartered Credit Unions. Section 701.22
includes various collections which
NCUA uses to ensure credit unions have
implemented a safe and sound program.
Respondents: Federally Insured Credit
Unions.
Estimated No. of Respondents/
Recordkeepers: 1,515 for loan
participation policy revision and loan
agreement retention, 10 for waiver
submission and 1 for appeal request.
Estimated Burden Hours per
Response: 3 hours per policy revision, 4
hours per waiver submission and 4
hours per appeal.
Frequency of Response: One time and
optionally with each waiver submission.
Estimated Total Annual Burden
Hours: 4,589 hours total.
Estimated Total Annual Cost:
$146,343.21.
By the National Credit Union
Administration Board on November 18, 2015.
Gerard Poliquin,
Secretary of the Board.
[FR Doc. 2015–30934 Filed 12–8–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7535–01–P
NATIONAL CREDIT UNION
ADMINISTRATION
Agency Information Collection
Activities: Submission to OMB for
Reinstatement With Change, Bank
Conversions and Mergers, 12 CFR Part
708a; Comment Request
National Credit Union
Administration (NCUA).
ACTION: Request for comments.
AGENCY:
NCUA intends to submit the
following information collection to the
Office of Management and Budget
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\09DEN1.SGM
09DEN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 236 (Wednesday, December 9, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 76581-76583]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-30986]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET
Information Collection; Request for Public Comments
AGENCY: Executive Office of the President, Office of Management and
Budget.
ACTION: Notice and request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) invites
the general public and Federal agencies to comment on a revision of an
approved information collection, Form SF-SAC, that is used to report
audit results, audit findings, and questioned costs as required by the
Single Audit Act Amendments of 1996 (31 U.S.C. 7501 et seq.) and 2 CFR
part 200, ``Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and
Audit
[[Page 76582]]
Requirements for Federal Awards.'' A draft of the proposed Form SF-SAC
can be reviewed at the OMB Grants Management Internet home page at
https://www.whitehouse.gov/OMB/grants/grants_docs.html. The Form SF-SAC
instructions contain a detailed listing of the proposed changes to the
Form SF-SAC.
DATES: Submit comments on or before February 8, 2016. Late comments
will be considered to the extent practicable.
ADDRESSES: 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 mailed comments will be received before the comment
closing date.
Electronic mail comments may be submitted to: Gilbert Tran at
hai_m._tran@omb.eop.gov. Please include ``2016 Form SF-SAC Comments''
in the subject line and the full body of your comments in the text of
the electronic message, not as an attachment. Please include your name,
title, organization, postal address, telephone number and email address
in the text of the message. Comments may also be submitted via
facsimile to 202-395-3952 (with ``2016 Form SF-SAC Comments'' as title
page).
Comments may be mailed to Gilbert Tran, Office of Federal Financial
Management, Office of Management and Budget, Room 6025, New Executive
Office Building, Washington, DC 20503.
In general, responses will be summarized and included in the
request for OMB approval. All comments will also be a matter of public
record.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gilbert Tran, Office of Federal
Financial Management, Office of Management and Budget, (202) 395-3052.
The proposed revisions to the Information Collection Form, Form SF-SAC
can be obtained by contacting the Office of Federal Financial
Management as indicated above or by download from the OMB Grants
Management home page on at https://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/grants_forms
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Abstract
This is a revision of a currently approved form with changes of
Form SF-SAC, OMB Control Number 0348-0057.
Non-Federal entities (states, local governments, Indian tribes,
institutions of higher education, and nonprofit organizations) that
expend a total amount of Federal awards equal to or in excess of
$750,000 in any fiscal year are required by the Single Audit Act
Amendments of 1996 (31 U.S.C. 7501, et. seq.) (Act) and 2 CFR part 200,
``Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit
Requirements for Federal Awards,'' (Uniform Guidance) to have audits of
their Federal awards and file the resulting reporting packages and data
collection forms (Single Audit reports) with the Federal Audit
Clearinghouse (FAC). The data collection form (Form SF-SAC) is Appendix
X to 2 CFR part 200. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has
designated the U.S. Bureau of the Census as the FAC, which serves as
the government-wide repository of record for Single Audit reports. The
Uniform Guidance imposes new reporting requirements effective for non-
Federal entity fiscal years beginning on or after December 26, 2014.
