Small Business Size Standards: Educational Services, 70667-70680 [2011-29445]
Download as PDF
70667
Proposed Rules
Federal Register
Vol. 76, No. 220
Tuesday, November 15, 2011
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.
OFFICE OF GOVERNMENT ETHICS
5 CFR Part 2635
Standards of Ethical Conduct for
Employees of the Executive Branch;
Proposed Amendments Limiting Gifts
From Registered Lobbyists and
Lobbying Organizations; Extension of
Comment Period
AGENCY:
3209–AA04, for the proposed
rulemaking.
Julia
L. Eirinberg, Associate General Counsel,
Office of Government Ethics; telephone:
(202) 482–9300; TYY: (800) 877–8339;
FAX: (202) 482–9237.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A copy of
the original proposed rulemaking notice
is available at: https://www.gpo.gov/
fdsys/pkg/FR-2011-09-13/html/201123311.htm.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Approved: November 9, 2011.
Don W. Fox,
Acting Director, Office of Government Ethics.
[FR Doc. 2011–29569 Filed 11–14–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6345–03–P
Office of Government Ethics
(OGE).
Proposed rule; extension of
comment period.
SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION
On September 13, 2011, the
Office of Government Ethics published
in the Federal Register proposed
amendments to the regulation governing
standards of ethical conduct for
executive branch employees of the
Federal Government to impose limits on
the use of gift exceptions by all
employees to accept gifts from
registered lobbyists and lobbying
organizations, and to implement the
lobbyist gift ban for appointees required
to sign the Ethics Pledge prescribed by
Executive Order 13490. The public
comment period closes on November
14, 2011. OGE is extending the
comment period to December 14, 2011.
DATES: The comment period for the
proposed rule published September 13,
2011, at 76 FR 56330, is extended.
Comments must be submitted in writing
and be received by December 14, 2011.
ADDRESSES: You may submit written
comments to OGE on the proposed rule,
identified by RIN 3209–AA04, by any of
the following methods:
• Email: usoge@oge.gov. Include the
reference ‘‘Proposed Amendments to
Part 2635’’ in the subject line of the
message.
• Fax: (202) 482–9237.
• Mail/Hand Delivery/Courier: Office
of Government Ethics, Suite 500, 1201
New York Avenue NW., Washington,
DC 20005–3917, Attention: Julia L.
Eirinberg, Associate General Counsel.
Instructions: All submissions must
include OGE’s agency name and the
Regulation Identifier Number (RIN),
RIN 3245–AG29
ACTION:
jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:13 Nov 14, 2011
Jkt 226001
13 CFR Part 121
Small Business Size Standards:
Educational Services
U.S. Small Business
Administration.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
The U.S. Small Business
Administration (SBA) proposes to
increase small business size standards
for nine industries in North American
Industry Classification System (NAICS)
Sector 61, Educational Services. As part
of its ongoing comprehensive size
standards review, SBA has evaluated all
size standards in NAICS Sector 61 to
determine whether the existing size
standards should be retained or revised.
This proposed rule is one of a series of
proposals that will examine size
standards of industries grouped by
NAICS Sector. SBA issued a White
Paper entitled ‘‘Size Standards
Methodology’’ and published a notice in
the October 21, 2009 issue of the
Federal Register that ‘‘Size Standards
Methodology’’ is available on its Web
site at https://www.sba.gov/size for
public review and comments. The ‘‘Size
Standards Methodology’’ White Paper
explains how SBA establishes, reviews
and modifies its receipts based and
employee based small business size
standards. In this proposed rule, SBA
has applied its methodology that
pertains to establishing, reviewing and
modifying a receipts based size
standard.
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
SBA must receive comments to
this proposed rule on or before January
17, 2012.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments,
identified by RIN 3245–AG29 by one of
the following methods: (1) Federal
eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov; follow the
instructions for submitting comments;
or (2) Mail/Hand Delivery/Courier:
Khem R. Sharma, Ph.D., Chief, Size
Standards Division, 409 Third Street
SW., Mail Code 6530, Washington, DC
20416. SBA will not accept comments to
this proposed rule submitted by email.
SBA will post all comments to this
proposed rule on https://
www.regulations.gov. If you wish to
submit confidential business
information (CBI) as defined in the User
Notice at https://www.regulations.gov,
you must submit such information to
U.S. Small Business Administration,
Khem R. Sharma, Ph.D., Chief, Size
Standards Division, 409 Third Street
SW., Mail Code 6530, Washington, DC
20416, or send an email to
sizestandards@sba.gov. You should
highlight the information that you
consider to be CBI and explain why you
believe SBA should hold this
information as confidential. SBA will
review your information and determine
whether it will make the information
public or not.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Khem R. Sharma, Ph.D., Chief, Size
Standards Division, (202) 205–6618 or
sizestandards@sba.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: To
determine eligibility for Federal small
business assistance, SBA establishes
small business size definitions (referred
to as size standards) for private sector
industries in the United States. SBA
uses two primary measures of business
size: average annual receipts and
average number of employees. SBA uses
financial assets, electric output, and
refining capacity to measure the size for
a few specialized industries. In
addition, SBA’s Small Business
Investment Company (SBIC), Certified
Development Company (504) and 7(a)
Loan Programs use either the industry
based size standards or net worth and
net income based size standards to
determine eligibility for those programs.
At the beginning of SBA’s
comprehensive size standards review,
there were 41 different size standards,
covering 1,141 NAICS industries and 18
DATES:
E:\FR\FM\15NOP1.SGM
15NOP1
jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
70668
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 220 / Tuesday, November 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules
sub-industry activities (‘‘exceptions’’ in
SBA’s table of size standards). Thirtyone of these size levels were based on
average annual receipts, seven were
based on average number of employees,
and three were based on other measures.
In addition, SBA has established 11
other size standards for its financial and
procurement programs.
Over the years, SBA has received
comments that its size standards have
not kept up with changes in the
economy, in particular the changes in
the Federal contracting marketplace and
industry structure. The last time SBA
conducted a comprehensive review of
size standards was during the late 1970s
and early 1980s. Since then, most
reviews of size standards have been
limited to in-depth analyses of specific
industries in response to requests from
the public and Federal agencies. SBA
also makes periodic inflation
adjustments to its monetary based size
standards. SBA’s latest inflation
adjustment to size standards was
published in the Federal Register on
July 18, 2008 (73 FR 41237).
Because of changes in the Federal
marketplace and industry structure
since the last overall review, SBA
recognizes that current data may no
longer support some of its existing size
standards. Accordingly, in 2007, SBA
began a comprehensive review of all
size standards to determine if they are
consistent with current data, and to
adjust them when necessary. In
addition, on September 27, 2010, the
President of the United States signed the
Small Business Jobs Act of 2010 (Jobs
Act). The Jobs Act directs SBA to
conduct a detailed review of all size
standards and to make appropriate
adjustments to reflect market
conditions. Specifically, the Jobs Act
requires SBA to conduct a detailed
review of at least one-third of all size
standards during every 18-month period
from the date of its enactment. In
addition, the Jobs Act requires that SBA
conduct a review of all size standards
not less frequently than once every 5
years thereafter. Reviewing existing
small business size standards and
making appropriate adjustments based
on current data are also consistent with
Executive Order 13563 on improving
regulation and regulatory review.
Rather than review all size standards
at one time, SBA has adopted a more
manageable approach of reviewing a
group of industries within an NAICS
Sector. An NAICS Sector generally
consists of 25 to 75 industries, except
for the manufacturing sector, which has
considerably more. Once SBA
completes its review of size standards
for industries in an NAICS Sector, it
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:13 Nov 14, 2011
Jkt 226001
will issue a proposed rule to revise size
standards for those industries for which
currently available data and other
relevant factors support doing so.
Below is a discussion of SBA’s size
standards methodology for establishing
receipts based size standards, which
SBA applied to this proposed rule,
including analyses of industry structure,
Federal procurement trends and other
factors for industries reviewed in this
proposed rule, the impact of the
proposed revisions to size standards on
Federal small business assistance, and
the evaluation of whether a revised size
standard would exclude dominant firms
from being considered small.
