Emergency Clearance; Public Information Collection Requirements Submitted to the Office of Management and Budget; Notice, 46666-46668 [07-4087]
Download as PDF
46666
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 161 / Tuesday, August 21, 2007 / Notices
Title: National Longitudinal Survey of
Youth 1979.
OMB Control Number: 1220–0109.
Estimated Number of Annual
Respondents: 11,265.
Estimated Total Annual Burden
Hours: 11,044.
Affected Public: Individuals or
households.
Description: The information obtained
in this survey will be used by the
Department of Labor, other government
agencies, academic researchers, the
news media, and the general public to
understand the employment
experiences and life-cycle transitions of
men and women born in the years 1957
to 1964 and living in the United States
when the survey began in 1979.
Darrin A. King,
Acting Departmental Clearance Officer.
[FR Doc. E7–16405 Filed 8–20–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510–24–P
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Office of the Secretary
Submission for OMB Review:
Comment Request
rmajette on PROD1PC64 with NOTICES
August 15, 2007.
The Department of Labor has
submitted the following public
information collection request (ICR) to
the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) for review and approval in
accordance with the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–13,
44 U.S.C. chapter 35). Copies of this
ICRs, with applicable supporting
documentation; including among other
things a description of the likely
respondents, proposed frequency of
response, and estimated total burden
may be obtained from the RegInfo.gov
Web site at https://www.reginfo.gov/
public/do/PRAMain or by contacting
Darrin King on 202–693–4129 (this is
not a toll-free number)/e-mail:
king.darrin@dol.gov.
Comments should be sent to Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs,
Attn: John Kraemer, OMB Desk Officer
for the Occupational Safety and Health
Administration (OSHA), Office of
Management and Budget, 725 17th
Street, NW., Room 10235, Washington,
DC 20503, Telephone: 202–395–4816/
Fax: 202–395–6974 (these are not a tollfree numbers), E-mail:
OIRA_submission@omb.eop.gov within
30 days from the date of this publication
in the Federal Register. In order to
ensure the appropriate consideration,
comments should reference the OMB
Control Number (see below).
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:08 Aug 20, 2007
Jkt 211001
The OMB is particularly interested in
comments which:
• Evaluate whether the proposed
collection of information is necessary
for the proper performance of the
functions of the agency, including
whether the information will have
practical utility;
• Evaluate the accuracy of the
agency’s estimate of the burden of the
proposed collection of information,
including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used;
• Enhance the quality, utility, and
clarity of the information to be
collected; and
• Minimize the burden of the
collection of information on those who
are to respond, including through the
use of appropriate automated,
electronic, mechanical, or other
technological collection techniques or
other forms of information technology,
e.g., permitting electronic submission of
responses.
Agency: Occupational Safety and
Health Administration.
Type of Review: Extension without
change of currently approved collection.
Title: Student Data Form.
OMB Control Number: 1218–0172.
Estimated Number of Respondents:
2,000.
Estimated Total Burden Hours: 167.
Affected Public: Individuals or
households.
Description: The form is used to
collect student group and emergency
contact information from Training
Institute students. Student group data is
used for reports, and tuition receipts.
Darrin A. King,
Acting Departmental Clearance Officer.
[FR Doc. E7–16406 Filed 8–20–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510–26–P
NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION
Emergency Clearance; Public
Information Collection Requirements
Submitted to the Office of Management
and Budget; Notice
National Science Foundation.
Emergency Clearance: Public
Information Collection Requirements
Submitted to the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB).
AGENCY:
ACTION:
SUMMARY: The National Science
Foundation (NSF) is announcing plans
to request approval of this collection. In
accordance with the requirement of
Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–13),
we are providing an opportunity for
public comment on this action. After
PO 00000
Frm 00068
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
obtaining and considering public
comment, NSF will prepare the
submission requesting that OMB
approve clearance of this collection for
no longer than 3 years.