The first year under the new requirements is the fiscal year ending on
or after December 26, 2015.
The Single Audit process is the primary method Federal agencies and
pass-through entities use to provide oversight for Federal awards and
reduce risk of non-compliance and improper payments. This includes
following up on audit findings and questioned costs. The proposed
changes make revisions to the Form SF-SAC that reflect Uniform Guidance
requirements; revise some existing data elements; and add data elements
that would make the reports easier for Federal agencies, pass-through
entities, and the public to use. The changes would also delete data
elements that are no longer needed.
In particular, the Uniform Guidance requires the FAC to make Single
Audit reports publically available on a Web site. This represents a
change as the FAC previously only made publically available the Form
SF-SAC data. The Uniform Guidance also requires non-Federal entities to
sign a statement that the reporting package does not include protected
personally identifiable information and that the FAC is authorized to
make the reporting package and the data collection form publicly
available on a Web site. An exception is provided in 2 CFR
200.512(b)(2) for Indian tribes and tribal organizations to opt not to
authorize the public display of their reporting packages on the FAC Web
site. The revised form reflects the Uniform Guidance's requirements.
For fiscal year starting on or after December 26, 2014, the FAC
also plans to allow Non-Federal entities who did not meet the threshold
requiring submission of a Single Audit report to voluntarily notify the
FAC that they did not meet the reporting threshold. This information
helps the Federal agencies in the review of applicants that fall below
the reporting requirements. The FAC plans to put this information on
their Web site.
In addition, we are planning a pilot project to combine the
reporting of this form and the Schedule of Expenditures of Federal
Awards into a singular form to streamline the Non-Federal entities
reporting process. This proposal will be included under a separate
notice.
II. Method of Collection
The information will be collected electronically through FAC's Web
based Internet Data Entry System available at https://harvester.census.gov/facweb.
III. Data
OMB Control Number: 0348-0057.
Title: Data Collection Form.
Form Number(s): SF-SAC.
Type of Review: Revision of a currently approved collection.
Respondents: States, local governments, non-profit organizations
(Non-Federal entities) and their auditors.
Estimated Number of Respondents: 80,000 (40,000 from auditees and
40,000 from auditors).
Estimated Time per Response: 65 hours for each of the 400 large
respondents and 20 hours for each of the 79,600 small respondents.
Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 1,618,000.
Estimated Number of Responses per Respondent: 1.
Frequency of Response: Annually.
Legal Authority: Title 31 U.S.C. Section 7501 et. seq. and 2 CFR
Part 200.
Needs and Uses: Reports from auditors to auditees and reports from
auditees to the Federal government are used by non-Federal entities,
pass-through entities and Federal agencies to ensure that Federal
awards are expended in accordance with applicable laws and regulations.
The FAC (designated by the U.S. Bureau of the Census) uses the
information on the Form SF-SAC to ensure proper distribution of audit
reports to Federal agencies and identify non-Federal entities who have
not filed the required reports. The FAC also uses the information on
the Form SF-SAC to create a government-wide database, which contains
information on audit results. This database is publicly accessible on
the Internet at https://harvester.census.gov/fac/. It is used by Federal
agencies, pass-through entities, non-Federal entities, auditors, the
Government Accountability Office, OMB and the general public for
management of and information about Federal awards and the results of
audits.
[[Page 76583]]
IV. Request for Comments
Comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed collection of
information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of
the agency, including whether the information shall have practical
utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden
(including hours and cost) of the proposed collection of information;
(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 through the use of
automated collection techniques or other forms of information
technology.
In general, comments submitted in response to this notice will be
summarized and/or included in the request for OMB approval of this
information collection; they also will become a matter of public
record.
Mark Reger,
Deputy Controller.
[FR Doc. 2015-30986 Filed 12-8-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