Size Standards Methodology
SBA has developed a ‘‘Size Standards
Methodology’’ for developing, reviewing
and modifying size standards when
necessary. SBA has published the
document on its Web site at https://
www.sba.gov/size for public review and
comments and included it, as a
supporting document, in the electronic
docket for this proposed rule at https://
www.regulations.gov. SBA does not
apply all features of its ‘‘Size Standards
Methodology’’ to all industries because
not all are appropriate. For example,
since this proposed rule covers all
industries with receipts based size
standards in NAICS Sector 61, the
methodology described here applies to
establishing receipts based standards.
However, the methodology is made
available in its entirety for parties who
have an interest in SBA’s overall
approach to establishing, evaluating and
modifying small business size
standards. SBA always explains its
analysis in individual proposed and
final rules relating to size standards for
specific industries.
SBA welcomes comments from the
public on a number of issues that it
raises in its ‘‘Size Standards
Methodology,’’ such as suggestions on
alternative approaches to establishing
and modifying size standards, whether
there are alternative or additional
factors that SBA should consider,
whether SBA’s approach to small
business size standards makes sense in
the current economic environment,
whether SBA’s use of anchor size
standards is appropriate in the current
economy, whether there are gaps in
SBA’s methodology because of the lack
of comprehensive data, and whether
there are other facts or issues that SBA
should consider. Comments on SBA’s
methodology should be submitted via
(1) The Federal eRulemaking Portal:
https://www.regulations.gov; the docket
number is SBA–2009–0008; follow the
instructions for submitting comments;
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
or (2) Mail/Hand Delivery/Courier:
Khem R. Sharma, Ph.D., Chief, Size
Standards Division, 409 Third Street
SW., Mail Code 6530, Washington, DC
20416. As with comments received to
this and other proposed rules, SBA will
post all comments on its methodology
on https://www.regulations.gov. As of
November 15, 2011, SBA has received
seven comments to its ‘‘Size Standards
Methodology.’’ The comments are
available to the public at https://
www.regulations.gov. SBA continues to
welcome comments on its methodology
from interested parties.
Congress granted SBA’s Administrator
discretion to establish detailed small
business size standards. 15 U.S.C.
632(a)(2). Section 3(a)(3) of the Small
Business Act (15 U.S.C. 632(a)(3))
requires that ‘‘* * * the [SBA]
Administrator shall ensure that the size
standard varies from industry to
industry to the extent necessary to
reflect the differing characteristics of the
various industries and consider other
factors deemed to be relevant by the
Administrator.’’ Accordingly, the
economic structure of an industry is the
basis for developing and modifying
small business size standards. SBA
identifies the small business segment of
an industry by examining data on the
economic characteristics defining the
industry structure itself (as described
below). In addition to analyzing an
industry’s structure when it establishes
small business size standards, SBA
considers current economic conditions,
together with its own mission, program
objectives, and the Administration’s
current policies, suggestions from
industry groups and Federal agencies,
and public comments on the proposed
rule. SBA also examines whether a size
standard based on industry and other
relevant data successfully excludes
businesses that are dominant in the
industry. This proposed rule affords the
public an opportunity to review and
comment on SBA’s proposals to revise
size standards in NAICS Sector 61, as
well as on the data and methodology it
uses to evaluate and revise a size
standard.
Industry Analysis
For the current comprehensive size
standards review, SBA has established
three ‘‘base’’ or ‘‘anchor’’ size standards:
$7 million in average annual receipts for
industries that have receipts based size
standards, 500 employees for
manufacturing and other industries that
have employee based size standards
(except for Wholesale Trade), and 100
employees for industries in the
Wholesale Trade Sector. SBA
established 500 employees as the anchor
E:\FR\FM\15NOP1.SGM
15NOP1
jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 220 / Tuesday, November 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules
size standard for manufacturing
industries at its inception in 1953.
Shortly thereafter SBA established $1
million in average annual receipts as the
anchor size standard for
nonmanufacturing industries. SBA has
periodically increased the receipts
based anchor size standard for inflation,
and it stands today at $7 million. Since
1986, the size standard for all industries
in the Wholesale Trade Sector has been
100 employees for SBA financial
assistance and for most other Federal
programs. However, NAICS codes for
Wholesale Trade Industries (NAICS
Sector 42) and their 100 employee size
standards do not apply to Federal
procurement programs. Rather, for
Federal procurement the size standard
for all industries in Wholesale Trade
and for all industries in Retail Trade
(NAICS Sector 44–45) is 500 employees
under SBA’s nonmanufacturer rule (13
CFR 121.406(b)).
These long-standing anchor size
standards have stood the test of time
and gained legitimacy through practice
and general public acceptance. An
anchor size standard is neither a
minimum nor a maximum. It is a
common size standard for a large
number of industries that have similar
economic characteristics and serves as a
reference point in evaluating size
standards for individual industries. SBA
uses the anchor in lieu of trying to
establish precise small business size
standards for each industry. Otherwise,
theoretically, the number of size
standards might be as high as the
number of industries for which SBA
establishes size standards (1,141).
Furthermore, the data SBA analyzes are
static, while the U.S. economy is not.
Hence, absolute precision is impossible.
Therefore, SBA presumes an anchor size
standard is appropriate for a particular
industry unless that industry displays
economic characteristics that are
considerably different from others with
the same anchor size standard.
When evaluating a size standard, SBA
compares the economic characteristics
of the specific industry under review to
the average characteristics of industries
with one of the three anchor size
standards (referred to as ‘‘anchor
comparison group’’). This allows SBA to
assess the industry structure and to
determine whether the industry is
appreciably different from the other
industries in the anchor comparison
group. If the characteristics of a specific
industry under review are similar to the
average characteristics of the anchor
comparison group, the anchor size
standard is considered appropriate for
that industry. SBA may consider
adopting a size standard below the
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:13 Nov 14, 2011
Jkt 226001
anchor when (1) All or most of the
industry characteristics are significantly
smaller than the average characteristics
of the anchor comparison group or (2)
other industry considerations strongly
suggest that the anchor size standard
would be an unreasonably high size
standard for the industry.
If the specific industry’s
characteristics are significantly higher
than those of the anchor comparison
group, then a size standard higher than
the anchor size standard may be
appropriate. The larger the differences
are between the characteristics of the
industry under review and those in the
anchor comparison group, the larger
will be the difference between the
appropriate industry size standard and
the anchor size standard. To determine
a size standard above the anchor size
standard, SBA analyzes the
characteristics of a second comparison
group. For industries with receipts
based size standards, including those in
NAICS Sector 61 that are reviewed in
this proposed rule, SBA has developed
a second comparison group consisting
of industries with the highest levels of
receipts based size standards. To
determine the level of a size standard
above the anchor size standard, SBA
analyzes the characteristics of this
second comparison group. The size
standards for this group of industries
range from $23 million to $35.5 million
in average annual receipts, with the
weighted average size standard for the
group being $29 million. SBA refers to
this comparison group as the ‘‘higher
level receipts based size standard
group.’’
The primary factors that SBA
evaluates when analyzing the structural
characteristics of an industry include
average firm size, startup costs and
entry barriers, industry competition,
and distribution of firms by size. SBA
also evaluates, as an additional primary
factor, the impact that revising size
standards might have on Federal
contracting assistance to small
businesses. These are, generally, the five
most important factors SBA examines
when establishing or revising a size
standard for an industry. In addition,
SBA considers and evaluates other
information that it believes is relevant to
a particular industry (such as
technological changes, growth trends,
SBA financial assistance and other
program factors, etc.). The SBA also
considers impacts of size standard
revisions on eligibility for Federal small
business assistance, current economic
conditions, the Administration’s
policies, and suggestions from industry
groups and Federal agencies. Public
comments on a proposed rule also
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
70669
provide important additional
information. SBA thoroughly reviews all
public comments before making a final
decision on its proposed size standards.
Below are brief descriptions of each of
the five primary factors that SBA has
evaluated for each industry in NAICS
Sector 61 being reviewed in this
proposed rule. A more detailed
description of this analysis is provided
in SBA ‘‘Size Standards Methodology,’’
available at https://www.sba.gov/size.
1. Average firm size. SBA computes
two measures of average firm size:
Simple average and weighted average.
For industries with receipts based size
standards, the simple average is the total
receipts of the industry divided by the
total number of firms in the industry.