DATES: Interested persons are invited to
send comments regarding the burden or
any other aspect of these collections of
information requirements by September
20, 2007.
ADDRESSES: Written comments
regarding the information collection and
requests for copies of the proposed
information collection request should be
addressed to Suzanne Plimpton, Reports
Clearance Officer, National Science
Foundation, 4201 Wilson Blvd., Rm.
295, Arlington, VA 22230, or by e-mail
to splimpto@nsf.gov, and Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs,
Office of Management and Budget,
Room 10235, New Executive Office
Building, Washington, DC 20503. Attn:
John Kraemer, NSF Desk Officer.
Comments: Written 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 of the
proposed collection of information; (c)
ways to enhance the quality, utility, and
clarity of the information on
respondents, including through the use
of automated collection techniques or
other forms of information technology;
or (d) ways to minimize the burden of
the collection of information on those
who are to respond, including through
the use of appropriate automated,
electronic, mechanical, or other
technological collection techniques or
other forms of information technology.
NSF has determined that it cannot
reasonably comply with the normal
clearance procedures under 5 CFR 1320
because normal clearance procedures
are reasonably likely to prevent or
disrupt the collection of information.
NSF is requesting emergency review
from OMB of this information collection
to enable the Emergency review and
approval of this ICR will assure
continuation of the PFF evaluation that
is also funded by the Atlantic
Philanthropies. OMB approval has been
requested for September 24, 2007. If
granted, the emergency approval is only
valid for 90 days.
During this same period, a regular
review of this information collection
will be undertaken. During the regular
review period, the NSF requests written
comments and suggestions from the
public and affected agencies concerning
this information collection. Comments
E:\FR\FM\21AUN1.SGM
21AUN1
rmajette on PROD1PC64 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 161 / Tuesday, August 21, 2007 / Notices
are encouraged and will be accepted
until October 22, 2007 to be assured of
consideration. Comments received after
that date will be considered to the
extent practicable.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Suzanne H. Plimpton, Reports Clearance
Officer, National Science Foundation,
4201 Wilson Boulevard, Suite 295,
Arlington, Virginia 22230; telephone
(703) 292–7556; or send e-mail to
splimpto@nsf.gov. Individuals who use
a telecommunications device for the
deaf (TDD) may call the Federal
Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1–
800–877–8339 between 8 a.m. and 8
p.m., Eastern time, Monday through
Friday.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
OMB Approval Number: OMB 3145–
0058.
Expiration Date: January 31, 2010.
Overview of this information
collection: The Federal Funding
Accountability and Transparency Act
(FFATA) of 2006 (Pub. L. 109–282)
requires agencies to make award and
sub-award information available to be
searched by the public in a single
searchable Web site developed by the
Office of Management and Budget
(OMB). The impetus for this Act was the
lack of a single source of accurate,
complete and timely information on
federal government spending.1 The
requirements and residual technical and
policy impacts of FFATA were
unanticipated at the time the prior
information clearance package was
cleared by OMB. In order to meet the
legislative mandate and Congressional
intent of FFATA, NSF needs a reliable
source of data and the ability to validate
the accuracy of that data. The change
that is being proposed by NSF,
therefore, is essential to ensuring
compliance with FFATA requirements.
If NSF cannot collect and validate the
accuracy of award data, NSF will miss
the deadline imposed by Congress to
make award data publicly available by
January 1, 2008.
NSF is committed to providing
citizens accurate, complete, and timely
information regarding the expenditure
of taxpayer funds. The policy change for
which NSF is seeking approval will
enable the Foundation to accomplish
this goal. If NSF must follow the normal
OIRA clearance review process, the
result will be incomplete and inaccurate
award data on OMB’s single searchable
Web site.
1 Source: Chairman’s Statement, Senator Tom
Coburn, N.D. (R–OK), What You Don’t Know Can
Hurt You: S. 2590, the ‘‘Federal Funding
Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006’’ (July
18, 2006).
