General Services Administration Acquisition Regulation; Information Collection; Transactional Data Reporting, 24512-24516 [2019-11030]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
24512
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 102 / Tuesday, May 28, 2019 / Notices
Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve
System, May 21, 2019.
Yao-Chin Chao,
Assistant Secretary of the Board.
[FR Doc. 2019–10978 Filed 5–24–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6210–01–P
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION
Agency Information Collection
Activities; Submission for OMB
Review; Comment Request
AGENCY:
Federal Trade Commission
(FTC).
ACTION:
Notice and request for comment.
The FTC requests that the
Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) extend for three years the current
PRA clearance for information
collection requirements contained in the
agency’s Mail, internet, or Telephone
Order Merchandise Rule (MITOR or
Rule). The existing clearance expires on
May 31, 2019. The public should
address comments to this notice to the
OMB.
DATES: Comments must be received by
June 27, 2019.
ADDRESSES: Comments in response to
this notice should be submitted to the
OMB Desk Officer for the Federal Trade
Commission within 30 days of this
notice. You may submit comments
using any of the following methods:
Electronic: Write ‘‘MITOR: PRA
Comment, P072108,’’ on your comment
and file your comment online at https://
www.regulations.gov, by following the
instructions on the web-based form.
Email: Wendy_L._Liberante@
omb.eop.gov and Susan_M._Minson@
omb.eop.gov.
Fax: (202) 395–5806.
Mail: Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs, Office of
Management and Budget, Attention:
Desk Officer for the Federal Trade
Commission, New Executive Office
Building, Docket Library, Room 10102,
725 17th Street NW, Washington, DC
20503.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jock
Chung, 202–326–2984, Attorney,
Enforcement Division, Bureau of
Consumer Protection, 600 Pennsylvania
Avenue NW, Mail Drop CC–9528,
Washington, DC 20580.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Title: Mail, internet, or Telephone
Order Merchandise Rule (MITOR or
Rule), 16 CFR part 435.
OMB Control Number: 3084–0106.
Type of Review: Extension of a
currently approved collection.
Abstract: Generally, the MITOR
requires a seller (or merchant) to: (1)
jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:49 May 24, 2019
Jkt 247001
Have a reasonable basis for any express
or implied shipment representation
made in soliciting the sale (if no express
time period is promised, the implied
shipment representation is 30 days); (2)
notify the buyer (or consumer) and
obtain the buyer’s consent to any delay
in shipment; and (3) make prompt and
full refunds when the buyer exercises a
cancellation option or the seller is
unable to meet the Rule’s other
requirements.
On March 19, 2019, the FTC sought
comment on the information collection
requirements associated with the Rule.
84 FR 10072. The FTC received no
comments during the public comment
period. Pursuant to OMB regulations, 5
CFR part 1320, that implement the PRA,
44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., the FTC is
providing this second opportunity for
public comment while seeking OMB
approval to renew the pre-existing
clearance for the Rule. For more details
about the Rule requirements and the
basis for the calculations summarized
below, see 84 FR 10072.
Likely Respondents: Businesses
engaged in the sale of merchandise by
mail, internet or telephone.
Estimated Annual Hours Burden:
2,692,350 hours.
Third Party Disclosure: [(44,946
established businesses × 50 hours) +
(1,935 new entrants × 230 hours) =
2,692,350 hours.
Estimated Annual Cost Burden:
$66,501,045, which is derived from
2,692,350 hours × $24.70/hour.1
Request for Comment
Your comment—including your name
and your state—will be placed on the
public record of this proceeding at the
https://www.regulations.gov website.
Because your comment will be made
public, you are solely responsible for
making sure that your comment does
not include any sensitive personal
information, such as anyone’s Social
Security number; date of birth; driver’s
license number or other state
identification number, or foreign
country equivalent; passport number;
financial account number; or credit or
debit card number. You are also solely
responsible for making sure that your
comment does not include any sensitive
health information, such as medical
records or other individually
1 The hourly wage rates for sales and related
workers are updated from the 60-Day Federal
Register notice and are based on mean hourly
wages found at https://www.bls.gov/news.release/
ocwage.htm (‘‘Occupational Employment and
Wages–May 2018,’’ U.S. Department of Labor,
released March 2019, Table 1 (‘‘National
employment and wage data from the Occupational
Employment Statistics survey by occupation, May
2018’’).
PO 00000
Frm 00051
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
identifiable health information. In
addition, your comment should not
include any ‘‘trade secret or any
commercial or financial information
which . . . is privileged or
confidential’’—as provided by Section
6(f) of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. 46(f), and
FTC Rule 4.10(a)(2), 16 CFR 4.10(a)(2)—
including in particular competitively
sensitive information such as costs,
sales statistics, inventories, formulas,
patterns, devices, manufacturing
processes, or customer names.
Heather Hippsley,
Deputy General Counsel.
[FR Doc. 2019–10994 Filed 5–24–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6750–01–P
GENERAL SERVICES
ADMINISTRATION
[OMB Control No. 3090–0306; Docket No.
2019–0001; Sequence No. 4]
General Services Administration
Acquisition Regulation; Information
Collection; Transactional Data
Reporting
Office of Acquisition Policy,
General Services Administration (GSA).
ACTION: Notice of request for comments
regarding an extension to an existing
OMB clearance.
AGENCY:
Under the provisions of the
Paperwork Reduction Act, the
Regulatory Secretariat Division is
submitting a request to the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) to
review and approve an extension of a
previously approved information
collection requirement regarding
General Services Administration
Acquisition Regulation (GSAR) clauses
552.216–75 Transactional Data
Reporting and 552.238–80 Industrial
Funding Fee and Sales Reporting,
Alternate I.1 GSA uses this information
to establish price reasonableness on
certain Government-wide contracts,
inform category management activities,
collect fees due from buying agencies,
and administer the respective programs.
DATES: Submit comments on or before:
July 29, 2019.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments
identified by Information Collection
3090–0306, Transactional Data
Reporting, by any of the following
methods:
• Regulations.gov: https://
www.regulations.gov. Submit comments
SUMMARY:
1 This clause was formerly found at GSAR
552.238–74 but was amended to GSAR 552.238–80
per GSAR case 2016–G502, effective May 23, 2019.
See 84 FR 17030 from April 23, 2019.
E:\FR\FM\28MYN1.SGM
28MYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 102 / Tuesday, May 28, 2019 / Notices
via the Federal eRulemaking portal by
searching the OMB control number.