The weighted average firm size is the
sum of weighted simple averages in
different receipts size classes, where
weights are the shares of total industry
receipts for respective size classes. The
simple average weighs all firms within
an industry equally, regardless of their
size. The weighted average overcomes
that limitation by giving more weight to
larger firms.
If the average firm size of an industry
under review is significantly higher
than the average firm size of industries
in the anchor comparison industry
group, this will generally support a size
standard higher than the anchor size
standard. Conversely, if the industry’s
average firm size is similar to or
significantly lower than that of the
anchor comparison industry group, it
will be a basis to adopt the anchor size
standard, or in rare cases, a standard
lower than the anchor.
2. Startup costs and entry barriers.
Startup costs reflect a firm’s initial size
in an industry. New entrants to an
industry must have sufficient capital
and other assets to start and maintain a
viable business. If new firms entering a
particular industry have greater capital
requirements than firms in industries in
the anchor comparison group, this can
be a basis for establishing a size
standard higher than the anchor
standard. In lieu of data on actual
startup costs, SBA uses average assets as
a proxy to measure the capital
requirements for new entrants to an
industry.
To calculate average assets, SBA
begins with the total sales to total assets
ratio for an industry from the Risk
Management Association’s Annual
Statement Studies. SBA then applies
these ratios to the average receipts of
firms in that industry. An industry with
average assets that are significantly
higher than those of the anchor
comparison group is likely to have
higher startup costs; this in turn will
E:\FR\FM\15NOP1.SGM
15NOP1
jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
70670
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 220 / Tuesday, November 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules
support a size standard higher than the
anchor. Conversely, an industry with
average assets that are similar to or
significantly lower than those of the
anchor comparison group is likely to
have lower startup costs; this in turn
will support adoption of the anchor size
standard, or in rare cases, one lower
than the anchor.
3. Industry competition. Industry
competition is generally measured by
the share of total industry receipts
generated by the largest firms in an
industry. SBA generally evaluates the
share of industry receipts generated by
the four largest firms in each industry.
This is referred to as the ‘‘four-firm
concentration ratio,’’ a commonly used
economic measure of market
competition. SBA compares the fourfirm concentration ratio for an industry
under review to the average four-firm
concentration ratio for industries in the
anchor comparison group. If a
significant share of economic activity
within the industry is concentrated
among a few relatively large companies,
all else being equal, SBA will establish
a size standard higher than the anchor
size standard. SBA does not consider
the four-firm concentration ratio as an
important factor in assessing a size
standard if its value for an industry
under review is less than 40 percent.
For industries in which the four-firm
concentration ratio is 40 percent or
more, SBA examines the average size of
the four largest firms in determining a
size standard.
4. Distribution of firms by size. SBA
examines the shares of industry total
receipts accounted for by firms of
different receipts and employment size
classes in an industry. This is an
additional factor SBA evaluates in
assessing competition within an
industry. If most of an industry’s
economic activity is attributable to
smaller firms, this indicates that small
businesses are competitive in that
industry. This supports adopting the
anchor size standard. If most of an
industry’s economic activity is
attributable to larger firms, this
indicates that small businesses are not
competitive in that industry. This will
support adopting a size standard above
the anchor.
Concentration is a measure of
inequality of distribution. To determine
the degree of inequality of distribution
in an industry, SBA computes the Gini
coefficient, using the Lorenz curve. The
Lorenz curve presents the cumulative
percentages of units (firms) along the
horizontal axis and the cumulative
percentages of receipts (or other
measures of size) along the vertical axis.
(For further detail, please refer to SBA’s
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:13 Nov 14, 2011
Jkt 226001
‘‘Size Standards Methodology’’ on
SBA’s Web site at https://www.sba.gov/
size.) Gini coefficient values vary from
zero to one. If receipts are distributed
equally among all the firms in an
industry, the value of the Gini
coefficient will equal zero. If an
industry’s total receipts are attributed to
a single firm, the Gini coefficient will
equal one.
SBA compares the Gini coefficient
value for an industry under review with
that for industries in the anchor
comparison group. If an industry shows
a higher Gini coefficient value than
industries in the anchor comparison
industry group this may, all else being
equal, warrant a higher size standard
than the anchor. Conversely, if an
industry’s Gini coefficient is similar to
or lower than that for the anchor group,
the anchor standard, or in some cases a
standard lower than the anchor, may be
adopted.
5. Impact on Federal contracting and
SBA loan programs. SBA examines the
impact a size standard change may have
on Federal small business assistance.
This most often focuses on the share of
Federal contracting dollars awarded to
small businesses in the industry in
question. In general, if the small
business share of Federal contracting in
an industry with significant Federal
contracting is appreciably less than the
small business share of the industry’s
total receipts, there is justification for
considering a size standard higher than
the existing size standard. The disparity
between the small business Federal
market share and the industry-wide
small business share may have a variety
of causes, such as extensive
administrative and compliance
requirements associated with Federal
contracts, different skill set
requirements for Federal contracts as
compared to typical commercial
contracting work, and the size of
Federal contracts. These, as well as
other factors, are likely to influence the
type of firms within an industry that
compete for Federal contracts. By
comparing the Federal contracting small
business share with the industry-wide
small business share, SBA includes in
its size standards analysis the latest
Federal contracting trends. This analysis
may indicate a size standard larger than
the current standard.
SBA considers Federal procurement
trends in the size standards analysis
only if (1) The small business share of
Federal contracting dollars is at least 10
percent lower than the small business
share of total industry receipts and (2)
total Federal contracting averages $100
million or more during the latest three
fiscal years. These thresholds reflect a
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
significant level of contracting where a
revision to a size standard may have an
impact on expanding small business
opportunities.
Besides the impact on small business
Federal contracting, SBA also evaluates
the impact of a proposed size standard
on SBA’s loan programs. For this, SBA
examines the volume of SBA guaranteed
loans within an industry and the size of
firms obtaining those loans. This allows
SBA to assess whether the existing or
the proposed size standard for a
particular industry may restrict the level
of financial assistance to small firms. If
the analysis shows that the current size
standards have impeded financial
assistance to small businesses, higher
size standards are supportable.
However, if under current size
standards small businesses have been
receiving significant amounts of
financial assistance through SBA’s loan
programs, or if the financial assistance
has been provided mainly to businesses
that are much smaller than the existing
size standard, this factor is not
considered for determining the size
standard.
Sources of Industry and Program Data
SBA’s primary source of industry data
for most industries covered by this
proposed rule was a special tabulation
of the data from 2007 Economic Census
(see https://www.census.gov/econ/
census07/) prepared by the U.S. Bureau
of the Census (Census Bureau) for SBA.
The three industries, namely NAICS
611110, NAICS 611210, and NAICS
611310, are not covered by the
Economic Census. The data for these
industries were based on the 2007
County Business Patterns (see https://
www.census.gov/econ/cbp/). The
special tabulation provides SBA with
data on the number of firms, number of
establishments, number of employees,
annual payroll, and annual receipts of
companies by NAICS Sector (2-digit
level), Subsector (3-digit level), Industry
Group (4-digit level), Industry (6-digit
level). These data are arrayed by various
classes of firms’ size based on the
overall number of employees and
receipts of the entire enterprise (all
establishments and affiliated firms) from
all industries. The special tabulation
enables SBA to evaluate average firm
size, the four-firm concentration ratio,
and distribution of firms by receipts and
employment size.
In some cases, where data were not
available due to disclosure prohibitions,
SBA either estimated missing values
using available relevant data or
examined data at a higher level of
industry aggregation, such as at the
NAICS 2-digit (Sector), 3-digit
E:\FR\FM\15NOP1.SGM
15NOP1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 220 / Tuesday, November 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules
jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
(Subsector), or 4-digit (Industry Group)
level. In some instances, SBA analysis
was based only on those factors for
which data were available or estimates
of missing values were possible.