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:08 Aug 20, 2007
Jkt 211001
Consult With Other Agencies & the
Public
The policy change identified is
consistent with a previously established
Government-wide standard imposed by
Grants.gov as part of its registration
process. (Reference OMB Clearance
Number: 4040–0001, Expiration Date:
04/30/2008). Grants.gov currently has
103,000 Authorized Organizational
Representatives registered in the system.
As reiterated below, 93.1% of
organizations that submitted proposals
to NSF in FY06 are already registered in
CCR. Implementing this policy change,
will make NSF’s registration
requirement consistent with that
currently in use by all other Federal
granting agencies.
NSF also plans to announce this
proposed change at an upcoming
Federal Demonstration Partnership
meeting in September to gauge
community response to this policy
change. Finally, NSF plans to
communicate with its small business
community to obtain feedback as well as
post a notice on the NSF Web site
regarding the Foundation’s plans in this
area. The estimated impact of this
change is described more fully below.
Background
FFATA specifies requisite
information (14 data elements) that
must be included for each award, one of
which is the unique identifier for the
entity. OMB Memorandum, ‘‘Reporting
of Data Elements Required by the
Federal Funding Accountability and
Transparency Act,’’ (dated March 30,
2007) defines the unique identifier for
the entity as the Data Universal
Numbering System (DUNS) number.
In accordance with the OMB policy
‘‘Use of a Universal Identifier by Grant
Applicants,’’ (June 27, 2003) [68 FR
38402], NSF collects DUNS numbers for
all awardees. While NSF collects this
information, NSF currently does not
have a mechanism to validate the
accuracy of the DUNS number provided
by the organization during the FastLane
proposal submission process.
In order to meet the legislative
mandate and Congressional intent of
FFATA, NSF needs a reliable source of
data to validate the accuracy of the
DUNS number provided by the
organization. NSF has identified the
Central Contractor Registration (CCR)
database as the most complete and
accurate data source. The CCR system is
managed under the Integrated
Acquisition Environment (IAE)
Presidential Management Agenda
(PMA) E-Gov initiative. IAE is
sponsored by OMB and managed by the
PO 00000
Frm 00069
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
46667
General Services Administration. CCR is
the primary registrant database for the
U.S. Government. CCR collects,
validates, stores, and disseminates data
in support of agency acquisition
missions, including Federal agency
contract and assistance awards.
All contractors that do business with
the Federal government and all grantees
that use Grants.gov are required to
register in CCR prior to conducting any
transactions (e.g. submitting a grant
application). Any organization that
registers with the CCR must have a valid
DUNS number. To ensure each
organization receiving an NSF award
and/or subaward has a valid DUNS
number, NSF will require potential
proposers to register in the CCR prior to
proposal submission. This approach
aligns with the government-wide efforts
described above. The proposed effective
date for this policy change is October 1,
2007. Requiring CCR registration
effective October 1, 2007 will provide
NSF with sufficient time to change NSF
proposal preparation requirements to
mandate this requirement, as well as
validate DUNS numbers in preparation
for meeting the FFATA January 1, 2008
milestone to make award data publicly
available.
Impact of Policy Change
NSF has analyzed the impact of this
proposed policy change and the
additional burden associated with it on
the Foundation’s proposer community.
The results of this assessment are as
follows:
• CCR states it takes approximately
one hour for an organization to
complete the online registration,
depending upon the size and
complexity of the organization. The one
hour to complete registration includes
the time to read the instructions and to
complete the form online. CCR does
have handbook users may refer during
the registration process. CCR
recommends factoring in an additional
15 minutes in the instance the user
references the handbook.
• NSF retrieved a list of organizations
that submitted proposals to the
Foundation in FY 2006 and used a
sample (5% error) to determine the
percentage of these organizations
registered in the CCR.
• A total of 2,677 organizations
submitted proposals to NSF in FY 2006.
