95-18789. Food Stamp Program: Automated Data Processing Equipment and Services; Reduction in Reporting Requirements  

  • [Federal Register Volume 60, Number 146 (Monday, July 31, 1995)]
    [Proposed Rules]
    [Pages 38972-38974]
    From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
    [FR Doc No: 95-18789]
    
    
    
    ========================================================================
    Proposed Rules
                                                    Federal Register
    ________________________________________________________________________
    
    This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of 
    the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these 
    notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in 
    the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules.
    
    ========================================================================
    
    
    Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 146 / Monday, July 31, 1995 / 
    Proposed Rules
    
    
    [[Page 38972]]
    
    
    DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
    
    Food and Consumer Service
    
    7 CFR Part 277
    
    [Amendment No. 368]
    RIN 0584-AB92
    
    
    Food Stamp Program: Automated Data Processing Equipment and 
    Services; Reduction in Reporting Requirements
    
    AGENCY: Food and Consumer Service, USDA.
    
    ACTION: Proposed rule.
    
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    SUMMARY: This rule proposes to increase the cost thresholds above which 
    prior written Federal approval of State automated data processing (ADP) 
    equipment and services acquisitions is required for Federal financial 
    participation. The effect of the proposed changes would be a reduction 
    in State reporting requirements.
        Additionally, State request would be deemed to have provisionally 
    met the prior approval requirement if FCS does not approve, disapprove, 
    or request additional information about the request within 60 days of 
    the agency's letter to the State acknowledging its receipt. Finally, 
    this rule proposes to eliminate the requirement that State agencies 
    submit written information pertaining to the State biennial system 
    security reviews. States would be required to maintain copies of the 
    report and pertinent supporting documentation for FCS review.
    DATES: Comments must be received on or before September 29, 1995 in 
    order to be assured of consideration.
    
    ADDRESSES: Comments should be addressed to John H. Knaus, Chief, 
    Quality Control Branch, Program Accountability Division, Food Stamp 
    Program, 3101 Park Center Drive, Room 904, Alexandria, Virginia 22302. 
    All written comments will be open to public inspection during regular 
    business hours (8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m., Monday through Friday) at that 
    address.
    
    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Questions concerning this proposed 
    rulemaking should be addressed to Mr. Knaus at the above address or by 
    telephone at (703) 305-2474.
    
    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    
    Executive Order 12866
    
        This rulemaking has been determined to be significant and was 
    reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order 
    12866.
    
    Executive Order 12372
    
        The Food Stamp Program (FSP) is listed in the Catalog of Federal 
    Domestic Assistance under 10.551 and information on State agency 
    administrative matching grants for the FSP is listed under 10.561. For 
    the reasons set forth in the final rule and related notice to 7 CFR 
    3015, subpart v (48 FR 29115), the FSP is excluded from the scope of 
    Executive Order 12372 which requires intergovernmental consultation 
    with State and local officials.
    
    Executive Order 12778
    
        This rulemaking has been reviewed under Executive Order 12778, 
    Civil Justice Reform. This rule is intended to have preemptive effect 
    with respect to any State or local laws, regulations or policies which 
    conflict with its provisions or which would otherwise impede its full 
    implementation. This rule is not intended to have retroactive effect 
    unless so specified in the ``Effective Date'' section of this preamble. 
    Prior to any judicial challenge to the provisions of this rule or the 
    application of its provisions, all applicable administrative procedures 
    must be exhausted. In the FSP the administrative procedures are as 
    follows: (1) For program benefit recipients--State administrative 
    procedures issued pursuant to 7 U.S.C. 2020(e)(10) and 7 CFR 273.15; 
    (2) for State agencies--administrative procedures issued pursuant to 7 
    U.S.C. 2023 set out at 7 CFR 276.7 (for rules related to non-QC 
    liabilities) or Part 283 (for rules related to QC Liabilities); (3) for 
    program retailers and wholesalers--administrative procedures issued 
    pursuant to 7 U.S.C. 2023 set out at 7 CFR 278.8.
    
    Regulatory Flexibility Act
    
        This rulemaking has been reviewed with regard to the requirements 
    of the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (Pub. L. 96-354, 94 Stat. 
    1164, September 19, 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601-612). Ellen Haas, Under 
    Secretary for Food, Nutrition, and Consumer Services, has certified 
    that this rule does not have a significant economic impact on a 
    substantial number of small entities. This rule will affect State 
    agencies by reducing the reporting requirements applicable to them.
    