The data from the Census Bureau’s
tabulation are limited to the 6-digit
NAICS industry level and hence do not
provide economic characteristics at the
sub-industry level. Thus, when
establishing, reviewing, or modifying
size standards at the sub-industry level
(that is, one of the ‘‘exceptions’’ in
SBA’s table of size standards), SBA
evaluates the data from the U.S. General
Service Administration’s (GSA) Federal
Procurement Data System—Next
Generation (FPDS–NG) and Central
Contractor Registration (CCR) databases
following a two-step procedure. First,
using FPDS–NG, SBA identifies product
service codes (PSCs) that correspond to
specific sub-industry activities or
‘‘exceptions’’ and then identifies firms
that are active in Federal contracting
involving those PSCs. Then, SBA
obtains those firms’ revenue and
employment data from the CCR
database. SBA uses that data to evaluate
the actual size of businesses that FPDS–
NG identifies for those procurements. In
this proposed rule, SBA applied this
approach to determine industry and
Federal contracting factors for ‘‘Job
Corps Centers,’’ which is an exception
under NAICS 611519, Other Technical
and Trade Schools.
To calculate average assets, SBA used
total sales to total assets ratios from the
Risk Management Association’s Annual
Statement Studies from years 2007 to
2009.
To evaluate Federal contracting
trends, SBA examined data on Federal
contract awards for fiscal years 2007 to
2009. The data are available from the
GSA’s FPDS–NG database.
To assess the impact on financial
assistance to small businesses, SBA
examined data on its own guaranteed
loan programs for fiscal years 2008 to
2010.
Data sources and estimation
procedures that SBA uses in its size
standards analysis are documented in
detail in the SBA’s ‘‘Size Standards
Methodology’’ White Paper, which is
available at https://www.sba.gov/size.
Dominance in Field of Operation
Section 3(a) of the Small Business Act
(15 U.S.C. 632(a)) defines a small
business concern as one that is (1)
Independently owned and operated, (2)
not dominant in its field of operation,
and (3) within a specific small business
size definition or size standard
established by the SBA Administrator.
SBA considers as part of its evaluation
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:13 Nov 14, 2011
Jkt 226001
whether a business concern at a
proposed size standard would be
dominant in its field of operation. For
this, SBA generally examines the
industry’s market share of firms at the
proposed standard. Market share and
other factors may indicate whether a
firm can exercise a major controlling
influence on a national basis in an
industry where a significant number of
business concerns are engaged. If a
contemplated size standard includes a
dominant firm, SBA will consider a
lower size standard to exclude the
dominant firm from being defined as
small.
Selection of Size Standards
To simplify size standards, for the
ongoing comprehensive review of
receipts based size standards, SBA has
proposed to select size standards from a
limited number of levels. For many
years, SBA has been concerned about
the complexity of determining small
business status caused by a large
number of varying receipts based size
standards (see 69 FR 13130 (March 4,
2004) and 57 FR 62515 (December 31,
1992)). At the beginning of the current
comprehensive size standards review,
there were 31 different levels of receipts
based size standards. They ranged from
$0.75 million to $35.5 million, and
many of them applied to one or only a
few industries. SBA believes that size
standards with such a large number of
small variations among them are both
unnecessary and difficult to justify
analytically. To simplify managing and
using size standards, SBA proposes that
there be fewer size standard levels. This
will produce more common size
standards for businesses operating in
related industries. This will also result
in greater consistency among the size
standards for industries that have
similar economic characteristics.
SBA proposes, therefore, to apply one
of eight receipts based size standards to
each industry in NAICS Sector 61. All
size standards in NAICS Sector 61 are
based on annual receipts. The eight
‘‘fixed’’ receipts based size standard
levels are $5 million, $7 million, $10
million, $14 million, $19 million, $25.5
million, $30 million, and $35.5 million.
To establish these eight receipts based
size standard levels SBA considered the
current minimum, the current
maximum, and the most commonly
used current receipts based size
standards. Currently, the most
commonly used receipts based size
standards cluster around the following:
$2.5 million to $4.5 million, $7 million,
$9 million to $10 million, $12.5 million
to $14 million, $25 million to $25.5
million, and $33.5 million to $35.5
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
70671
million. SBA selected $7 million as one
of eight fixed levels of receipts based
size standards because it is an anchor
standard for receipts based standards.
The lowest or minimum receipts based
size level will be $5 million. Other than
the standards for agriculture and those
based on commissions (such as real
estate brokers and travel agents), $5
million will include those industries
that at the start of the comprehensive
size standards review had the lowest
receipts based standards, which ranged
from $2 million to $4.5 million. Among
the higher level size clusters, SBA has
set four fixed levels, namely: $10
million, $14 million, $25.5 million, and
$35.5 million. Because there are large
intervals between some of the fixed
levels, SBA also established two
intermediate levels, namely $19 million
between $14 million and $25.5 million,
and $30 million between $25.5 million
and $35.5 million. These two
intermediate levels reflect roughly the
same proportional differences as
between the other two successive levels.
Evaluation of Industry Structure
SBA evaluated the structure of each of
the 17 industries and one sub-industry
in NAICS Sector 61, Educational
Services, to assess the appropriateness
of the current size standards. As
described above, SBA compared data on
the economic characteristics of each
industry in NAICS Sector 61 to the
average characteristics of industries in
two comparison groups. The first
comparison group consists of all
industries with $7 million size
standards and is referred to as the
‘‘receipts based anchor comparison
group.’’ Because the goal of SBA’s size
standards review is to assess whether a
specific industry’s size standard should
be the same as or different from the
anchor size standard, this is the most
logical group of industries to analyze. In
addition, this group includes a
sufficient number of firms to provide a
meaningful assessment and comparison
of industry characteristics.
If the characteristics of an industry
under review are similar to the average
characteristics of industries in the
anchor comparison group, the anchor
size standard is generally considered
appropriate for that industry. If an
industry’s structure is significantly
different from industries in the anchor
group, a size standard lower or higher
than the anchor size standard might be
selected. The level of the new size
standard is based on the difference
between the characteristics of the
anchor comparison group and a second
industry comparison group. As
described above, the second comparison
E:\FR\FM\15NOP1.SGM
15NOP1
70672
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 220 / Tuesday, November 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules
group for receipts based standards
consists of industries with the highest
receipts based size standards, ranging
from $23 million to $35.5 million. The
average size standard for this group is
$29 million. SBA refers to this group of
industries as the ‘‘higher level receipts
based size standard comparison group.’’
SBA determines differences in industry
structure between an industry under
review and the industries in the two
comparison groups by comparing data
on each of the industry factors,
including average firm size, average
assets size, the four-firm concentration
ratio, and the Gini coefficient of
distribution of firms by size. Table 1
shows two measures of the average firm
size (simple and weighted), average
assets size, the four-firm concentration
ratio, average receipts of the four largest
firms, and the Gini coefficient for both
anchor level and higher level
comparison groups for receipts based
size standards.
TABLE 1—AVERAGE CHARACTERISTICS OF RECEIPTS BASED COMPARISON GROUPS
Average firm size
($ million)
Receipts based
comparison group
Weighted
average
Simple average
Anchor Level ....................
Higher Level .....................
Average assets
size
($ million)
1.32
5.07
19.63
116.84
Four-firm
concentration
ratio
(%)*
0.84
3.20
Average
receipts of four
largest firms
($ million)*
16.6
32.1
196.4
1,376.0
Gini coefficient
0.693
0.830
* To be used for industries with a four-firm concentration ratio of 40% or greater.
Derivation of Size Standards Based on
Industry Factors
For each industry factor in Table 1,
SBA derives a separate size standard
based on the differences between the
values for an industry under review and
the values for the two comparison
groups. If the industry value for a
particular factor is near the
corresponding factor for the anchor
comparison group, SBA will consider
the $7 million anchor size standard
appropriate for that factor.
An industry factor significantly above
or below the anchor comparison group
will generally warrant a size standard
for that industry above or below the $7
million anchor. The level of the new
size standard in these cases is based on
the proportional difference between the
industry value and the values for the
two comparison groups.
For example, if an industry’s simple
average receipts are $3.3 million, that
would support a $19 million size
standard. The $3.3 million level is 52.8
percent between the average firm size of
$1.32 million for the anchor comparison
group and $5.07 million for the higher
level comparison group (($3.30
million¥$1.32 million) ÷ ($5.07
million¥$1.32 million) = 0.528 or
52.8%). This proportional difference is
applied to the difference between the $7
million anchor size standard and
average size standard of $29 million for
the higher level size standard group and
then added to $7 million to estimate a
size standard of $18.62 million ([{$29.0
million¥$7.0 million} * 0.528] + $7.0
million = $18.62 million). The final step
is to round the estimated $18.62 million
size standard to the nearest fixed size
standard, which in this example is $19
million. SBA applies the above
calculation to derive a size standard for
each industry factor. Detailed formulas
involved in these calculations are
presented in SBA’s ‘‘Size Standards
Methodology,’’ which is available on its
Web site at https://www.sba.gov/size.