• Out of the 2,677 organizations that
submitted proposals to NSF in FY06, a
random sample of 247 organizations
was used to verify CCR registration.
• Of the 247 sample organizations,
230 were registered in CCR (93.1%).
E:\FR\FM\21AUN1.SGM
21AUN1
46668
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 161 / Tuesday, August 21, 2007 / Notices
• Based on the sample analysis of
FY06 data (the 247 sample
organizations), it can be concluded that:
• 93.1% of organizations that
submitted proposals to NSF in FY06 are
already registered in CCR.
• 6.9% of organizations that
submitted proposals to NSF in FY06 are
not registered in CCR.
• Of the 2,677 organizations that
submitted proposals to NSF in FY06,
184 organizations (6.9%) would be
impacted by this policy change.
The amount of additional burden
associated with this policy change is
230 hours (184 organizations * 1.25
hour to register = 230 hours). On
average, it takes CCR three days to
process a registration submission.
Respondents: Not-for-profit
institutions, for-profit institutions,
individuals.
Number of Respondents: 184.
Burden on the Public: 230 additional
hours.
Dated: August 15, 2007.
Suzanne H. Plimpton,
Reports Clearance Officer, National Science
Foundation.
[FR Doc. 07–4087 Filed 8–20–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7555–01–M
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
[Docket Nos. 50–346, 50–440, 50–334, and
50–412; License Nos. NPF–3, NPF–58, DPR–
66 and NPF–73; EA 07–199]
In the Matter of FirstEnergy Nuclear
Operating Company; Davis-Besse
Nuclear Power Station, Unit 1; Beaver
Valley Power Station, Units 1 and 2;
Confirmatory Order (Effective
Immediately)
rmajette on PROD1PC64 with NOTICES
I
FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating
Company (FENOC or licensee) is the
holder of four NRC Facility Operating
Licenses issued by the U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission (NRC or
Commission) pursuant to 10 CFR Part
50, which authorizes the operation of
the specifically-named facilities in
accordance with the conditions
specified in each license. License No.
NPF–3 was issued on April 22, 1977, to
operate the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power
Station, Unit No. 1. License No. NPF–
58 was issued on November 13, 1986, to
operate the Perry Nuclear Power Plant,
Unit No. 1. License Nos. DPR–66 and
NPF–73 to operate the Beaver Valley
Power Station, Units 1 and 2, were
issued on July 2, 1976, and August 14,
1987, respectively. Davis-Besse is
located near Toledo, Ohio; Perry is
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:08 Aug 20, 2007
Jkt 211001
located near Painesville, Ohio; and
Beaver Valley is located near
McCandless, Pennsylvania.
II
The events leading up to this
Confirmatory Order date back several
years. In 2005, the NRC took
enforcement action against FENOC,
imposing a $5,450,000 civil penalty for
regulatory violations associated with the
2002 reactor pressure vessel head
degradation event at the Davis-Besse
Plant. In response to that event, FENOC
performed root cause evaluations.
Among other things, FENOC’s root
cause reports determined that the
reactor pressure vessel head degradation
was the result of ongoing and
undetected Control Rod Drive
Mechanism nozzle leakage that had
lasted more than four years.
In February 2007, the licensee
informed the NRC that Davis-Besse was
initiating a condition report based on
information contained in a letter
received from Nuclear Electric
Insurance Limited (NEIL). The NEIL
letter referenced a new analysis that
FENOC had commissioned of the DavisBesse reactor pressure vessel head
degradation event. The new analysis,
submitted to NEIL as expert testimony
in an insurance arbitration on December
18, 2006, was performed by Exponent
Failure Analysis Associates and Altran
Solutions Corporation (Exponent) and
concluded that the time period between
the beginning of substantial leakage
from the reactor pressure vessel head
nozzle and the development of the large
cavity next to the nozzle may have been
as short as four months.