    Paperwork Reduction Act
    
        In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980 (44 U.S.C. 
    3507), information collection requirements relating to automated data 
    processing and information retrieval systems have been approved by OMB 
    Approval No. 0584-0083. The provisions of this rule do not contain any 
    additional reporting and/or recordkeeping requirements subject to OMB 
    approval.
    
    Background
    
        State agencies acquire ADP equipment and services for computer 
    operations which support the FSP. For Federal financial participation, 
    States are required to obtain prior written Federal approval when ADP 
    acquisitions for total State and Federal costs exceed the thresholds 
    established in 7 CFR 277.18. Currently, prior approval is required for 
    competitively bid ADP acquisitions of $500,000 or more; sole source 
    acquisitions costing more than $100,000; project increases of $300,000 
    or more; most procurement documents (requests of proposals (RFPs) and 
    contracts) of $500,000 or more; and contract amendments that cost 
    $100,000 or more.
        ADP equipment and services acquisitions under $5 million account 
    for a small percentage of the total cost of State systems development. 
    In the interest of improved efficiency and effectiveness of the ADP 
    process, the Department proposes to increase thresholds above which 
    prior approval is required. This change would reduce the reporting 
    burden on States and provide for better use of Federal resources.
        The higher thresholds proposed in this rule would require prior 
    approval from the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Food and 
    Consumer Service 
    
    [[Page 38973]]
    (FCS) for: (1) advance planning documents (APDs) for ADP equipment and 
    services acquisitions of $5 million or more in total Federal and State 
    costs; (2) justifications for noncompetitive ADP acquisitions from 
    nongovernment sources of more than $1 million but no more than $5 
    million in total Federal and State costs; (3) requests for proposals 
    and contracts of more than $5 million in total Federal and State costs 
    for competitive procurements and more than $1 million for 
    noncompetitive acquisitions from nongovernmental sources, unless 
    specifically exempted by FCS; (4) contract amendments for cost 
    increases exceeding $1 million or time extensions of more than 120 
    days; (5) annual APD updates for projects with total acquisition costs 
    of more than $5 million; and (6) as-needed APD updates for cost 
    increases of $1 million or more (the percentage of cost benchmark is 
    removed).
        Additionally, this rule proposes to add a provision to regulations 
    which will promote efficient operation of the prior approval 
    requirement. The prior approval requirement would be deemed to have 
    been provisionally met if FCS has not approved, denied or requested 
    additional information on the request within 60 days of the Agency's 
    written acknowledgement of its receipt. With this change, States would 
    have a firmer basis upon which to establish project timeframes, 
    including the need for FCS approvals. The possibility of increased 
    costs attributable to a delay in FCS action on State funding requests 
    would also be reduced.
        This change would allow States which are confident that their 
    requests are in compliance of Federal requirements to proceed after the 
    60-day period has expired without awaiting final FCS approval. However, 
    the provisional approval would not exempt a State from having to meet 
    all other Federal requirements which pertain to the acquisition of ADP 
    equipment and services. Such acquisitions remain subject to Federal 
    audit and review, and the final determinations of these audits and 
    reviews.
        Currently, State agencies are required to submit to FCS information 
    pertaining to the biennial security review. As proposed, State agencies 
    would no longer be required to submit this information; but security 
    review reports and pertinent supporting documentation would have to be 
    maintained for Federal onsite review.
        This rulemaking reflects concerned efforts on the part of USDA and 
    DHHS to promote inter-Departmental consistency and standardization. The 
    Departments are publishing similar regulations in coordination with 
    each other.
    