Select the link ‘‘Submit a Comment’’
that corresponds with ‘‘Information
Collection 3090–0306, Transactional
Data Reporting.’’ Follow the instructions
provided at the ‘‘Submit a Comment’’
screen. Please include your name,
company name (if any), and
‘‘Information Collection 3090–0306,
Transactional Data Reporting’’ on your
attached document.
• Mail: General Services
Administration, Regulatory Secretariat
Division (MVCB), 1800 F Street NW,
Washington, DC 20405. ATTN: Ms.
Mandell/IC 3090–0306, Transactional
Data Reporting.
Instructions: Please submit comments
only and cite Information Collection
3090–0306, Transactional Data
Reporting, in all correspondence related
to this collection. All comments
received will be posted without change
to https://www.regulations.gov, including
any personal and/or business
confidential information provided.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.
Matthew McFarland, Office of
Acquisition Policy, (301) 758–5880 or
matthew.mcfarland@gsa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES
A. Purpose
Transactional data is generated when
a transaction is made between a buyer
and seller and shows details of
transactions at the line-item level, such
as descriptions, quantities, and the
prices paid for the items purchased. The
Government is increasingly using this
data to gain insight into its purchasing
patterns, allowing it to identify the most
efficient solutions, channels, and
sources to meet its mission critical
needs. This data is particularly critical
to the Government’s use of category
management, the business practice of
buying common goods and services as
an enterprise to eliminate redundancies,
increase efficiency, and deliver more
value and savings from acquisition
programs. Moreover, individual buyers
benefit from this data when conducting
market research, price analysis, and
negotiations.
Transactional data is typically
possessed by the buyer and seller in a
transaction. On the Government (buyer)
side, this data is often found in contract
writing systems and financial systems.
However, these systems are not shared
across agencies; in fact, some agencies
use multiple versions of these systems.
Hence, no mechanism currently exists
to compile and analyze transactional
data from a wide-range of purchases
made across the Government.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:49 May 24, 2019
Jkt 247001
GSA sought to improve the
Government’s access to this data
through the Transactional Data
Reporting final rule, published on June
23, 2016.2 The rule amended the
General Services Administration
Acquisition Regulation (GSAR) by
establishing two contract clauses
requiring vendors to report transactional
data from orders placed against GSA’s
Government-wide contract vehicles:
• Alternate I of GSAR clause
552.238–80 Industrial Funding Fee and
Sales Reporting has been introduced to
the Federal Supply Schedule (FSS)
program on a pilot basis, along with
corresponding reductions to existing
pricing disclosure requirements.
• GSAR clause 552.216–75
Transactional Data Reporting is
applicable to GSA’s Government-wide
Acquisition Contract (GWAC) and other
Government-wide indefinite-delivery
indefinite-quantity (IDIQ) contract
vehicles established after June 23,
2016.3 As of May 2019, Alliant 2
(unrestricted) is the only vehicle in this
class that has been required to, and is
using, the Transactional Data Reporting
clause.
This information collection primarily
applies to GSA’s FSS contracts,
commonly known as GSA Schedules or
Multiple Award Schedules (MAS).
These Government-wide contracts
provide federal agencies with a
simplified process for acquiring
commercial supplies and services. The
GSA FSS program is the Government’s
preeminent commercial contracting
vehicle, accounting for about 10 percent
of all federal contract dollars with
approximately $33 billion of purchases
made through the program in fiscal year
2018.
GSA establishes the pricing and terms
of each GSA Schedule contract with
commercial vendors. Federal agencies
then follow GSA’s competitive
procedures when placing orders against
these contracts and thereby satisfy
statutory competition requirements to
provide ‘‘the lowest overall cost
alternative to meet the needs of the
Federal Government.’’ 4 In turn, those
agencies must pay an Industrial
Funding Fee (IFF) that covers GSA’s
costs of operating the FSS program. The
fee is currently set at 0.75% and is
included in the prices ordering
activities pay vendors when purchasing
2 See GSAR Case 2013–G504; Docket 2014–0020;
Sequence 1 [81 FR 41104 (June 23, 2016)].
3 The rule does not apply to FSS contracts
administered by the Department of Veterans Affairs.
4 41 U.S.C. 152(3)(B) requires FSS ordering
procedures to ‘‘result in the lowest overall cost
alternative to meet the needs of the Federal
Government.’’
PO 00000
Frm 00052
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
24513
from an FSS contract.5 FSS vendors
then report GSA Schedule sales data
and remit the IFF collected from
ordering activities to GSA once a
quarter.
There were a total of 16,215 FSS
contracts in fiscal year 2018. This
information collection pertains to the
2,063 contracts that participated in the
Transactional Data Reporting pilot. The
remaining 14,152 contracts are subject
to legacy sales reporting requirements
and pricing disclosure requirements
associated with Commercial Sales
Practices (CSP) and GSAR clause
552.238–81 Price Reductions, otherwise
known as the Price Reductions Clause
(PRC); those requirements are accounted
for under separate information
collection identified by OMB control
number 3090–0235.6
GSA believes Transactional Data
Reporting offers a meaningful burden
reduction for FSS vendors. GSA
estimates the combined burden of this
information collection is 49% less per
contract than the legacy sales reporting
requirements and CSP and PRC
disclosures associated with OMB
control number 3090–0235. GSA
estimates if all FSS vendors participated
in Transactional Data Reporting, they
would realize an estimated annual
burden reduction of $30.8 million.7 On
the other hand, GSA estimates ending
the FSS pilot will cost participating
vendors nearly $15 million and GSA
approximately $3 million to transition
to the legacy sales reporting and CSP
and PRC disclosure requirements unless
an alternate method is created to collect
the IFF, monitor program sales and
establish and monitor contract pricing.8
5 The IFF for Schedule 599, Special Item Number
599–2 is $1.50 per transaction.
6 The PRC was formerly found at GSAR 552.238–
75 but was amended to GSAR 552.238–81 per
GSAR case 2016–G502, effective May 23, 2019. See
84 FR 17030 from April 23, 2019.
7 The estimated burden for this information
collection, which applied to the 14,152 contracts
not participating in the Transactional Data
Reporting pilot, is estimated to be $94.2 million.
This equates to a per-contract burden of $6,662/
year. The estimated burden for the Transactional
Data Reporting information collection is $9.2
million/year for the 2,063 contracts participating in
the FSS pilot; this equates to a per-contract the
burden of $4,483/year. The estimated $30.8 million/
year burden reduction is calculated by taking the
updated 3090–0235 burden estimate ($94.2 million/
year) and subtracting the product of the number of
contracts included in 3090–0235 multiplied by the
average per-contract burden of Transactional Data
Reporting (14,152 contracts × $4,483), which equals
$63.4 million/year ($94.2M¥$63.4M = $30.8M).
