(a) To avoid causing needless changes in participants' financial management systems, an expenditure-based TIA will make for-profit participants that currently perform under other expenditure-based Federal procurement contracts or assistance awards subject to the same standards for financial management systems that apply to those other awards. Therefore, if a for-profit participant has expenditure-based DOE assistance awards other than a TIA, the TIA must apply the standards in 10 CFR 600.311. The contracting officer may grant an exception and allow a for-profit participant that has other expenditure-based Federal Government awards to use an alternative set of standards that meets the minimum criteria in paragraph (b) of this section, if there is a compelling programmatic or business reason to do so. For each case in which an exception is granted, the contracting officer must document the reason in the award file.

(b) For an expenditure-based TIA, the contracting officer is to allow and encourage each for-profit participant that does not currently perform under expenditure-based Federal procurement contracts or assistance awards (other than a TIA) to use its existing financial management system as long as the system, as a minimum:

(1) Complies with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles.

(2) Effectively controls all project funds, including Federal funds and any required cost share. The system must have complete, accurate, and current records that document the sources of funds and the purposes for which they are disbursed. It also must have procedures for ensuring that project funds are used only for purposes permitted by the agreement (see § 603.625).

(3) Includes, if advance payments are authorized under § 603.805, procedures to minimize the time elapsing between the payment of funds by the Government and the firm's disbursement of the funds for program purposes.

So as not to force system changes for any State, local government, institution of higher education, or other nonprofit organization, expenditure-based TIA requirements for the financial management system of any nonprofit participant are to be the same as those that apply to the participant's other Federal assistance awards. Specifically, the requirements are those in:

(a) 10 CFR 600.220 for State and local governments; and

(b) 10 CFR 600.121(b) for other nonprofit organizations, with the exception of nonprofit Government-owned, contractor-operated (GOCO) facilities and Federally Funded Research and Development Centers (FFRDCs) that are excepted from the definition of “recipient” in 10 CFR 600.101. If a GOCO or FFRDC is a participant, the contracting officer must specify appropriate standards that conform as much as practicable with requirements in their procurement contract.

(a) So as not to require any firm to needlessly change its cost accounting system, an expenditure-based TIA is to apply the Government cost principles in 48 CFR part 31 to for-profit participants that currently perform under expenditure-based Federal procurement contracts or assistance awards (other than a TIA) and therefore have existing systems for identifying allowable costs under those principles. If there are programmatic or business reasons to do otherwise, the contracting officer may grant an exception from this requirement and use alternative standards as long as the alternative satisfies the conditions described in paragraph (b) of this section; if an exception is granted the reasons must be documented in the award file.

(b) For other for-profit participants, the contracting officer may establish alternative standards in the agreement as long as that alternative provides, as a minimum, that Federal funds and funds counted as recipients' cost sharing will be used only for costs that:

(1) A reasonable and prudent person would incur in carrying out the RD&D project contemplated by the agreement. Generally, elements of cost that appropriately are charged are those identified with RD&D activities under the Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (see Statement of Financial Accounting Standards Number 2, “Accounting for Research and Development Costs,” October 1974). Moreover, costs must be allocated to DOE and other projects in accordance with the relative benefits the projects receive. Costs charged to DOE projects must be given consistent treatment with costs allocated to the participants' other RD&D activities (e.g., activities supported by the participants themselves or by non-Federal sponsors).

(2) Are consistent with the purposes stated in the governing Congressional authorizations and appropriations. The contracting officer is responsible for ensuring that provisions in the award document address any requirements that result from authorizations and appropriations.

In accordance with the general policy in § 603.605, the contracting officer must require a for-profit participant that has federally approved indirect cost rates for its Federal procurement contracts to use those rates to accumulate and report costs under an expenditure-based TIA. This includes both provisional and final rates that are approved up until the time that the TIA is closed out.

So as not to force financial system changes for any nonprofit participant, an expenditure-based TIA will provide that costs to be charged to the RD&D project by any nonprofit participant must be determined to be allowable in accordance with:

(a) OMB Circular A-87, if the participant is a State or local governmental organization;

(b) OMB Circular A-21, if the participant is an institution of higher education;

(c) 45 CFR Part 74, Appendix E, if the participant is a hospital; or

(d) OMB Circular A-122, if the participant is any other type of nonprofit organization (the cost principles in 48 CFR parts 31 and 231 are to be used by any nonprofit organization that is identified in Circular A-122 as being subject to those cost principles).