    Regulation Changes
    
        Regulations now require prior written approval for acquisition of 
    ADP equipment and services if total costs are $500,000 or more in 
    Federal and State funds. If the State plans to acquire the equipment 
    and services non-competitively from a non-government source, prior 
    approval is required when the total acquisition costs are greater than 
    $100,000.
        This rulemaking proposes to revise 7 CFR 277.18(c)(1) by raising 
    the thresholds for approval of competitive acquisitions to those that 
    will cost $5 million or more in total Federal and State funds. As 
    proposed, noncompetitive acquisitions of $5 million or more would also 
    require prior approval. In addition, noncompetitive acquisitions from a 
    non-governmental source that have total State and Federal acquisition 
    costs of more than $1 million but no more than $5 million would need 
    prior approval of the justification for the sole source purchase. No 
    changes are proposed for the requirements in this paragraph that apply 
    to Electronic Benefit Transfer (EBT) systems.
        Paragraphs (c)(2)(ii) (A) and (B) currently provide that, unless 
    specifically exempted by FCS, prior written approval must be received 
    before the release of a Request for Proposal (RFP) or execution of a 
    contract where costs are anticipated to equal or exceed $500,000. This 
    rule proposes to increase the threshold for prior approval of 
    competitive procurements to those costing more than $5 million and, for 
    noncompetitive procurements from non-government sources, to those 
    costing more than $1 million. States could be required to submit RFPs 
    and contracts under the threshold amounts on an exception basis or if 
    the procurement strategy is not adequately described in the APD.
        Changes to thresholds for contract amendments, specified in 
    paragraph (c)(2)(ii)(C), are also proposed. Regulations now require 
    that, unless specifically exempted by FCS, prior approval is required 
    before the State's signing of a contract amendment unless it involves 
    cost increases of less than $100,000 or time extensions of less than 60 
    days, and is an integral part of the APD. This rule proposes to change 
    that requirement to provide that, unless specifically exempted by FCS, 
    prior Federal approval would be required for contract amendments 
    involving cost increases greater than $1 million or contract time 
    extensions of more than 120 days. States would also be required to 
    submit contract amendments under these thresholds on an exception basis 
    or if the contract amendment is not adequately justified in the APD.
        Proposed changes to paragraphs (c)(2)(ii) (A), (B) and (C), as 
    discussed above, would retain FCS' right to review and approve all 
    RFPs, contracts, and contract amendments, regardless of dollar amount 
    on an exception basis. The exception basis could include instances 
    where new program requirements or technology are involved, or when 
    adequate justification in the APD has not been provided. EBT system 
    requirements in these paragraphs would be unchanged.
        States are currently required to submit for approval an annual APD 
    Update for approved planning and implementation APDs when the total 
    acquisition costs exceed $1 million. This rule proposes to increase the 
    threshold for submission of these documents to those costing more than 
    $5 million.
        Paragraph (e)(3)(i) now recommends submission of ``as-needed'' APD 
    updates whenever there is a significant increase ($300,000 or 10 
    percent, whichever is less) in total costs for a commitment of Federal 
    financial participation for the increase. As proposed, the amount of a 
    significant increase in total project costs would be raised to $1 
    million or more. There would no longer be a percentage of cost 
    benchmark.
        This rule proposes to add a new paragraph after paragraph (c)(4). 
    To promote operation of the prior approval requirement, this new 
    paragraph, (c)(5), would provide for provisional approval of the prior 
    approval requirement if FCS has not provided written approval, 
    disapproval, or a request for additional information within 60 days of 
    issuing an acknowledge of receipt of a State's request.
        Finally, this rule proposes to amend paragraph (p)(3), which 
    requires States agencies to submit information related to the biennial 
    security review. As proposed, State agencies would be required to 
    maintain reports of their biennial ADP system reviews and pertinent 
    supporting documentation for Federal on-site review.
    
    List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 277
    
        Claims, Computer technology, Grant programs, Social programs.
    
        Accordingly, 7 CFR part 277 is proposed to be amended as follows:
    
    [[Page 38974]]
    
    
    PART 277--PAYMENTS OF CERTAIN ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS OF STATE 
    AGENCIES
        1. The authority citation for Part 277 continues to read as 
    follows:
    
        Authority: 7 U.S.C. 2011-2032.
    
        2. In Sec. 277.18,
        a. paragraph (c)(1) is revised;
        b. the second sentence in paragraph (c)(2)(ii)(A) is removed and 
    two sentences are added in its place;
        c. the second sentence in paragraph (c)(2)(ii)(B) is removed and 
    two sentences are added in its place;
        d. the second sentence in paragraph (c)(2)(ii)(C) is removed and 
    two sentences are added in its place;
        e. paragraph (c)(5) is added;
        f. paragraph (e)(1) is amended by removing to words ``$1 million'' 
    and adding in their place the words ``$5 million'';
        g. paragraph (e)(3)(i) is amended by removing the words ``($300,000 
    or 10 percent, whichever is less)'' and adding in their place the words 
    ``($1 million or more)'';
        h. the third and fourth sentences of paragraph (p)(3) are removed 
    and one sentence is added in their place.
        The revisions and additions read as follows:
    
    
    Sec. 277.18  Establishment of an Automated Data Processing (ADP) and 
    Information Retrieval System.
    