More information about the Transactional Data
Reporting burden can be found under Information
Collection 3090–0306 at https://www.reginfo.gov/
public by searching ‘‘ICR’’ for ‘‘3090–0306’’.
8 Vendors transitioning back to the CSP/PRC
framework would have to submit CSPs to establish
E:\FR\FM\28MYN1.SGM
Continued
28MYN1
24514
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 102 / Tuesday, May 28, 2019 / Notices
The Paperwork Reduction Act
generally requires information
collections to be renewed every three
years.9 Both this information collection
(OMB control number 3090–0306) and
the information collection associated
with legacy sales reporting and CSP and
PRC disclosure requirements (OMB
control number 3090–0235) were last
approved in 2016, so GSA is now
obtaining extensions to both
information collections.10
This request for comments only
pertains to the information collection
requirements associated with
Transactional Data Reporting (OMB
control number 3090–0306). GSA has
also posted a separate notice requesting
comments on the information collection
associated with legacy sales reporting
and CSP and PRC disclosure
requirements (OMB control number
3090–0235).
Information Collection Changes and
Updates
jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES
Adjustments for Actual Number of
Contracts: The Transactional Data
Reporting pilot had yet to launch when
these burden estimates were previously
calculated in 2016, so GSA based its
estimates for the number of contracts
that would participate on the total
number of contracts under the
Schedules and Special Item Numbers
eligible for the pilot:
• The ratio of GSA Schedule
contracts that would continue to require
legacy sales reporting and CSP and PRC
disclosures was estimated to be 56.8%,
which was based on the percentage of
the program’s sales in fiscal year 2015
for contracts that would not be eligible
to participate in the Transactional Data
Reporting pilot.
• The ratio of GSA Schedule
contracts slated to be included in the
Transactional Data Reporting pilot was
estimated to account for the remaining
43.2%.
basis of award pricing. As of December 2018, 2,158
vendors were participating in the Transactional
Data Reporting pilot. Using the framework for new
offer CSPs in this information collection, 2,158 new
offer CSPs would equate to a burden of $11.5
million. This same framework would show
increased costs of $3 million for GSA to process
2,158 new offer CSPs. Additionally, these vendors
would also need to establish sales tracking systems
to comply with the sales reporting requirements of
the basic version of GSAR clause 552.238–80. Using
the sales reporting cost estimation framework for
establishing new systems from OMB control
number 3090–0235, this would cost these vendors
$3.1 million.
9 44 U.S.C. 3507(g).
10 GSA is consolidating a separate information
collection for IFF and sales reporting (OMB control
number 3090–0121) with the pricing disclosures
information collection (OMB control number 3090–
0235) because the burdens are interdependent.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:49 May 24, 2019
Jkt 247001
However, pilot participation became
optional in 2017 and the number of
contracts that eventually joined the pilot
was far lower than anticipated in 2016.
Of the 16,215 contracts that were active
in FY 2018—
• 14,152 contracts, or 87.28% of the
total, were required to conduct legacy
sales reporting and provide CSP and
PRC disclosures.
• 2,063 contracts, or 12.72% of the
total, participated in the Transactional
Data Reporting pilot.
Additionally, only one non-FSS
contract vehicle, Alliant 2
(unrestricted), currently uses the nonFSS Transactional Data Reporting
clause. The last revision of these burden
estimates relied upon the total number
of non-FSS contracts (537) that would
be eligible had they been awarded after
the Transactional Data Reporting rule
was promulgated. As a result, the
number of non-FSS contracts was
lowered from 537 to the actual number
of contracts using the applicable clause,
53.
Accordingly, the revised participation
figures resulted in significantly lower
burden estimates for this information
collection. On the other hand, the FSS
pilot participation revisions resulted in
significantly higher burden estimates for
the information collection accounting
for CSP and PRC disclosures and legacy
sales reporting (OMB Control Number
3090–0235).
Revised Labor Rates: The previous
burden estimates used a fully burdened
labor rate of $68/hour. This included a
$50/hour base rate, which was based on
professional judgment, and 36% for
fringe benefits, which was rounded
down from the 36.25% fringe benefit
factor included in OMB Circular A–76.
The revised burden estimates attempt to
align with the Department of Defense’s
Regulatory Cost Analysis Tool (RCAT),
which was developed to prepare
economic analyses in compliance with
Executive Order 13771 and uses various
Government labor category rates as the
basis for cost estimates. As such, GSA
determined—
• The GS–12, Step 5 labor rate from
the RCAT ($55.19/hour) was the most
appropriate for the tasks performed by
vendors to comply with monthly
reporting requirements; and
• The GS–14, Step 5 labor rate from
the RCAT ($77.25/hour) was the most
appropriate for the tasks performed by
vendors to comply with the initial
setup.
B. Annual Reporting Burden
This information collection applies to
GSA FSS contracts that include GSAR
clauses 552.216–75 Transactional Data
PO 00000
Frm 00053
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Reporting and 552.238–80 Industrial
Funding Fee and Sales Reporting,
Alternate I. In FY 2018, vendors held 53
Alliant 2 contracts subject to clause
552.216–75 and 2,063 GSA FSS
contracts subject to Alternate I of GSAR
clause 552.238–80.
Both clauses require vendors to report
the data elements outlined in each
clause, such as item descriptions and
prices paid, to a GSA website. This data
must be reported monthly within 30
calendar days after the end of each
calendar month, meaning vendors will
furnish 12 reports over the course of a
year for each contract containing one of
these clauses. Vendors also remit
applicable fees, such as the IFF for
Schedule contracts, when submitting
these reports.
Cost Burden Calculation
The two primary activities associated
with this information collection are the
initial setup and monthly reporting.
GSA calculated the cost burden for each
as follows:
• Initial Setup: The duties required
for these activities will generally be
completely by a senior-level subject
matter expert. For the purposes of
establishing an hourly rate, GSA equates
these duties to those of a GS–14, Step
5 employee, whose hourly rate in 2019
for the ‘‘Rest of U.S.’’ locality is $56.92
an hour.11 When factoring a 36.25
percent overhead rate for fringe benefits,
the fully burdened rate is $77.55 an
hour.12
• Quarterly Reporting: The duties
required for these activities will
generally be completed by mid-level
personnel. For the purposes of
establishing an hourly rate, GSA equates
these duties to those of a GS–12, Step
5 employee, whose hourly rate in 2019
for the ‘‘Rest of U.S.’’ locality is $40.51
an hour. When factoring a 36.25 percent
overhead rate for fringe benefits, the
fully burdened rate is $55.19 an hour.