(However, it should be noted that the
figures in the ‘‘Size Standards
Methodology’’ White Paper are based on
2002 Economic Census data and are
different from those presented in this
proposed rule. That is because when
SBA prepared its ‘‘Size Standards
Methodology,’’ the 2007 Economic
Census data were not yet available).
Table 2 (below) shows ranges of values
for each industry factor and the levels
of size standards supported by those
values.
TABLE 2—VALUES OF INDUSTRY FACTORS AND SUPPORTED SIZE STANDARDS
Or if weighted average
receipts size is
($ million)
Or if average assets
size is
($ million)
Or if average receipts
of largest four firms is
($ million)
Or if Gini coefficient is
< 1.15 ............................
1.15 to 1.57 ...................
1.58 to 2.17 ...................
2.18 to 2.94 ...................
2.95 to 3.92 ...................
3.93 to 4.86 ...................
4.87 to 5.71 ...................
> 5.71 ............................
jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
If simple average
receipts size is
($ million)
< 15.22 ........................
15.22 to 26.26 .............
26.27 to 41.73 .............
41.74 to 61.61 .............
61.62 to 87.02 .............
87.03 to 111.32 ...........
111.33 to 133.41 .........
> 133.41 ......................
< 0.73 ..........................
0.73 to 1.00 .................
1.01 to 1.37 .................
1.38 to 1.86 .................
1.87 to 2.48 .................
2.49 to 3.07 .................
3.08 to 3.61 .................
> 3.61 ..........................
< 142.8 ........................
142.8 to 276.9 .............
277.0 to 464.5 .............
464.6 to 705.8 .............
705.9 to 1,014.1 ..........
1,014.2 to 1,309.0 .......
1,309.1 to 1,577.1 .......
> 1,577.1 .....................
< 0.686 ........................
0.686 to 0.702 .............
0.703 to 0.724 .............
0.725 to 0.752 .............
0.753 to 0.788 .............
0.789 to 0.822 .............
0.823 to 0.853 .............
> 0.853 ........................
Derivation of Size Standard Based on
Federal Contracting Factor
Besides industry structure, SBA also
evaluates Federal contracting data to
assess how successful small businesses
are in getting Federal contracts under
existing size standards. For the current
comprehensive size standards review,
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:13 Nov 14, 2011
Jkt 226001
for industries where the small business
share of total Federal contracting dollars
is between 10 and 30 percent lower than
their shares in total industry receipts,
SBA has designated a size standard at
one level higher than their current size
standard. For industries where the small
business share of total Federal
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Then size
standard is
($ million)
5.0
7.0
10.0
14.0
19.0
25.5
30.0
35.5
contracting dollars is more than 30
percent lower than their shares in total
industry receipts, SBA has designated a
size standard at two levels higher than
the current size standard.
Because of the complex relationships
among a number of variables affecting
small business participation in the
E:\FR\FM\15NOP1.SGM
15NOP1
70673
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 220 / Tuesday, November 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules
Federal marketplace, SBA has chosen
not to designate a size standard for the
Federal contracting factor alone that is
more than two levels above the current
size standard. SBA believes that a larger
adjustment to size standards based on
Federal contracting activity should be
based on a more detailed analysis of the
impact of any subsequent revision to the
current size standard. In limited
situations, however, SBA may conduct
a more extensive examination of Federal
contracting experience. This may enable
SBA to support a different size standard
than indicated by this general rule and
take into consideration significant and
unique aspects of small business
competitiveness in the Federal contract
market. SBA welcomes comments on its
methodology for incorporating the
Federal contracting factor in the size
standard analysis and suggestions for
alternative methods and other relevant
information on small business
experience in the Federal contract
market.
Of the 17 industries reviewed in this
proposed rule, seven industries
averaged $100 million or more annually
in Federal contracting during fiscal
years 2007 to 2009. Also, a review of
Federal contracts awarded to the subindustry Job Corps Centers during fiscal
year 2009 indicates that the subindustry received more than $100
million in Federal contracts as well. The
Federal contracting factor was
significant (i.e., the difference between
the small business share of total
industry receipts and the small business
share of Federal contracting dollars was
10 percentage points or more) in three
of those seven industries and a separate
size standard was derived for that factor
for each of them.
New Size Standards Based on Industry
and Federal Contracting Factors
Table 3 shows the results of analyses
of industry and Federal contracting
factors for each industry covered by this
proposed rule. Many of the NAICS
industries in columns 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, and
8 show two numbers. The upper
number is the value for the industry or
Federal contracting factor shown on the
top of the column, and the lower
number is the size standard supported
by that factor. For the four-firm
concentration ratio, SBA estimates a
size standard if its value is 40 percent
or more. If the four-firm concentration
ratio for an industry is less than 40
percent, there is no size standard
estimated for that factor. If the four-firm
concentration ratio is more than 40
percent, SBA indicates in column 6 the
average size of the industry’s top four
firms together with a size standard
based on that average. Column 9 shows
a calculated new size standard for each
industry. This is the average of the size
standards supported by each factor and
rounded to the nearest fixed size level.
Analytical details involved in the
averaging procedure are described in
SBA ‘‘Size Standard Methodology.’’ For
comparison with the new standards, the
current size standards are in column 10
of Table 3.
TABLE 3—SIZE STANDARDS SUPPORTED BY EACH FACTOR FOR EACH INDUSTRY
[Millions of dollars]
(1)
NAICS code/
NAICS industry title
611110—Elementary and Secondary Schools ......................
611210—Junior Colleges ..........
611310—Colleges, Universities
and Professional Schools ......
611410—Business and Secretarial Schools .........................
611420—Computer Training .....
611430—Professional and Management Development Training ..........................................
611511—Cosmetology and Barber Schools ............................
611512—Flight Training ............
611513—Apprenticeship Training ..........................................
611519—Other Technical and
Trade Schools .......................
Except—Job Corps Centers .....
jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
611610—Fine Arts Schools ......
611620—Sports and Recreation
Instruction ..............................
611630—Language Schools .....
611691—Exam Preparation and
Tutoring ..................................
611692—Automobile Driving
Schools ..................................
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:13 Nov 14, 2011
(2)
Simple
average
firm size
($ million)
(3)
Weighted
average
firm size
($ million)
(4)
Average
assets size
($ million)
(5)
Four-firm
ratio
(%)
(6)
Four-firm
average
size
($ million)
(8)
Federal
contract
factor
(%)
(7)
Gini
coefficient
(9)
Calculated
size
standard
($ million)
(10)
Current size
standard
($ million)
$3.3
19.0
14.9
35.5
$14.7
5.0
62.0
19.0
....................
....................
....................
....................
1.7
....................
25.4
....................
$259.3
....................
443.4
....................
0.668
$5.0
0.735
$14.0
....................
....................
....................
....................
$10.0
....................
19.0
....................
$7.0
....................
7.0
....................
67.5
35.5
324.3
35.5
....................
....................
9.6
....................
3,959.4
....................
0.779
$19.0
0.8
....................
25.5
....................
7.0
....................
1.3
7.0
1.2
7.0
6.2
5.0
11.3
5.0
....................
....................
....................
....................
19.8
....................
17.0
....................
20.2
....................
104.5
....................
0.668
$5.0
0.741
$14.0
....................
....................
23.3
....................
7.0
....................
10.0
....................
7.0
....................
7.0
....................
1.3
7.0
12.8
5.0
0.9
7.0
9.9
....................
178.2
....................
0.739
$14.0
¥17.7
$10.0
10.0
....................
7.0
....................
0.8
5.0
2.6
14.0
6.4
5.0
56.9
14.0
....................
....................
....................
....................
11.7
....................
52.0
....................
35.0
....................
282.0
10.0
0.546
$5.0
0.836
$30.0
....................
....................