On April 2, 2007, after several
conference calls with the licensee and
Exponent to assess whether the
Exponent Report raised any immediate
safety concerns (it did not), the NRC
requested FENOC to respond in writing
to four questions regarding information
and conclusions presented in the
Exponent Report. Among other things,
the NRC’s request for information asked
FENOC to ‘‘discuss any differences
between the Exponent Report
information and conclusions drawn
therein, and information previously
provided in the Root Cause Analysis
Report and Licensee Event Report for
the Davis-Besse reactor pressure vessel
head wastage event.’’
In its May 2, 2007, response to the
NRC’s request for information, FENOC
stated that it ‘‘ha[d] not specifically
evaluated all of the assumptions used by
Exponent’’ but nevertheless concluded
that the Exponent Report ‘‘more
accurately characterizes the time line of
the reactor head degradation event
PO 00000
Frm 00070
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
based on [Exponent’s] use of more
recently available test data in
conjunction with detailed analytical
modeling.’’ FENOC’s response did not
include a detailed discussion of the
differences between the operational
experience data and the Exponent
Report assumptions.
Consequently, on May 14, 2007, the
NRC issued FENOC a Demand for
Information (DFI) pursuant to 10 CFR
2.204 to determine whether further
enforcement action was necessary to
provide reasonable assurance that
FENOC would continue to operate its
licensed facilities in accordance with
the terms of its licenses and the
Commission’s regulations. The DFI
required FENOC to provide a detailed
discussion of the process used to
determine if the Exponent Report
assumptions, analyses, conclusions, or
other related information should have
been reported to the NRC in a more
prompt manner; a detailed discussion of
the differences in assumptions,
analyses, conclusions, and other related
information of the Exponent Report and
technical and programmatic root cause
reports developed in 2002; and a
position on whether FENOC endorsed
the conclusions of a second contractor
report prepared in connection with the
NEIL insurance arbitration.
FENOC responded to the DFI in
writing on June 13, 2007. In that
response, FENOC stated that its May 2,
2007, response ‘‘was primarily focused
on the detailed analytical studies that
form the basis for the Exponent Report’s
time line for the crack growth and
wastage phenomenon * * * and was
not a comprehensive review of the
differences between our root cause
reports and the Exponent Report.’’
According to the June 13 response,
FENOC ‘‘continues to believe’’ that its
earlier root cause reports ‘‘provide a
comprehensive explanation of the
progression and causal factors of the
Davis-Besse reactor pressure vessel head
degradation event and, hence, contain
the most appropriate information to
have used in development and
implementation of corrective actions to
prevent recurrence.’’ FENOC’s June 13,
2007, response further acknowledged
that it ‘‘should have communicated
more effectively internally and more
promptly with the NRC’’ about the
Exponent Report, and included
commitments to implement corrective
actions in those areas.
On June 27, 2007, the NRC held a
public meeting with FENOC to discuss
the DFI response. During the meeting,
the NRC questioned the corporate safety
culture at FirstEnergy and whether
FENOC had changed its position
E:\FR\FM\21AUN1.SGM
21AUN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 161 (Tuesday, August 21, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Pages 46666-46668]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 07-4087]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION
Emergency Clearance; Public Information Collection Requirements
Submitted to the Office of Management and Budget; Notice
AGENCY: National Science Foundation.
ACTION: Emergency Clearance: Public Information Collection Requirements
Submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The National Science Foundation (NSF) is announcing plans to
request approval of this collection. In accordance with the requirement
of Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub.
L. 104-13), we are providing an opportunity for public comment on this
action. After obtaining and considering public comment, NSF will
prepare the submission requesting that OMB approve clearance of this
collection for no longer than 3 years.
DATES: Interested persons are invited to send comments regarding the
burden or any other aspect of these collections of information
requirements by September 20, 2007.