Categorization of Vendors by Monthly
Sales Revenue: Transactional Data
Reporting imposes a progressive
burden—one that increases with a
contractor’s sales volume. Monthly
11 General Schedule (GS) labor rates may be
viewed on the Office of Personnel Management
(OPM) under Pay & Leave: Salaries and Wages,
SALARY TABLE 2019–RUS at https://
www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversight/pay-leave/
salaries-wages/salary-tables/19Tables/html/RUS_
h.aspx.
12 36.25% overhead rate was used in reference to
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular
No. A–76. Circular A–76 requires agencies to use
standard cost factors to estimate certain costs of
Government performance. These cost factors ensure
that specific government costs are calculated in a
standard and consistent manner to reasonably
reflect the cost of performing commercial activities
with government personnel.
E:\FR\FM\28MYN1.SGM
28MYN1
24515
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 102 / Tuesday, May 28, 2019 / Notices
reporting times increase with a vendor’s
applicable sales volume, as vendors
with lower to no reportable sales spend
relatively little time on monthly
reporting, while those with more
reportable sales with face a higher
reporting burden.
GSA separated vendors into categories
based on annual sales volume in order
to account for the differences in
reporting burden. These categories are:
• Category 1: No sales activity (annual
of $0)
• Category 2: Annual sales between $0
and $25,000
• Category 3: Annual sales between
$25,000 and $250,000
• Category 4: Annual sales between
$250,000 and $1 million
• Category 5: Annual sales over $1
million
The distribution of vendors by sales
category is as follows:
FSS AND NON-FSS VENDORS BY SALES CATEGORY
FSS vendors
(count)
Category
Category
Category
Category
Category
1
2
3
4
5
Non-FSS
vendors
(count)
FSS vendors
(percentage)
Non-FSS
vendors
(percentage)
Total vendor
count by
category
...........................................................................
...........................................................................
...........................................................................
...........................................................................
...........................................................................
318
197
619
407
522
15
10
30
20
25
37
0
0
2
14
70
0
0
4
26
355
197
619
409
536
Total ..............................................................................
2,063
100
53
100
2,116
Automated vs. Manual Reporting
Systems: Vendors subject to these
clauses must create systems or processes
to produce and report accurate data.
Generally, vendors will use automated
or manual systems to identify the
transactional data to be reported each
month. An automated system is one that
relies on information technology, such
as an accounting system or data
management software, to identify and
compile reportable data. These systems
can tremendously streamline the
reporting process but require upfront
configuration to perform the tasks, such
as coding the data elements to be
retrieved. Conversely, a manual system
is one that incorporates little to no
automation and instead relies on
personnel to manually identify and
compile the reportable data. An
example of a manual system would be
an accountant reviewing invoices to
identify the reportable data and then
transferring the findings to a
spreadsheet. In contrast to automation,
a manual system requires relatively
little setup time but the reporting effort
will generally increase with the
vendor’s sales volume.
The likelihood of a vendor adopting
an automated system increases with
their applicable sales volume. Vendors
with little to no reportable data are
unlikely to expend the effort needed to
establish an automated reporting system
since it will be relatively easy to
identify and report a limited amount of
data. In fiscal year 2018, 15% of FSS
contracts in the Transactional Data
Reporting pilot had $0 sales, while
another 10% reported annual sales
between $1 and $25,000 per month.
However, as a vendor’s applicable
average monthly sales increase, it will
be increasingly likely to establish an
automated system to reduce the
monthly reporting burden.
Consequently, vendors with higher
reportable sales will likely bear a higher
setup burden to create an automated
system, or absorb a high monthly
reporting burden if they choose to rely
on manual reporting methods.
The following chart depicts the
likelihood of the current population
adopting manual and automated
reporting systems:
VENDORS BY REPORTING SYSTEM TYPE
[Manual vs. Automated]
Manual
system
(percentage)
jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES
Category
Category
Category
Category
Category
1
2
3
4
5
Automated
system
(percentage)
Manual
system
vendor count
Automated
system
vendor count
.......................................................................................................
.......................................................................................................
.......................................................................................................
.......................................................................................................
.......................................................................................................
100
100
90
50
10
0
0
10
50
90
355
197
557
205
54
0
0
62
205
482
Total Count of Vendors by System Type .................................................
Percentage of Vendors by System Type .................................................
........................
........................
........................
........................
1,367
65%
749
35%
Initial Setup: Vendors complying with
this rule will absorb a one-time setup
burden to establish reporting systems.
The estimated setup time varies
between automated and manual
reporting systems. Vendors
implementing a manual system must
acclimate themselves with the new
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:49 May 24, 2019
Jkt 247001
reporting requirements and train their
staff accordingly, while those with
automated systems must perform these
tasks in addition to configuring
information technology resources. GSA
estimates the average one-time setup
burden is 8 hours for vendors with a
PO 00000
Frm 00054
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
manual system and 240 hours for those
with an automated system.
Monthly Reporting: After initial setup,
vendors subject to these clauses are
required to report sales within 30
calendar days after the end of each
calendar month. The average reporting
times vary by system type (manual or
E:\FR\FM\28MYN1.SGM
28MYN1
24516
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 102 / Tuesday, May 28, 2019 / Notices
automated) and by sales categories. GSA
estimates vendors using a manual
system will have average monthly
reporting times ranging from 15 minutes
(0.25 hours) for vendors with $0 sales to
an average of 48 hours for vendors with
monthly sales over $1 million. On the
other hand, GSA projects vendors with
automated systems will have reporting
times of 2 hours per month, irrespective
of monthly sales volume, as a result of
efficiencies achieved through automated
processes. The following table shows
GSA’s projected monthly reporting
times per sales category and system
type:
MONTHLY REPORTING HOURS BY SYSTEM TYPE AND CATEGORY
Manual
systems
jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES
Category
Category
Category
Category
Category
1
2
3
4
5
...............................................................................................................................................................
...............................................................................................................................................................
...............................................................................................................................................................
...............................................................................................................................................................
...............................................................................................................................................................
Automated
systems
0.25
2.00
4.00
16.00
48.00
Transactional Data Reporting, in all
correspondence.