¥17.3
$30.0
5.0
....................
19.0
....................
7.0
....................
25.5
....................
1.0
5.0
5.7
5.0
....................
....................
10.2
....................
31.9
....................
0.612
$5.0
....................
....................
5.0
....................
7.0
....................
1.8
10.0
585.8
35.5
0.3
5.0
19.4
7.0
1,907.3
35.5
1.7
5.0
1.2
10.0
....................
....................
0.1
5.0
17.8
....................
94.0
....................
3.2
....................
267.4
....................
2,891.2
35.5
26.3
....................
0.778
$19.0
0.690
$7.0
0.325
$5.0
¥13.8
$10.0
20.0
....................
....................
....................
14.0
....................
30.0
....................
5.0
....................
7.0
....................
35.5
....................
7.0
....................
0.3
5.0
0.7
5.0
1.5
5.0
52.8
14.0
....................
....................
....................
....................
4.0
....................
31.1
....................
36.8
....................
66.7
....................
0.327
$5.0
0.704
$10.0
....................
....................
....................
....................
5.0
....................
10.0
....................
7.0
....................
7.0
....................
0.6
5.0
43.9
14.0
....................
....................
29.5
....................
259.1
....................
0.642
$5.0
....................
....................
7.0
....................
7.0
....................
0.3
2.2
....................
8.6
13.8
0.370
....................
5.0
7.0
Jkt 226001
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\15NOP1.SGM
15NOP1
70674
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 220 / Tuesday, November 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 3—SIZE STANDARDS SUPPORTED BY EACH FACTOR FOR EACH INDUSTRY—Continued
[Millions of dollars]
(1)
NAICS code/
NAICS industry title
(2)
Simple
average
firm size
($ million)
(3)
Weighted
average
firm size
($ million)
(4)
Average
assets size
($ million)
(5)
Four-firm
ratio
(%)
(6)
Four-firm
average
size
($ million)
(8)
Federal
contract
factor
(%)
(7)
Gini
coefficient
(9)
Calculated
size
standard
($ million)
(10)
Current size
standard
($ million)
5.0
611699—All Other Miscellaneous Schools and Instruction .........................................
611710—Educational Support
Services .................................
5.0
....................
....................
....................
$5.0
....................
....................
....................
1.0
5.0
21.5
7.0
0.7
7.0
27.1
....................
242.4
....................
0.758
$19.0
3.2
....................
10.0
....................
7.0
....................
1.5
7.0
39.2
10.0
1.2
10.0
21.2
....................
467.1
....................
0.811
$25.5
¥5.1
....................
14.0
....................
7.0
....................
Special Considerations
jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Job Corps Centers
The current size standard for Federal
contracts for Job Corps Centers
(‘‘exception’’ to NAICS code 611519) is
$35.5 million in average annual
receipts. For Federal procurement
programs, this size standard applies to
Federal contracts that meet specific
criteria. The criteria that constitute a
Jobs Corps Center contract or company
are detailed in Footnote 16 to SBA’s
table of size standards (13 CFR 121.201):
‘‘For classifying a Federal Procurement,
the purpose of the solicitation must be
for the management and operation of a
U.S. Department of Labor Job Corps
Centers. The activities involved include
admissions activities, life skills training,
educational activities, comprehensive
career preparation activities, career
development activities, career transition
activities, as well as the management
and support functions and services
needed to operate and maintain the
facility. For SBA assistance as a small
business concern, other than for Federal
Government procurements, a concern
must be primarily engaged in providing
the services to operate and maintain
Federal Job Corps Centers.’’
To determine if the current $35.5
million size standard is appropriate,
SBA evaluated average firm size, market
concentration, and size distribution of
firms involved in the Job Corps Centers
sub-industry using the data from FPDS–
NG and CCR and the procedure
described under the section of this rule
entitled ‘‘Sources of Industry and
Program Data.’’ Based on the data for
fiscal year 2009, Federal contracts
averaged more than $100 million
annually, but the small business share
of Federal contracting dollars was larger
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:13 Nov 14, 2011
Jkt 226001
than the small business share of total
receipts. Therefore, the Federal
contracting factor was not important for
the evaluation of this sub-industry. The
results, as shown in Table 3, support
decreasing the current size standard to
$30 million. However, for reasons
discussed below, SBA has proposed to
retain the $35.5 million size standard.
Evaluation of SBA Loan Data
Before deciding on an industry’s size
standard, SBA also considers the impact
of new or revised standards on SBA’s
loan programs. Accordingly, SBA
examined its 7(a) and 504 Loan Program
data for fiscal years 2008 to 2010 to
assess whether the existing or proposed
size standards need further adjustments
to ensure credit opportunities for small
businesses through those programs. For
the industries reviewed, the data show
that it is mostly businesses much
smaller than the current size standards
that utilize SBA’s 7(a) and 504 loans.
Therefore, no size standard in NAICS
Sector 61, Educational Services, needs
an adjustment based on this factor.
Proposed Changes to Size Standards
Table 4 (below) summarizes the
results of SBA analyses of industry and
federal procurement factors from Table
3. The results support increases in size
standards for nine industries, decreases
for six industries and one sub-industry
(exception to NAICS 611519, Job Corps
Centers), and no changes for two
industries.
However, lowering small business
size standards is not in the best interests
of small businesses under the current
economic environment. The U.S.
economy was in recession from
December 2007 to June 2009, the longest
and deepest of any recessions since
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
World War II. The economy lost more
than eight million non-farm jobs during
2008–2009. In response, Congress
passed and the President signed the
American Recovery and Reinvestment
Act of 2009 (Recovery Act) to promote
economic recovery and to preserve and
create jobs. Although the recession
officially ended in June 2009, the
unemployment rate was 9.4 percent or
higher from May 2009 to December
2010. It somewhat moderated to 8.8
percent in March 2011, but it has been
9 percent or higher for the May-July
quarter. The unemployment rate is
forecast to remain at around 9 percent
through the end of 2011. More recently,
Congress passed and the President
signed the Small Business Jobs Act of
2010 (Jobs Act) to promote small
business job creation. The Jobs Act puts
more capital into the hands of
entrepreneurs and small business
owners; includes recommendations
from the President’s Task Force on
Federal Contracting Opportunities for
Small Business that strengthens small
businesses’ ability to compete for
contracts and creates a better playing
field for small businesses; building on
the President’s National Export
Initiative, promotes small business
exporting; expands training and
counseling for small businesses; and
provides $12 billion in tax relief to help
small businesses invest in their firms
and create jobs.
Reducing the size standard for Job
Corps Centers (the exception to NAICS
511619) would result in significant jobs
losses in that industry, and it would
adversely affect those unemployed and
underemployed people that Job Corps
Centers serve. This is another reason
why SBA is not lowering the size
standard for this industry.
E:\FR\FM\15NOP1.SGM
15NOP1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 220 / Tuesday, November 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules
70675
TABLE 4—SUMMARY OF SIZE STANDARDS ANALYSIS
Calculated
size standard
($ million)
NAICS code
NAICS industry title
611110 ...............
611210 ...............
611310 ...............
611410 ...............
611420 ...............
611430 ...............
611511 ...............
611512 ...............
611513 ...............
611519 ...............
Except ................
611610 ...............
611620 ...............
611630 ...............
611691 ...............
611692 ...............
611699 ...............
611710 ...............
Elementary and Secondary Schools ......................................................................................
Junior Colleges .......................................................................................................................
Colleges, Universities and Professional Schools ...................................................................
Business and Secretarial Schools ..........................................................................................
Computer Training ..................................................................................................................
Professional and Management Development Training ..........................................................
Cosmetology and Barber Schools ..........................................................................................
Flight Training .........................................................................................................................
Apprenticeship Training ..........................................................................................................
Other Technical and Trade Schools .......................................................................................
Job Corps Centers ..................................................................................................................
Fine Arts Schools ....................................................................................................................
Sports and Recreation Instruction ..........................................................................................
Language Schools ..................................................................................................................
Exam Preparation and Tutoring ..............................................................................................
Automobile Driving Schools ....................................................................................................
All Other Miscellaneous Schools and Instruction ...................................................................
Educational Support Services .................................................................................................
