Overview
Title
Information Collection; Subcontracting Plans
Agencies
ELI5 AI
The government wants to know if people think it's helpful or not when they ask businesses to share plans about working with other smaller businesses. They also want ideas on how to make this process easier and better.
Summary AI
The Department of Defense, General Services Administration, and NASA are asking the public to comment on continuing the requirement for subcontracting plans. This involves providing feedback on whether the collection of information is needed for government functions and how it can be improved. The proposal asks for extending the approval for collecting this information until after the current expiration date. Comments are due by February 4, 2025, and can be submitted through the provided government website.
Abstract
In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, and the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) regulations, DoD, GSA, and NASA invite the public to comment on an extension concerning subcontracting plans. DoD, GSA, and NASA invite comments on: whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of Federal Government acquisitions, including whether the information will have practical utility; the accuracy of the estimate of the burden of the proposed information collection; ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and ways to minimize the burden of the information collection on respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology. OMB has approved this information collection for use through May 31, 2025. DoD, GSA, and NASA propose that OMB extend its approval for use for three additional years beyond the current expiration date.
Keywords AI
Sources
AnalysisAI
The document from the Federal Register is a notice from the Department of Defense (DoD), General Services Administration (GSA), and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) requesting public comments about the extension of subcontracting plan requirements. According to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, any collection of information by the government must be approved, and these agencies are seeking to extend the approval for subcontracting plans beyond the current expiration date of May 31, 2025. They request public input on the necessity, usefulness, and burden of the data collection involved in these plans.
Summary of the Document
The primary purpose of this notice is to gather public feedback on subcontracting plans, which are integral to government contracting procedures. Subcontracting plans are designed to ensure small businesses and disadvantaged groups are given maximum opportunities in federal contracts, helping to promote diversity and inclusivity in public procurement.
Significant Issues or Concerns
One major concern is the complexity of the language used in the document. It references specific federal regulations and acts such as the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) and the Small Business Jobs Act of 2010, which might be difficult for those not well-versed in legal or governmental jargon to fully understand. Moreover, it does not clearly explain how reports like the Summary Subcontract Report (SSR) or Individual Subcontract Report (ISR) are used to assess subcontractors' compliance or performance.
Another issue is the lack of detail about the consequences for contractors who do not make a good faith effort to engage small businesses as outlined in their plans. There is also ambiguity regarding how the burden estimates were calculated, which could hinder assessments of their accuracy.
Additionally, there is a potential privacy concern since comments submitted to the regulations site will be posted publicly without change. This might include sensitive personal or business information.
Broad Public Impact
For the general public, the opportunity to comment on this kind of federal register notice ensures that individuals, businesses, and other organizations can participate in shaping policies that affect how government contracts are managed. This openness aligns with democratic principles by encouraging transparency in governmental processes.
Impact on Specific Stakeholders
For small businesses and other entities like veteran-owned and women-owned businesses, the enforcement and refinement of subcontracting plans can have significant positive impacts. These plans are designed to help them secure public contracts that might otherwise be unrealistically dominated by larger or more established firms.
Conversely, the document might impose a significant administrative burden on contractors required to comply with these regulations by preparing and submitting the necessary documentation, which can be time-consuming and complex.
In summary, while this document continues important discussions about subcontracting plans valuable for small and disadvantaged businesses, it would benefit from clearer language and more thorough explanations addressing public concerns and understanding.
Financial Assessment
In this Federal Register document, the primary financial reference concerns the requirement for contractors to submit subcontracting plans if they have contracts expected to exceed certain thresholds. Specifically, contractors who are awarded contracts that are expected to exceed $750,000, or $1.5 million for the construction of a public facility, must submit an acceptable subcontracting plan. This plan should aim to provide maximum practicable opportunities for various small business categories, including small businesses owned by veterans, service-disabled veterans, women, and other disadvantaged groups.
The document mentions that these subcontracting plans are a compliance requirement under section 8(d) of the Small Business Act. The financial implications here are significant, as contractors engaged in Federal Government acquisitions must consider the subcontracting opportunities they are providing for small businesses, which can impact the overall cost and management of these contracts.
One notable issue connected to these financial references is the lack of clarity regarding the process for evaluating subcontractors' compliance with these financial thresholds and how these reports—like the Summary Subcontract Report (SSR) and Individual Subcontract Report (ISR)—are used to assess performance. While contractors are required to submit these extensive and detailed reports annually and semi-annually, respectively, the document does not explain how the information provided will be used to ensure that the financial allocations toward subcontracting plans are being managed effectively. This can raise questions about the efficiency and accountability in the use of taxpayer dollars within government contracts.
Additionally, the document stipulates a substantial burden of 112,704 total hours for respondents to comply with these reporting requirements. However, there is no clear explanation of how this figure was calculated, which raises concerns about the accuracy of the estimate. If the burden estimate is inaccurate, it could imply a misallocation of time and resources, potentially impacting the financial management of these contracts. Understanding the basis for this figure is vital for assessing whether the financial resources allocated toward handling these subcontracting plans are reasonable and justified.
Overall, while the financial thresholds set forth in the document aim to ensure broad opportunities for small businesses, the lack of detail about the compliance and performance assessment process might limit the effectiveness of this financial policy from a practical perspective.
Issues
• The document mentions the requirement for contractors to submit various reports such as the Summary Subcontract Report (SSR) and Individual Subcontract Report (ISR), but it does not provide a clear explanation of the process by which these reports are used to evaluate subcontractors' compliance or performance.
• The document does not address potential consequences or actions taken if a contractor fails to make a good faith effort to utilize small business subcontractors, as outlined in the subcontracting plans.
• There is a lack of clarity on how the burden estimates of 112,704 total burden hours were calculated, which may impact the ability to assess the reasonableness of these estimates.
• The document's language could be perceived as overly complex, especially for readers not familiar with federal acquisition regulations or the specific acts and clauses referenced (e.g., FAR 52.219-9, Small Business Jobs Act of 2010).
• There is no mention of how the effectiveness of the subcontracting plans will be measured, which could lead to questions about the practical utility of the information being collected.
• Potential concerns around privacy or confidentiality regarding the posting of comments without change on regulations.gov, including any personal and/or business confidential information.