FSS Burden Estimates: A total of 376
FSS contracts joined the Transactional
Data Reporting pilot in FY 2018,
including 139 newly awarded contracts
and 237 existing contracts that
voluntarily joined the pilot. The initial
setup burden was split between manual
and automated systems, the number of
which was estimated based on the ratio
for all pilot contracts (64% manual,
36% automated). The initial setup
burden for those contracts is illustrated
below:
systems increases with their reported
sales while the reporting burden for
vendors using automated systems
remains constant regardless of the
reported sales volume. The reporting
burden for those contracts is as follows:
Jeffrey A. Koses,
Senior Procurement Executive, Office of
Acquisition Policy, Office of Governmentwide Policy.
Quarterly Reporting
[FR Doc. 2019–11030 Filed 5–24–19; 8:45 am]
Initial Setup
Annual Burden (Hours): 34,412.
Annual Burden (Cost): $2,668,613.
Transactional data was reported for
2,063 FSS contracts in FY 2018. As
previously noted, the reporting burden
for vendors using manual systems
increases with their reported sales while
the reporting burden for vendors using
automated systems remains constant
regardless of the reported sales volume.
The reporting burden for those contracts
is illustrated below:
The total estimated burden imposed
by Transactional Data Reporting is as
follows:
Quarterly Reporting
Annual Burden (Hours): 119,207.
Annual Burden (Cost): $6,579,023.
Non-FSS Burden Estimates: The only
non-FSS contract vehicle currently
using the clause is the Alliant 2
unrestricted contract. 53 Alliant 2
contracts were awarded in FY 2018,
meaning each of the contract holders
incurred initial setup costs. The initial
setup burden was split between manual
and automated systems, the number of
which was estimated based on the ratio
for the Alliant 2 contracts (74% manual,
26% automated). The initial setup
burden for those contracts is illustrated
below:
Initial Setup
Annual Burden (Hours): 3,672.
Annual Burden (Cost): $284,764.
As previously noted, the reporting
burden for vendors using manual
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:49 May 24, 2019
Jkt 247001
2.00
2.00
2.00
2.00
2.00
BILLING CODE 6820–61–P
Annual Burden (Hours): 1,445.
Annual Burden (Cost): $79,772.
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Total Annual Burden
Estimated Annual Time Burden (Hours)
FSS Vendors: 153,619.
Non-FSS Vendors: 5,117.
Total Annual Time Burden: 158,736.
Estimated Annual Cost Burden
FSS Vendors: $9,247,636.
Non-FSS Vendors: $364,535.
Total Annual Cost Burden:
$9,612,171.
C. Public Comments
Public comments are particularly
invited on: Whether this collection of
information is necessary and whether it
will have practical utility; whether our
estimate of the public burden of this
collection of information is accurate,
and based on valid assumptions and
methodology; ways to enhance the
quality, utility, and clarity of the
information to be collected.
Obtaining Copies of Proposals:
Requesters may obtain a copy of the
information collection documents from
the General Services Administration,
Regulatory Secretariat Division (MVCB),
1800 F Street NW, Washington, DC
20405, telephone 202–501–4755. Please
cite Information Collection 3090–0306,
PO 00000
Frm 00055
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
GENERAL SERVICES
ADMINISTRATION
NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND
SPACE ADMINISTRATION
[OMB Control No. 9000–0073; Docket No.
2019–0003; Sequence No. 15]
Submission for OMB Review; Advance
Payments
Department of Defense (DOD),
General Services Administration (GSA),
and National Aeronautics and Space
Administration (NASA).
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
Under the provisions of the
Paperwork Reduction Act, the
Regulatory Secretariat Division will be
submitting to the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB) a request to review
and approve a revision and renewal of
a previously approved information
collection requirement regarding
advanced payments.
DATES: Submit comments on or before:
June 27, 2019.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments
identified by Information Collection
9000–0073 by any of the following
methods:
• Regulations.gov: https://
www.regulations.gov. Submit comments
via the Federal eRulemaking portal by
searching the OMB control number.
Select the link ‘‘Submit a Comment’’
that corresponds with ‘‘Information
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\28MYN1.SGM
28MYN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 102 (Tuesday, May 28, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 24512-24516]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-11030]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION
[OMB Control No. 3090-0306; Docket No. 2019-0001; Sequence No. 4]
General Services Administration Acquisition Regulation;
Information Collection; Transactional Data Reporting
AGENCY: Office of Acquisition Policy, General Services Administration
(GSA).
ACTION: Notice of request for comments regarding an extension to an
existing OMB clearance.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, the
Regulatory Secretariat Division is submitting a request to the Office
of Management and Budget (OMB) to review and approve an extension of a
previously approved information collection requirement regarding
General Services Administration Acquisition Regulation (GSAR) clauses
552.216-75 Transactional Data Reporting and 552.238-80 Industrial
Funding Fee and Sales Reporting, Alternate I.\1\ GSA uses this
information to establish price reasonableness on certain Government-
wide contracts, inform category management activities, collect fees due
from buying agencies, and administer the respective programs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ This clause was formerly found at GSAR 552.238-74 but was
amended to GSAR 552.238-80 per GSAR case 2016-G502, effective May
23, 2019. See 84 FR 17030 from April 23, 2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DATES: Submit comments on or before: July 29, 2019.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments identified by Information Collection 3090-
0306, Transactional Data Reporting, by any of the following methods:
Regulations.gov: https://www.regulations.gov. Submit
comments
[[Page 24513]]
via the Federal eRulemaking portal by searching the OMB control number.
Select the link ``Submit a Comment'' that corresponds with
``Information Collection 3090-0306, Transactional Data Reporting.''
Follow the instructions provided at the ``Submit a Comment'' screen.
Please include your name, company name (if any), and ``Information
Collection 3090-0306, Transactional Data Reporting'' on your attached
document.
Mail: General Services Administration, Regulatory
Secretariat Division (MVCB), 1800 F Street NW, Washington, DC 20405.
ATTN: Ms. Mandell/IC 3090-0306, Transactional Data Reporting.
Instructions: Please submit comments only and cite Information
Collection 3090-0306, Transactional Data Reporting, in all
correspondence related to this collection. All comments received will
be posted without change to https://www.regulations.gov, including any
personal and/or business confidential information provided.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Matthew McFarland, Office of
Acquisition Policy, (301) 758-5880 or [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
A. Purpose
Transactional data is generated when a transaction is made between
a buyer and seller and shows details of transactions at the line-item
level, such as descriptions, quantities, and the prices paid for the
items purchased. The Government is increasingly using this data to gain
insight into its purchasing patterns, allowing it to identify the most
efficient solutions, channels, and sources to meet its mission critical
needs. This data is particularly critical to the Government's use of
category management, the business practice of buying common goods and
services as an enterprise to eliminate redundancies, increase
efficiency, and deliver more value and savings from acquisition
programs. Moreover, individual buyers benefit from this data when
conducting market research, price analysis, and negotiations.