Further, lowering size standards
would decrease the number of firms that
could participate in Federal financial
and procurement assistance for small
businesses. Size standards based solely
on analytical results without any other
considerations would cut off currently
eligible small firms from those
programs. That would run counter to
what SBA and the Federal government
are doing to help small businesses.
Reducing size eligibility for Federal
assistance, especially under current
economic conditions, would not
preserve or create more jobs; rather, it
would have the opposite effect.
Therefore, in this proposed rule, SBA
does not propose to reduce size
standards for any industries. For six
industries and one sub-industry for
which analyses might support lowering
size standards, SBA proposes to retain
the current size standards. SBA
nevertheless invites comments and
suggestions on whether it should lower
size standards as suggested by analyses
of industry and program data or retain
the current standards for those
industries in view of current economic
conditions.
As discussed above, SBA has decided
that lowering small business size
standards would be inconsistent with
what the Federal government is doing to
stimulate the economy and encourage
job growth through the Recovery Act
and Jobs Act. Therefore, for those
industries for which its analyses
suggested decreasing their size
standards, SBA proposes to retain the
current size standards. Thus, of the 17
industries and one sub-industry in
NAICS Sector 61 that SBA reviewed in
this proposed rule, the Agency proposes
to increase size standards for nine
industries and retain the current
standards for eight industries and one
sub-industry. Industries for which SBA
has proposed to increase their size
standards and proposed standards are in
Table 5 (below).
In addition, not lowering size
standards in NAICS Sector 61 is
$10.0
19.0
25.5
7.0
10.0
10.0
5.0
19.0
5.0
14.0
30.0
5.0
5.0
10.0
7.0
5.0
10.0
14.0
Current size
standard
($ million)
$7.0
7.0
7.0
7.0
7.0
7.0
7.0
25.5
7.0
7.0
35.5
7.0
7.0
7.0
7.0
7.0
7.0
7.0
consistent with SBA’s prior actions for
NAICS Sector 44–45 (Retail Trade),
NAICS Sector 72 (Accommodation and
Food Services), and NAICS Sector 81
(Other Services), which the Agency
proposed (74 FR 53924, 74 FR 53913,
and 74 FR 53941, October 21, 2009) and
adopted in its final rules (75 FR 61597,
75 FR 61604, and 75 FR 61591, October
6, 2010). It is also consistent with the
Agency’ recently proposed rules for
NAICS Sector 54, Professional,
Technical, and Scientific Services (76
FR 14323, March 16, 2011), NAICS
Sector 48–49, Transportation and
Warehousing (76 FR 27935, May 13,
2011), NAICS Sector 51, Information
(See 76 FR 63216, October 12, 2011),
and NAICS Sector 56, Administrative
and Support, Waste Management and
Remediation Services (See 76 FR 63510,
October 12, 2011). In each of those final
and proposed rules, SBA opted not to
reduce small business size standards for
the same reasons it has provided above
in this proposed rule.
TABLE 5—SUMMARY OF PROPOSED SIZE STANDARD REVISIONS
jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
NAICS code
611110
611210
611310
611420
611430
611519
611630
611699
611710
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
VerDate Mar<15>2010
Proposed size
standard
($ million)
NAICS industry title
Elementary and Secondary Schools ......................................................................................
Junior Colleges .......................................................................................................................
Colleges, Universities and Professional Schools ...................................................................
Computer Training ..................................................................................................................
Professional and Management Development Training ..........................................................
Other Technical and Trade Schools .......................................................................................
Language Schools ..................................................................................................................
All Other Miscellaneous Schools and Instruction ...................................................................
Educational Support Services .................................................................................................
16:13 Nov 14, 2011
Jkt 226001
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\15NOP1.SGM
15NOP1
$10.0
19.0
25.5
10.0
10.0
14.0
10.0
10.0
14.0
Current size
standard
($ million)
$7.0
7.0
7.0
7.0
7.0
7.0
7.0
7.0
7.0
70676
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 220 / Tuesday, November 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules
Evaluation of Dominance in Field of
Operation
SBA has determined that for the
industries in NAICS Sector 61,
Educational Services, for which it has
proposed to increase size standards, no
firm at or below the proposed size
standard will be large enough to
dominate its field of operation. At the
proposed size standards, if adopted,
small business shares of total industry
receipts among those industries vary
from less than 0.1 percent to 1.7
percent, with an average of 0.5 percent.
These levels of market share effectively
preclude a firm at or below the
proposed size standards from exerting
control on its industry.
jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Request for Comments
SBA invites public comments on this
proposed rule, especially on the
following issues.
1. To simplify size standards, SBA
proposes eight fixed levels for receipts
based size standards: $5 million, $7
million, $10 million, $14 million, $19
million, $25.5 million, $30 million, and
$35.5 million. SBA invites comments on
whether simplification of size standards
in this way is necessary and if these
proposed fixed size levels are
appropriate. SBA welcomes suggestions
on alternative approaches to simplifying
small business size standards.
2. SBA seeks feedback on whether the
proposed levels of size standards are
appropriate given the economic
characteristics of each industry. SBA
also seeks feedback and suggestions on
alternative standards, if they would be
more appropriate, including whether an
employee based standard for certain
industries is a more suitable measure of
size and what that employee level
should be.
3. SBA’s proposed size standards are
based on its evaluation of five primary
factors: Average firm size, average assets
size (as a proxy of startup costs and
entry barriers), four-firm concentration
ratio, distribution of firms by size and
the level and small business share of
Federal contracting dollars. SBA
welcomes comments on these factors
and/or suggestions on other factors that
it should consider for assessing industry
characteristics when evaluating or
revising size standards. SBA also seeks
information on relevant data sources, if
available.
4. SBA gives equal weight to each of
the five primary factors in all industries.
SBA seeks feedback on whether it
should continue giving equal weight to
each factor or whether it should give
more weight to one or more factors for
certain industries. Recommendations to
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:13 Nov 14, 2011
Jkt 226001
weigh some factors more than others
should include suggestions on specific
weights for each factor for those
industries along with supporting
information.
5. For some industries, based on its
analysis of industry and program data,
SBA proposes to increase the existing
size standards by a large amount (such
as NAICS 611210, NAICS 611310,
NAICS 611519, and NAICS 611710)
while for others the proposed increases
are modest. SBA seeks feedback on
whether it should, as a policy, limit the
increase to a size standard and/or
whether it should, as a policy, establish
minimum or maximum values for its
size standards. SBA seeks suggestions
on appropriate levels of changes to size
standards and on their minimum or
maximum levels.
6. In this proposed rule, SBA applied
its size standard methodology to review
the size standard for Job Corps Centers,
which is an exception to NAICS 611519,
using data on employment and receipts
from CCR. SBA welcomes any
comments on this source of data and
suggestions on alternative data sources.
7. To simplify size standards, SBA has
established or proposed common size
standards for closely related industries
in other NAICS Sectors. Within NAICS
Sector 61, all industries, with the
exceptions of Job Corps Centers
(exception to NAICS 611519, Other
Technical and Trade Schools) and
NAICS 611512, Flight Training,
currently have a common $7.0 million
size standard. Based on SBA’s analysis
of the industry data, too much variation
exists among the industries in Sector 61
to retain the current common size
standard or propose a different common
size standard for most industries.
Therefore, SBA has proposed size
standards based on an analysis of each
specific industry. SBA welcomes
comments on whether it should adopt
common size standards for all or a
particular group of industries, and if so,
how are those industries related in a
way that requires a common size
standard.
8. For analytical simplicity and
efficiency, in this proposed rule, SBA
has refined its size standard
methodology to obtain a single value as
a proposed size standard instead of a
range of values as it used in its past size
regulations. SBA welcomes any
comments on this procedure and
suggestions on alternative methods.
Public comments on the above issues
are very valuable to SBA for validating
its size standard methodology and
proposed revisions to size standards in
this proposed rule. This will help SBA
to move forward with its review of size
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
standards for other NAICS Sectors.
Commenters addressing size standards
for a specific industry or a group of
industries should include relevant data
and/or other information supporting
their comments. If comments relate to
using size standards for Federal
procurement programs, SBA suggests
that commenters provide information on
the size of contracts, the size of
businesses that can undertake the
contracts, start-up costs, equipment and
other asset requirements, the amount of
subcontracting, other direct and indirect
costs associated with the contracts, the
use of mandatory sources of supply for
products and services and the degree to
which contractors can mark up those
costs.