ADDRESSES: Written comments regarding the information collection and
requests for copies of the proposed information collection request
should be addressed to Suzanne Plimpton, Reports Clearance Officer,
National Science Foundation, 4201 Wilson Blvd., Rm. 295, Arlington, VA
22230, or by e-mail to splimpto@nsf.gov, and Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, Room 10235, New
Executive Office Building, Washington, DC 20503. Attn: John Kraemer,
NSF Desk Officer.
Comments: Written 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 of the proposed collection of information; (c) ways to
enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information on
respondents, including through the use of automated collection
techniques or other forms of information technology; or (d) ways to
minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are
to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated,
electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or
other forms of information technology.
NSF has determined that it cannot reasonably comply with the normal
clearance procedures under 5 CFR 1320 because normal clearance
procedures are reasonably likely to prevent or disrupt the collection
of information. NSF is requesting emergency review from OMB of this
information collection to enable the Emergency review and approval of
this ICR will assure continuation of the PFF evaluation that is also
funded by the Atlantic Philanthropies. OMB approval has been requested
for September 24, 2007. If granted, the emergency approval is only
valid for 90 days.
During this same period, a regular review of this information
collection will be undertaken. During the regular review period, the
NSF requests written comments and suggestions from the public and
affected agencies concerning this information collection. Comments
[[Page 46667]]
are encouraged and will be accepted until October 22, 2007 to be
assured of consideration. Comments received after that date will be
considered to the extent practicable.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Suzanne H. Plimpton, Reports Clearance
Officer, National Science Foundation, 4201 Wilson Boulevard, Suite 295,
Arlington, Virginia 22230; telephone (703) 292-7556; or send e-mail to
splimpto@nsf.gov. Individuals who use a telecommunications device for
the deaf (TDD) may call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at
1-800-877-8339 between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m., Eastern time, Monday through
Friday.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
OMB Approval Number: OMB 3145-0058.
Expiration Date: January 31, 2010.
Overview of this information collection: The Federal Funding
Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA) of 2006 (Pub. L. 109-282)
requires agencies to make award and sub-award information available to
be searched by the public in a single searchable Web site developed by
the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). The impetus for this Act was
the lack of a single source of accurate, complete and timely
information on federal government spending.\1\ The requirements and
residual technical and policy impacts of FFATA were unanticipated at
the time the prior information clearance package was cleared by OMB. In
order to meet the legislative mandate and Congressional intent of
FFATA, NSF needs a reliable source of data and the ability to validate
the accuracy of that data. The change that is being proposed by NSF,
therefore, is essential to ensuring compliance with FFATA requirements.
If NSF cannot collect and validate the accuracy of award data, NSF will
miss the deadline imposed by Congress to make award data publicly
available by January 1, 2008.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Source: Chairman's Statement, Senator Tom Coburn, N.D. (R-
OK), What You Don't Know Can Hurt You: S. 2590, the ``Federal
Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006'' (July 18,
2006).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
NSF is committed to providing citizens accurate, complete, and
timely information regarding the expenditure of taxpayer funds. The
policy change for which NSF is seeking approval will enable the
Foundation to accomplish this goal. If NSF must follow the normal OIRA
clearance review process, the result will be incomplete and inaccurate
award data on OMB's single searchable Web site.
Consult With Other Agencies & the Public
The policy change identified is consistent with a previously
established Government-wide standard imposed by Grants.gov as part of
its registration process. (Reference OMB Clearance Number: 4040-0001,
Expiration Date: 04/30/2008). Grants.gov currently has 103,000
Authorized Organizational Representatives registered in the system. As
reiterated below, 93.1% of organizations that submitted proposals to
NSF in FY06 are already registered in CCR. Implementing this policy
change, will make NSF's registration requirement consistent with that
currently in use by all other Federal granting agencies.
NSF also plans to announce this proposed change at an upcoming
Federal Demonstration Partnership meeting in September to gauge
community response to this policy change. Finally, NSF plans to
communicate with its small business community to obtain feedback as
well as post a notice on the NSF Web site regarding the Foundation's
plans in this area. The estimated impact of this change is described
more fully below.