Transactional data is typically possessed by the buyer and seller
in a transaction. On the Government (buyer) side, this data is often
found in contract writing systems and financial systems. However, these
systems are not shared across agencies; in fact, some agencies use
multiple versions of these systems. Hence, no mechanism currently
exists to compile and analyze transactional data from a wide-range of
purchases made across the Government.
GSA sought to improve the Government's access to this data through
the Transactional Data Reporting final rule, published on June 23,
2016.\2\ The rule amended the General Services Administration
Acquisition Regulation (GSAR) by establishing two contract clauses
requiring vendors to report transactional data from orders placed
against GSA's Government-wide contract vehicles:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ See GSAR Case 2013-G504; Docket 2014-0020; Sequence 1 [81 FR
41104 (June 23, 2016)].
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alternate I of GSAR clause 552.238-80 Industrial Funding
Fee and Sales Reporting has been introduced to the Federal Supply
Schedule (FSS) program on a pilot basis, along with corresponding
reductions to existing pricing disclosure requirements.
GSAR clause 552.216-75 Transactional Data Reporting is
applicable to GSA's Government-wide Acquisition Contract (GWAC) and
other Government-wide indefinite-delivery indefinite-quantity (IDIQ)
contract vehicles established after June 23, 2016.\3\ As of May 2019,
Alliant 2 (unrestricted) is the only vehicle in this class that has
been required to, and is using, the Transactional Data Reporting
clause.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ The rule does not apply to FSS contracts administered by the
Department of Veterans Affairs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This information collection primarily applies to GSA's FSS
contracts, commonly known as GSA Schedules or Multiple Award Schedules
(MAS). These Government-wide contracts provide federal agencies with a
simplified process for acquiring commercial supplies and services. The
GSA FSS program is the Government's preeminent commercial contracting
vehicle, accounting for about 10 percent of all federal contract
dollars with approximately $33 billion of purchases made through the
program in fiscal year 2018.
GSA establishes the pricing and terms of each GSA Schedule contract
with commercial vendors. Federal agencies then follow GSA's competitive
procedures when placing orders against these contracts and thereby
satisfy statutory competition requirements to provide ``the lowest
overall cost alternative to meet the needs of the Federal Government.''
\4\ In turn, those agencies must pay an Industrial Funding Fee (IFF)
that covers GSA's costs of operating the FSS program. The fee is
currently set at 0.75% and is included in the prices ordering
activities pay vendors when purchasing from an FSS contract.\5\ FSS
vendors then report GSA Schedule sales data and remit the IFF collected
from ordering activities to GSA once a quarter.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ 41 U.S.C. 152(3)(B) requires FSS ordering procedures to
``result in the lowest overall cost alternative to meet the needs of
the Federal Government.''
\5\ The IFF for Schedule 599, Special Item Number 599-2 is $1.50
per transaction.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
There were a total of 16,215 FSS contracts in fiscal year 2018.
This information collection pertains to the 2,063 contracts that
participated in the Transactional Data Reporting pilot. The remaining
14,152 contracts are subject to legacy sales reporting requirements and
pricing disclosure requirements associated with Commercial Sales
Practices (CSP) and GSAR clause 552.238-81 Price Reductions, otherwise
known as the Price Reductions Clause (PRC); those requirements are
accounted for under separate information collection identified by OMB
control number 3090-0235.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ The PRC was formerly found at GSAR 552.238-75 but was
amended to GSAR 552.238-81 per GSAR case 2016-G502, effective May
23, 2019. See 84 FR 17030 from April 23, 2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
GSA believes Transactional Data Reporting offers a meaningful
burden reduction for FSS vendors. GSA estimates the combined burden of
this information collection is 49% less per contract than the legacy
sales reporting requirements and CSP and PRC disclosures associated
with OMB control number 3090-0235. GSA estimates if all FSS vendors
participated in Transactional Data Reporting, they would realize an
estimated annual burden reduction of $30.8 million.\7\ On the other
hand, GSA estimates ending the FSS pilot will cost participating
vendors nearly $15 million and GSA approximately $3 million to
transition to the legacy sales reporting and CSP and PRC disclosure
requirements unless an alternate method is created to collect the IFF,
monitor program sales and establish and monitor contract pricing.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ The estimated burden for this information collection, which
applied to the 14,152 contracts not participating in the
Transactional Data Reporting pilot, is estimated to be $94.2
million. This equates to a per-contract burden of $6,662/year. The
estimated burden for the Transactional Data Reporting information
collection is $9.2 million/year for the 2,063 contracts
participating in the FSS pilot; this equates to a per-contract the
burden of $4,483/year. The estimated $30.8 million/year burden
reduction is calculated by taking the updated 3090-0235 burden
estimate ($94.2 million/year) and subtracting the product of the
number of contracts included in 3090-0235 multiplied by the average
per-contract burden of Transactional Data Reporting (14,152
contracts x $4,483), which equals $63.4 million/year ($94.2M-$63.4M
= $30.8M). More information about the Transactional Data Reporting
burden can be found under Information Collection 3090-0306 at https://www.reginfo.gov/public by searching ``ICR'' for ``3090-0306''.
\8\ Vendors transitioning back to the CSP/PRC framework would
have to submit CSPs to establish basis of award pricing. As of
December 2018, 2,158 vendors were participating in the Transactional
Data Reporting pilot. Using the framework for new offer CSPs in this
information collection, 2,158 new offer CSPs would equate to a
burden of $11.5 million. This same framework would show increased
costs of $3 million for GSA to process 2,158 new offer CSPs.
Additionally, these vendors would also need to establish sales
tracking systems to comply with the sales reporting requirements of
the basic version of GSAR clause 552.238-80. Using the sales
reporting cost estimation framework for establishing new systems
from OMB control number 3090-0235, this would cost these vendors
$3.1 million.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 24514]]
The Paperwork Reduction Act generally requires information
collections to be renewed every three years.\9\ Both this information
collection (OMB control number 3090-0306) and the information
collection associated with legacy sales reporting and CSP and PRC
disclosure requirements (OMB control number 3090-0235) were last
approved in 2016, so GSA is now obtaining extensions to both
information collections.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ 44 U.S.C. 3507(g).