If the TIA is an expenditure-based award, the contracting officer must include in it an audit provision that addresses, for each for-profit participant:

(a) Whether the for-profit participant must have periodic audits, in addition to any award-specific audits, as described in § 603.645;

(b) Whether the Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA) or an independent public accountant (IPA) will perform required audits, as discussed in § 603.650;

(c) How frequently any periodic audits are to be performed, addressed in § 603.655; and

(d) Other matters described in § 603.660, such as audit coverage, allowability of audit costs, auditing standards, and remedies for noncompliance.

The contracting officer needs to consider requirements for both periodic audits and award-specific audits (as defined in § 603.1295 and § 603.1220, respectively). The way that an expenditure-based TIA addresses the two types of audits will vary, depending upon the type of for-profit participant.

(a) For for-profit participants that are audited by the DCAA or other Federal auditors, as described in §§ 603.650(b) and 603.655, specific requirements for periodic audits need not be added because the Federal audits should be sufficient to address whatever may be needed. The inclusion in the TIA of the standard access-to-records provision for those for-profit participants, as discussed in § 603.910(a), gives the necessary access in the event that the contracting officer later needs to request audits to address award-specific issues that arise.

(b) For each other for-profit participant, the contracting officer:

(1) Should require that the participant have an independent auditor (i.e., the DCAA or an independent public accountant (IPA)) conduct periodic audits of its systems if it expends $500,000 or more per year in TIAs and other Federal assistance awards. A prime reason for including this requirement is that the Federal Government, for an expenditure-based award, necessarily relies on amounts reported by the participant's systems when it sets payment amounts or adjusts performance outcomes. The periodic audit provides some assurance that the reported amounts are reliable.

(2) Must ensure that the award provides an independent auditor the access needed for award-specific audits, to be performed at the request of the contracting officer if issues arise that require audit support. However, consistent with the government-wide policies on single audits that apply to nonprofit participants (see § 603.665), the contracting officer should rely on periodic audits to the maximum extent possible to resolve any award-specific issues.

The auditor identified in an expenditure-based TIA to perform periodic and award-specific audits of a for-profit participant depends on the circumstances, as follows:

(a) The Federal cognizant agency or an IPA will be the auditor for a for-profit participant that does not meet the criteria in paragraph (b) of this section. Note that the allocable portion of the costs of the IPA's audit may be reimbursable under the TIA, as described in § 603.660(b). The IPA should be the one that the participant uses to perform other audits (e.g., of its financial statement), to minimize added burdens and costs.

(b) Except as provided in paragraph (c) of this section, the Federal cognizant agency (e.g., DCAA) must be identified as the auditor for a GOCO or FFRDC and for any for-profit participant that is subject to Federal audits because it is currently performing under a Federal award that is subject to the:

(1) Cost principles in 48 CFR part 31 of the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR); or

(2) Cost Accounting Standards in 48 CFR Chapter 99.

(c) If there are programmatic or business reasons that justify the use of an auditor other than the Federal cognizant agency for a for-profit participant that meets the criteria in paragraph (b) of this section, the contracting officer may provide that an IPA will be the auditor for that participant in which case the reasons for this decision must be documented in the award file.

If an expenditure-based TIA provides for periodic audits of a for-profit participant by an IPA, the contracting officer must specify the frequency for those audits. The contracting officer should consider having an audit performed during the first year of the award, when the participant has its IPA do its next financial statement audit, unless the participant already had a systems audit due to other Federal awards within the past two years. The frequency thereafter may vary depending upon the dollars the participant is expending annually under the award, but it is not unreasonable to require an updated audit every two to three years to verify that the participant's systems continue to be reliable (the audit then would cover the two or three-year period between audits).

If an expenditure-based TIA provides for audits of a for-profit participant by an IPA, the contracting officer also must specify:

(a) What periodic audits are to cover. It is important to specify audit coverage that is only as broad as needed to provide reasonable assurance of the participant's compliance with award terms that have a direct and material effect on the RD&D project.