Background
FFATA specifies requisite information (14 data elements) that must
be included for each award, one of which is the unique identifier for
the entity. OMB Memorandum, ``Reporting of Data Elements Required by
the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act,'' (dated March
30, 2007) defines the unique identifier for the entity as the Data
Universal Numbering System (DUNS) number.
In accordance with the OMB policy ``Use of a Universal Identifier
by Grant Applicants,'' (June 27, 2003) [68 FR 38402], NSF collects DUNS
numbers for all awardees. While NSF collects this information, NSF
currently does not have a mechanism to validate the accuracy of the
DUNS number provided by the organization during the FastLane proposal
submission process.
In order to meet the legislative mandate and Congressional intent
of FFATA, NSF needs a reliable source of data to validate the accuracy
of the DUNS number provided by the organization. NSF has identified the
Central Contractor Registration (CCR) database as the most complete and
accurate data source. The CCR system is managed under the Integrated
Acquisition Environment (IAE) Presidential Management Agenda (PMA) E-
Gov initiative. IAE is sponsored by OMB and managed by the General
Services Administration. CCR is the primary registrant database for the
U.S. Government. CCR collects, validates, stores, and disseminates data
in support of agency acquisition missions, including Federal agency
contract and assistance awards.
All contractors that do business with the Federal government and
all grantees that use Grants.gov are required to register in CCR prior
to conducting any transactions (e.g. submitting a grant application).
Any organization that registers with the CCR must have a valid DUNS
number. To ensure each organization receiving an NSF award and/or
subaward has a valid DUNS number, NSF will require potential proposers
to register in the CCR prior to proposal submission. This approach
aligns with the government-wide efforts described above. The proposed
effective date for this policy change is October 1, 2007. Requiring CCR
registration effective October 1, 2007 will provide NSF with sufficient
time to change NSF proposal preparation requirements to mandate this
requirement, as well as validate DUNS numbers in preparation for
meeting the FFATA January 1, 2008 milestone to make award data publicly
available.
Impact of Policy Change
NSF has analyzed the impact of this proposed policy change and the
additional burden associated with it on the Foundation's proposer
community. The results of this assessment are as follows:
CCR states it takes approximately one hour for an
organization to complete the online registration, depending upon the
size and complexity of the organization. The one hour to complete
registration includes the time to read the instructions and to complete
the form online. CCR does have handbook users may refer during the
registration process. CCR recommends factoring in an additional 15
minutes in the instance the user references the handbook.
NSF retrieved a list of organizations that submitted
proposals to the Foundation in FY 2006 and used a sample (5% error) to
determine the percentage of these organizations registered in the CCR.
A total of 2,677 organizations submitted proposals to NSF
in FY 2006.
Out of the 2,677 organizations that submitted proposals to
NSF in FY06, a random sample of 247 organizations was used to verify
CCR registration.
Of the 247 sample organizations, 230 were registered in
CCR (93.1%).
[[Page 46668]]
Based on the sample analysis of FY06 data (the 247 sample
organizations), it can be concluded that:
93.1% of organizations that submitted proposals to NSF in
FY06 are already registered in CCR.
6.9% of organizations that submitted proposals to NSF in
FY06 are not registered in CCR.
Of the 2,677 organizations that submitted proposals to NSF
in FY06, 184 organizations (6.9%) would be impacted by this policy
change.
The amount of additional burden associated with this policy change
is 230 hours (184 organizations * 1.25 hour to register = 230 hours).
On average, it takes CCR three days to process a registration
submission.
Respondents: Not-for-profit institutions, for-profit institutions,
individuals.
Number of Respondents: 184.
Burden on the Public: 230 additional hours.
Dated: August 15, 2007.
Suzanne H. Plimpton,
Reports Clearance Officer, National Science Foundation.
[FR Doc. 07-4087 Filed 8-20-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7555-01-M