\10\ GSA is consolidating a separate information collection for
IFF and sales reporting (OMB control number 3090-0121) with the
pricing disclosures information collection (OMB control number 3090-
0235) because the burdens are interdependent.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This request for comments only pertains to the information
collection requirements associated with Transactional Data Reporting
(OMB control number 3090-0306). GSA has also posted a separate notice
requesting comments on the information collection associated with
legacy sales reporting and CSP and PRC disclosure requirements (OMB
control number 3090-0235).
Information Collection Changes and Updates
Adjustments for Actual Number of Contracts: The Transactional Data
Reporting pilot had yet to launch when these burden estimates were
previously calculated in 2016, so GSA based its estimates for the
number of contracts that would participate on the total number of
contracts under the Schedules and Special Item Numbers eligible for the
pilot:
The ratio of GSA Schedule contracts that would continue to
require legacy sales reporting and CSP and PRC disclosures was
estimated to be 56.8%, which was based on the percentage of the
program's sales in fiscal year 2015 for contracts that would not be
eligible to participate in the Transactional Data Reporting pilot.
The ratio of GSA Schedule contracts slated to be included
in the Transactional Data Reporting pilot was estimated to account for
the remaining 43.2%.
However, pilot participation became optional in 2017 and the number
of contracts that eventually joined the pilot was far lower than
anticipated in 2016. Of the 16,215 contracts that were active in FY
2018--
14,152 contracts, or 87.28% of the total, were required to
conduct legacy sales reporting and provide CSP and PRC disclosures.
2,063 contracts, or 12.72% of the total, participated in
the Transactional Data Reporting pilot.
Additionally, only one non-FSS contract vehicle, Alliant 2
(unrestricted), currently uses the non-FSS Transactional Data Reporting
clause. The last revision of these burden estimates relied upon the
total number of non-FSS contracts (537) that would be eligible had they
been awarded after the Transactional Data Reporting rule was
promulgated. As a result, the number of non-FSS contracts was lowered
from 537 to the actual number of contracts using the applicable clause,
53.
Accordingly, the revised participation figures resulted in
significantly lower burden estimates for this information collection.
On the other hand, the FSS pilot participation revisions resulted in
significantly higher burden estimates for the information collection
accounting for CSP and PRC disclosures and legacy sales reporting (OMB
Control Number 3090-0235).
Revised Labor Rates: The previous burden estimates used a fully
burdened labor rate of $68/hour. This included a $50/hour base rate,
which was based on professional judgment, and 36% for fringe benefits,
which was rounded down from the 36.25% fringe benefit factor included
in OMB Circular A-76. The revised burden estimates attempt to align
with the Department of Defense's Regulatory Cost Analysis Tool (RCAT),
which was developed to prepare economic analyses in compliance with
Executive Order 13771 and uses various Government labor category rates
as the basis for cost estimates. As such, GSA determined--
The GS-12, Step 5 labor rate from the RCAT ($55.19/hour)
was the most appropriate for the tasks performed by vendors to comply
with monthly reporting requirements; and
The GS-14, Step 5 labor rate from the RCAT ($77.25/hour)
was the most appropriate for the tasks performed by vendors to comply
with the initial setup.
B. Annual Reporting Burden
This information collection applies to GSA FSS contracts that
include GSAR clauses 552.216-75 Transactional Data Reporting and
552.238-80 Industrial Funding Fee and Sales Reporting, Alternate I. In
FY 2018, vendors held 53 Alliant 2 contracts subject to clause 552.216-
75 and 2,063 GSA FSS contracts subject to Alternate I of GSAR clause
552.238-80.
Both clauses require vendors to report the data elements outlined
in each clause, such as item descriptions and prices paid, to a GSA
website. This data must be reported monthly within 30 calendar days
after the end of each calendar month, meaning vendors will furnish 12
reports over the course of a year for each contract containing one of
these clauses. Vendors also remit applicable fees, such as the IFF for
Schedule contracts, when submitting these reports.
Cost Burden Calculation
The two primary activities associated with this information
collection are the initial setup and monthly reporting. GSA calculated
the cost burden for each as follows:
Initial Setup: The duties required for these activities
will generally be completely by a senior-level subject matter expert.
For the purposes of establishing an hourly rate, GSA equates these
duties to those of a GS-14, Step 5 employee, whose hourly rate in 2019
for the ``Rest of U.S.'' locality is $56.92 an hour.\11\ When factoring
a 36.25 percent overhead rate for fringe benefits, the fully burdened
rate is $77.55 an hour.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ General Schedule (GS) labor rates may be viewed on the
Office of Personnel Management (OPM) under Pay & Leave: Salaries and
Wages, SALARY TABLE 2019-RUS at https://www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversight/pay-leave/salaries-wages/salary-tables/19Tables/html/RUS_h.aspx.
\12\ 36.25% overhead rate was used in reference to Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) Circular No. A-76. Circular A-76
requires agencies to use standard cost factors to estimate certain
costs of Government performance. These cost factors ensure that
specific government costs are calculated in a standard and
consistent manner to reasonably reflect the cost of performing
commercial activities with government personnel.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quarterly Reporting: The duties required for these
activities will generally be completed by mid-level personnel. For the
purposes of establishing an hourly rate, GSA equates these duties to
those of a GS-12, Step 5 employee, whose hourly rate in 2019 for the
``Rest of U.S.'' locality is $40.51 an hour. When factoring a 36.25
percent overhead rate for fringe benefits, the fully burdened rate is
$55.19 an hour.
Categorization of Vendors by Monthly Sales Revenue: Transactional
Data Reporting imposes a progressive burden--one that increases with a
contractor's sales volume. Monthly
[[Page 24515]]
reporting times increase with a vendor's applicable sales volume, as
vendors with lower to no reportable sales spend relatively little time
on monthly reporting, while those with more reportable sales with face
a higher reporting burden.