(b) Who will pay for periodic and award-specific audits. The allocable portion of the costs of any audits by IPAs may be reimbursable under the TIA. The costs may be direct charges or allocated indirect costs, consistent with the participant's accounting system and practices.

(c) The auditing standards that the IPA will use. The contracting officer must provide that the IPA will perform the audits in accordance with the Generally Accepted Government Auditing Standards.

(d) The available remedies for noncompliance. The agreement must provide that the participant may not charge costs to the award for any audit that the contracting officer determines was not performed in accordance with the Generally Accepted Government Auditing Standards or other terms of the agreement. It also must provide that the Government has the right to require the participant to have the IPA take corrective action and, if corrective action is not taken, that the agreements officer has recourse to any of the remedies for noncompliance identified in 10 CFR 600.352(a).

(e) Where the IPA is to send audit reports. The agreement must provide that the IPA is to submit audit reports to the contracting officer. It also must require that the IPA report instances of fraud directly to the Office of Inspector General (OIG), DOE.

(f) The retention period for the IPA's working papers. The contracting officer must specify that the IPA is to retain working papers for a period of at least three years after the final payment, unless the working papers relate to an audit whose findings are not fully resolved within that period or to an unresolved claim or dispute (in which case, the IPA must keep the working papers until the matter is resolved and final action taken).

(g) Who will have access to the IPA's working papers. The agreement must provide for Government access to working papers.

An expenditure-based TIA is an assistance instrument subject to the Single Audit Act (31 U.S.C. 7501-7507), so nonprofit participants are subject to the requirements under that Act and OMB Circular A-133. Specifically, the requirements are those in:

(a) 10 CFR 600.226 for State and local governments; and

(b) 10 CFR 600.126 for other nonprofit organizations.

(a) In accordance with § 603.610, an expenditure-based TIA must require participants to flow down the same audit requirements to a subrecipient that would apply if the subrecipient were a participant.

(b) For example, a for-profit participant that is audited by the DCAA:

(1) Would flow down to a university subrecipient the Single Audit Act requirements that apply to a university participant;

(2) Could enter into a subaward allowing a for-profit participant, under the circumstances described in § 603.650(a), to use an IPA to do its audits.

(c) This policy applies to subawards for substantive performance of portions of the RD&D project supported by the TIA, and not to participants' purchases of goods or services needed to carry out the RD&D.

An expenditure-based TIA should require participants to report to the contracting officer when they enter into any subaward allowing a for-profit subawardee to use an IPA, as described in § 603.670(b)(2).

This subpart addresses “systemic” administrative matters that place requirements on the operation of a participant's financial management, property management, or purchasing system. Each participant's systems are organization-wide and do not vary with each agreement. Therefore, a TIA should address systemic requirements in a uniform way for each type of participant organization.

The general policy for an expenditure-based TIA is to avoid requirements that would force participants to use different financial management, property management, and purchasing systems than they currently use for:

(a) Expenditure-based Federal procurement contracts and assistance awards in general, if they receive them; or

(b) Commercial business, if they have no expenditure-based Federal procurement contracts and assistance awards.

If it is an expenditure-based award, the TIA must require participants to provide the same financial management, property management, and purchasing systems requirements to a subrecipient that would apply if the subrecipient were a participant. For example, a for-profit participant would require a university subrecipient to comply with requirements that apply to a university participant and would require a GOCO or FFRDC subrecipient to comply with standards that conform as much as practicable with the requirements in the GOCO/FFRDC procurement contract. Note that this policy applies to subawards for substantive performance of portions of the RD&D project supported by the TIA and not to participants' purchases of goods or services needed to carry out the RD&D.

(a) With the two exceptions described in paragraph (b) of this section, the contracting officer must require a for-profit firm to purchase real property or equipment with its own funds that are separate from the RD&D project. The contracting officer should allow the firm to charge to an expenditure-based TIA only depreciation or use charges for real property or equipment (and the cost estimate for a fixed-support TIA only would include those costs). Note that the firm must charge depreciation consistently with its usual accounting practice. Many firms treat depreciation as an indirect cost. Any firm that usually charges depreciation indirectly for a particular type of property must not charge depreciation for that property as a direct cost to the TIA.