    * * * * *
        (c) General acquisition requirements.--(1) Requirement for prior 
    FCS approval. A State agency shall obtain prior written approval from 
    FCS as specified in paragraph (c)(2) of this section when it plans to 
    acquire ADP equipment or services with proposed FFP that it anticipates 
    will have total acquisition costs of $5 million or more in Federal and 
    State funds. This applies to both competitively bid and sole source 
    acquisitions. A State agency shall also obtain prior written approval 
    from FCS of its justification for a sole source acquisition when it 
    plans to acquire ADP equipment or services non-competitively from a 
    non-governmental source which has a total State and Federal acquisition 
    cost of more than $1 million but no more than $5 million. However, a 
    State agency shall obtain prior written approval from FCS for the 
    acquisition of ADP equipment or services to be utilized in and EBT 
    system regardless of the cost of the acquisition. The State agency 
    shall request prior FCS approval by submitting the planning APD, the 
    Implementation APD or the justification for the sole source acquisition 
    signed by the appropriate State official to the FCS regional office.
        (2) Specific prior approval requirements. * * *
        (ii) * * *
        (A) * * * However, RFPs costing up to $5 million for competitive 
    procurement and up to $1 million for noncompetitive acquisitions from 
    non-governmental sources and which are an integral part of the approval 
    APD need not be submitted to FCS. Stated will be required to submit 
    RFPs under this threshold amount on an exception basis or if the 
    procurement strategy is not adequately described in an APD. * * *
        (B) * * * However, contracts costing up to $5 million for 
    competitive procurements and up to $1 million for noncompetitive 
    acquisitions from nongovernmental sources, and which are an integral 
    part of the approved APD need not be submitted to FCS. States will be 
    required to submit contracts under this threshold amount on an 
    exception basis or if the procurement strategy is not adequately 
    described in an APD. * * *
        (C) * * * However, contract amendments involving cost increases of 
    up to $1 million or time extensions of up to 120 days, and which are an 
    integral part of the approved ADP need not be submitted to FCS. States 
    will be required to submit contract amendments under these threshold 
    amounts on an exception basis or if the contract amendment is not 
    adequately justified in an APD. * * *
    * * * * *
        (5) Prompt action on requests for prior approval. FCS will reply 
    promptly to State requests for prior approval. If FCS has not provided 
    written approval, disapproval or a request for additional information 
    within 60 days of FCS' letter acknowledging receipt of the State's 
    request, the request will be deemed to have provisionally met the prior 
    approval requirement in 277.18(c). However, provisional approval will 
    not exempt a State from having to meet all other Federal requirements 
    which pertain to the acquisition of ADP equipment and services. Such 
    requirements remain subject to Federal audit and review.
     * * * * *
        (p) * * *
        (3) * * * State agencies shall maintain reports of their biennial 
    ADP system security reviews, together with pertinent supporting 
    documentation, for Federal on-site review.
     * * * * *
        Dated: July 26, 1995.
    Ellen Haas,
    Under Secretary, Food, Nutrition, and Consumer Services.
    [FR Doc. 95-18789 Filed 7-28-95; 8:45 am]
    BILLING CODE 3410-30-M
    
    

Document Information

Published:
07/31/1995
Department:
Food and Consumer Service
Entry Type:
Proposed Rule
Action:
Proposed rule.
Document Number:
95-18789
Dates:
Comments must be received on or before September 29, 1995 in order to be assured of consideration.
Pages:
38972-38974 (3 pages)
Docket Numbers:
Amendment No. 368
RINs:
0584-AB92: Food Stamp Program Automated Data Processing Equipment and Services; Reduction in Reporting Requirements
RIN Links:
https://www.federalregister.gov/regulations/0584-AB92/food-stamp-program-automated-data-processing-equipment-and-services-reduction-in-reporting-requireme
PDF File:
95-18789.pdf
CFR: (1)
7 CFR 277.18