GSA separated vendors into categories based on annual sales volume
in order to account for the differences in reporting burden. These
categories are:
Category 1: No sales activity (annual of $0)
Category 2: Annual sales between $0 and $25,000
Category 3: Annual sales between $25,000 and $250,000
Category 4: Annual sales between $250,000 and $1 million
Category 5: Annual sales over $1 million
The distribution of vendors by sales category is as follows:
FSS and Non-FSS Vendors by Sales Category
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Non-FSS Non-FSS Total vendor
FSS vendors FSS vendors vendors vendors count by
(count) (percentage) (count) (percentage) category
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Category 1...................... 318 15 37 70 355
Category 2...................... 197 10 0 0 197
Category 3...................... 619 30 0 0 619
Category 4...................... 407 20 2 4 409
Category 5...................... 522 25 14 26 536
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total....................... 2,063 100 53 100 2,116
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Automated vs. Manual Reporting Systems: Vendors subject to these
clauses must create systems or processes to produce and report accurate
data. Generally, vendors will use automated or manual systems to
identify the transactional data to be reported each month. An automated
system is one that relies on information technology, such as an
accounting system or data management software, to identify and compile
reportable data. These systems can tremendously streamline the
reporting process but require upfront configuration to perform the
tasks, such as coding the data elements to be retrieved. Conversely, a
manual system is one that incorporates little to no automation and
instead relies on personnel to manually identify and compile the
reportable data. An example of a manual system would be an accountant
reviewing invoices to identify the reportable data and then
transferring the findings to a spreadsheet. In contrast to automation,
a manual system requires relatively little setup time but the reporting
effort will generally increase with the vendor's sales volume.
The likelihood of a vendor adopting an automated system increases
with their applicable sales volume. Vendors with little to no
reportable data are unlikely to expend the effort needed to establish
an automated reporting system since it will be relatively easy to
identify and report a limited amount of data. In fiscal year 2018, 15%
of FSS contracts in the Transactional Data Reporting pilot had $0
sales, while another 10% reported annual sales between $1 and $25,000
per month. However, as a vendor's applicable average monthly sales
increase, it will be increasingly likely to establish an automated
system to reduce the monthly reporting burden. Consequently, vendors
with higher reportable sales will likely bear a higher setup burden to
create an automated system, or absorb a high monthly reporting burden
if they choose to rely on manual reporting methods.
The following chart depicts the likelihood of the current
population adopting manual and automated reporting systems:
Vendors by Reporting System Type
[Manual vs. Automated]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Automated Automated
Manual system system Manual system system vendor
(percentage) (percentage) vendor count count
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Category 1...................................... 100 0 355 0
Category 2...................................... 100 0 197 0
Category 3...................................... 90 10 557 62
Category 4...................................... 50 50 205 205
Category 5...................................... 10 90 54 482
---------------------------------------------------------------
Total Count of Vendors by System Type....... .............. .............. 1,367 749
Percentage of Vendors by System Type........ .............. .............. 65% 35%
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Initial Setup: Vendors complying with this rule will absorb a one-
time setup burden to establish reporting systems. The estimated setup
time varies between automated and manual reporting systems. Vendors
implementing a manual system must acclimate themselves with the new
reporting requirements and train their staff accordingly, while those
with automated systems must perform these tasks in addition to
configuring information technology resources. GSA estimates the average
one-time setup burden is 8 hours for vendors with a manual system and
240 hours for those with an automated system.
Monthly Reporting: After initial setup, vendors subject to these
clauses are required to report sales within 30 calendar days after the
end of each calendar month. The average reporting times vary by system
type (manual or
[[Page 24516]]
automated) and by sales categories. GSA estimates vendors using a
manual system will have average monthly reporting times ranging from 15
minutes (0.25 hours) for vendors with $0 sales to an average of 48
hours for vendors with monthly sales over $1 million. On the other
hand, GSA projects vendors with automated systems will have reporting
times of 2 hours per month, irrespective of monthly sales volume, as a
result of efficiencies achieved through automated processes. The
following table shows GSA's projected monthly reporting times per sales
category and system type:
Monthly Reporting Hours by System Type and Category
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Automated
Manual systems systems
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Category 1.............................. 0.25 2.00
Category 2.............................. 2.00 2.00
Category 3.............................. 4.00 2.00
Category 4.............................. 16.00 2.00
Category 5.............................. 48.00 2.00
------------------------------------------------------------------------
FSS Burden Estimates: A total of 376 FSS contracts joined the
Transactional Data Reporting pilot in FY 2018, including 139 newly
awarded contracts and 237 existing contracts that voluntarily joined
the pilot. The initial setup burden was split between manual and
automated systems, the number of which was estimated based on the ratio
for all pilot contracts (64% manual, 36% automated). The initial setup
burden for those contracts is illustrated below:
Initial Setup
Annual Burden (Hours): 34,412.
Annual Burden (Cost): $2,668,613.
Transactional data was reported for 2,063 FSS contracts in FY 2018.
As previously noted, the reporting burden for vendors using manual
systems increases with their reported sales while the reporting burden
for vendors using automated systems remains constant regardless of the
reported sales volume. The reporting burden for those contracts is
illustrated below:
Quarterly Reporting
Annual Burden (Hours): 119,207.
Annual Burden (Cost): $6,579,023.
Non-FSS Burden Estimates: The only non-FSS contract vehicle
currently using the clause is the Alliant 2 unrestricted contract. 53
Alliant 2 contracts were awarded in FY 2018, meaning each of the
contract holders incurred initial setup costs. The initial setup burden
was split between manual and automated systems, the number of which was
estimated based on the ratio for the Alliant 2 contracts (74% manual,
26% automated). The initial setup burden for those contracts is
illustrated below:
Initial Setup
Annual Burden (Hours): 3,672.
Annual Burden (Cost): $284,764.
As previously noted, the reporting burden for vendors using manual
systems increases with their reported sales while the reporting burden
for vendors using automated systems remains constant regardless of the
reported sales volume. The reporting burden for those contracts is as
follows:
Quarterly Reporting
Annual Burden (Hours): 1,445.
Annual Burden (Cost): $79,772.
Total Annual Burden
The total estimated burden imposed by Transactional Data Reporting
is as follows:
Estimated Annual Time Burden (Hours)
FSS Vendors: 153,619.
Non-FSS Vendors: 5,117.
Total Annual Time Burden: 158,736.
Estimated Annual Cost Burden
FSS Vendors: $9,247,636.
Non-FSS Vendors: $364,535.
Total Annual Cost Burden: $9,612,171.
C. Public Comments
Public comments are particularly invited on: Whether this
collection of information is necessary and whether it will have
practical utility; whether our estimate of the public burden of this
collection of information is accurate, and based on valid assumptions
and methodology; ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of
the information to be collected.
Obtaining Copies of Proposals: Requesters may obtain a copy of the
information collection documents from the General Services
Administration, Regulatory Secretariat Division (MVCB), 1800 F Street
NW, Washington, DC 20405, telephone 202-501-4755. Please cite
Information Collection 3090-0306, Transactional Data Reporting, in all
correspondence.
Jeffrey A. Koses,
Senior Procurement Executive, Office of Acquisition Policy, Office of
Government-wide Policy.
[FR Doc. 2019-11030 Filed 5-24-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6820-61-P