(b) In two situations, the contracting officer may grant an exception and allow a for-profit firm to use project funds, which includes both the Federal Government and recipient shares, to purchase real property or equipment (i.e., to charge to the project the full acquisition cost of the property). The two circumstances, which should be infrequent for equipment and extremely rare for real property, are those in which either:

(1) The real property or equipment will be dedicated to the project and has a current fair market value that is less than $5,000 by the time the project ends; or

(2) The contracting officer gives prior approval for the firm to include the full acquisition cost of the real property or equipment as part of the cost of the project (see § 603.535).

(c) If the contracting officer grants an exception in either of the circumstances described in paragraphs (b)(1) and (2) of this section, the real property or equipment must be subject to the property management standards in 10 CFR 600.321(b) through (e). As provided in those standards, the title to the real property or equipment will vest conditionally in the for-profit firm upon acquisition. A TIA, whether it is a fixed-support or expenditure-based award, must specify that any item of equipment that has a fair market value of $5,000 or more at the conclusion of the project also will be subject to the disposition process in 10 CFR 600.321(f), whereby the Federal Government will recover its interest in the property at that time.

For nonprofit participants, a TIA's requirements for vesting of title, use, management, and disposition of real property or equipment acquired under the award are the same as those that apply to the participant's other Federal assistance awards. Specifically, the requirements are those in:

(a) 10 CFR 600.231 and 600.232, for participants that are States and local governmental organizations; and

(b) 10 CFR 600.132 and 600.134, for other nonprofit participants, with the exception of nonprofit GOCOs and FFRDCs that are exempted from the definition of “recipient” in 10 CFR 600.101. If a GOCO or FFRDC is a participant, the contracting officer must specify appropriate standards that conform as much as practicable with the requirements in its procurement contract. Note also that:

(1) If the TIA is a cooperative agreement, 31 U.S.C. 6306 provides authority to vest title to tangible personal property in a nonprofit institution of higher education or in a nonprofit organization whose primary purpose is conducting scientific research, without further obligation to the Federal Government; and

(2) A TIA therefore must specify any conditions on the vesting of title to real property or equipment acquired by any such nonprofit participant.

If DOE provides Federally-owned property to any participant for the performance of RD&D under a TIA, the contracting officer must require that participant to account for, use, and dispose of the property in accordance with:

(a) 10 CFR 600.322, if the participant is a for-profit firm.

(b) 10 CFR 600.232(f), if the participant is a State or local governmental organization. Note that 10 CFR 600.232(f) contains additional requirements for managing the property.

(c) 10 CFR 600.133(a) and 600.134(f), if the participant is a nonprofit organization other than a GOCO or FFRDC (requirements for GOCOs and FFRDCs should conform with the property standards in their procurement contracts).

An expenditure-based TIA's provisions should permit participants to use their existing procedures to account for and manage supplies. A fixed-support TIA should not include requirements to account for or manage supplies.

(a) If the TIA is an expenditure-based award, it should require for-profit participants that currently perform under DOE assistance instruments subject to the purchasing standards in 10 CFR 600.331 to use the same requirements for the TIA, unless there are programmatic or business reasons to do otherwise (in which case the reasons must be documented in the award file).

(b) Other for-profit participants under an expenditure-based TIA should be allowed to use their existing purchasing systems, as long as they flow down the applicable requirements in Federal statutes, Executive Orders or Government-wide regulations (see Appendices A and B to this part for a list of those requirements).

So as not to force system changes for any nonprofit participant, an expenditure-based TIA should provide that each nonprofit participant's purchasing system comply with:

(a) 10 CFR 600.236, if the participant is a State or local governmental organization.

(b) 10 CFR 600.140 through 10 CFR 600.149, if the participant is a nonprofit organization other than a GOCO or FFRDC that is excepted from the definition of “recipient” in 10 CFR 600.101. If a GOCO or FFRDC is a participant, the TIA must specify appropriate standards that conform as much as practicable with requirements in its procurement contract.