Compliance With Executive Orders
12866, 13563, 12988 and 13132, the
Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C.
Ch. 35) and the Regulatory Flexibility
Act (5 U.S.C. 601–612)
Executive Order 12866
The Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) has determined that this
proposed rule is a ‘‘significant’’
regulatory action for purposes of
Executive Order 12866. Accordingly,
the next section contains SBA’s
Regulatory Impact Analysis. This is not
a ‘‘major rule,’’ however, under the
Congressional Review Act (5 U.S.C.
800).
Regulatory Impact Analysis
1. Is there a need for the regulatory
action?
SBA believes that the proposed size
standards for a number of industries in
NAICS Sector 61, Educational Services,
will better reflect the economic
characteristics of small businesses and
the Federal government marketplace.
SBA’s mission is to aid and assist small
businesses through a variety of
financial, procurement, business
development and advocacy programs.
To assist the intended beneficiaries of
these programs, SBA must establish
distinct definitions of which businesses
are deemed small businesses. The Small
Business Act (15 U.S.C. 632(a))
delegates to SBA’s Administrator the
responsibility for establishing small
business definitions. The Act also
requires that small business definitions
vary to reflect industry differences. The
recently enacted Small Business Jobs
Act also requires SBA to review all size
standards and make necessary
adjustments to reflect market
conditions. The SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION section of this proposed
rule explains SBA’s methodology for
E:\FR\FM\15NOP1.SGM
15NOP1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 220 / Tuesday, November 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules
jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
analyzing a size standard for a particular
industry.
2. What are the potential benefits and
costs of this regulatory action?
The most significant benefit to
businesses obtaining small business
status because of this rule is gaining
eligibility for Federal small business
assistance programs. These include
SBA’s financial assistance programs,
economic injury disaster loans, and
Federal procurement programs intended
for small businesses. Federal
procurement provides targeted
opportunities for small businesses
under SBA’s business development
programs, such as 8(a), Small
Disadvantaged Businesses (SDB), small
businesses located in Historically
Underutilized Business Zones
(HUBZones), women-owned small
businesses (WOSBs), and servicedisabled veteran-owned small business
concerns (SDVO SBCs). Federal
agencies may also use SBA size
standards for a variety of other
regulatory and program purposes. These
programs assist small businesses to
become more knowledgeable, stable,
and competitive. In nine industries for
which SBA has proposed increasing size
standards, SBA estimates that about
1,500 additional firms will obtain small
business status and become eligible for
these programs. That represents 2.1
percent of the total number of firms that
are classified as small under the current
standards in all industries within
NAICS Sector 61. If adopted as
proposed, this will increase the small
business share of total industry receipts
in those industries from about 18
percent under the current size standards
to nearly 23 percent.
Three groups will benefit from these
proposed size standards if they are
adopted in final form as proposed,
namely: (1) Some businesses that are
above the current size standards may
gain small business status under the
higher size standards, thereby being able
to participate in Federal small business
assistance programs; (2) growing small
businesses that are close to exceeding
the current size standards will be able
to retain their small business status
under the higher size standards, thereby
being able to continue their
participation in the programs; and (3)
Federal agencies that need larger pools
of small businesses from which to draw
for their small business procurement
programs will have access to them.
During fiscal years 2007 to 2009, 88
percent of Federal contracting dollars
spent in industries reviewed in this
proposed rule were accounted for by the
nine industries for which SBA has
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:13 Nov 14, 2011
Jkt 226001
proposed to increase size standards.
SBA estimates that additional firms
gaining small business status in those
industries under the proposed size
standards could potentially obtain
Federal contracts totaling up to $20
million to $25 million per year under
SBA’s small business, 8(a), HUBZone,
WOSB, and SDVO SBC programs and
other unrestricted procurements. The
added competition for many of these
procurements could also result in lower
prices to the Government for
procurements reserved for small
businesses, although SBA cannot
quantify this benefit.
Under SBA’s 7(a) Business Loan and
504 Programs, based on the 2008 to
2010 data, SBA estimates that around 16
to 20 additional loans totaling about $3
million to $4 million in Federal loan
guarantees could be made to these
newly defined small businesses under
the proposed standards. Increasing the
size standards will likely result in an
increase in small business guaranteed
loans to businesses in these industries,
but it would be impractical to try to
estimate exactly the extent of their
number and the total amount loaned.
Under the Jobs Act, SBA can now
guarantee substantially larger loans than
in the past. In addition, the Jobs Act
established an alternative size standard
($15 million in tangible net worth and
$5 million in net income after income
taxes) for business concerns that do not
meet the size standards for their
industry. Therefore, SBA finds it
similarly difficult to quantify the impact
of these proposed standards on its 7(a)
and 504 Loan Programs.
Newly defined small businesses will
also benefit from SBA’s Economic Injury
Disaster Loan (EIDL) Program. However,
since the benefit under this program is
contingent on the occurrence and
severity of a disaster, SBA cannot make
a meaningful estimate of benefits for
future disasters.
To the extent that 1,500 newly
defined additional small firms could
become active in Federal procurement
programs, the proposed changes, if
adopted, may entail some additional
administrative costs to the Federal
Government associated with additional
bidders for Federal small business
procurement opportunities. In addition,
there could be more firms seeking SBA
guaranteed loans, more firms eligible for
enrollment in the CCR’s Dynamic Small
Business Search database and more
firms seeking certification as 8(a) or
HUBZone firms or those qualifying for
small business, WOSB, SDVO SBC, and
SDB status. Among those newly defined
small businesses seeking SBA
assistance, there could be some
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
70677
additional costs associated with
compliance and verification of small
business status and protests of small
business status. These added costs will
be minimal because mechanisms are
already in place to handle these
administrative requirements.
The costs to the Federal Government
may be higher on some Federal
contracts. With a greater number of
businesses defined as small, Federal
agencies may choose to set aside more
contracts for competition among small
businesses rather than using full and
open competition. The movement from
unrestricted to small business set-aside
contracting might result in competition
among fewer total bidders, although
there will be more small businesses
eligible to submit offers. In addition,
higher costs may result if more full and
open contracts are awarded to HUBZone
businesses that receive price evaluation
preferences. The additional costs
associated with fewer bidders, however,
are expected to be minor since, as a
matter of law, procurements may be set
aside for small businesses or reserved
for the 8(a), HUBZone, WOSB, or SDVO
SBC programs only if awards are
expected to be made at fair and
reasonable prices.
The proposed size standards, if
adopted, may have distributional effects
among large and small businesses.
Although SBA cannot estimate the
actual outcome of the gains and losses
among small and large businesses with
certainty, it can identify several
probable impacts. There may be a
transfer of some Federal contracts to
small businesses from large businesses.
Large businesses may have fewer
Federal contract opportunities as
Federal agencies decide to set aside
more Federal contracts for small
businesses. In addition, some Federal
contracts may be awarded to HUBZone
firms instead of large businesses since
these firms may be eligible for a price
evaluation preference for contracts
when they compete on a full and open
basis. Similarly, currently defined small
businesses may obtain fewer Federal
contracts due to the increased
competition from more businesses
defined as small. This transfer may be
offset by a greater number of Federal
procurements set aside for all small
businesses. The number of newly
defined and expanding small businesses
that are willing and able to sell to the
Federal Government will limit the
potential transfer of contracts away from
large and currently defined small
businesses. SBA cannot estimate the
potential distributional impacts of these
transfers with any degree of precision
because FPDS–NG data only identify the
E:\FR\FM\15NOP1.SGM
15NOP1
70678
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 220 / Tuesday, November 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules
jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
size of businesses receiving Federal
contracts as ‘‘small businesses’’ or
‘‘other than small businesses’’ without
providing the exact size of the
businesses.
The proposed revisions to the existing
size standards for NAICS Sector 61,
Educational Services, are consistent
with SBA’s statutory mandate to assist
small business. This regulatory action
promotes the Administration’s
objectives. One of SBA’s goals in
support of the Administration’s
objectives is to help individual small
businesses succeed through fair and
equitable access to capital and credit,
Government contracts, and management
and technical assistance. Reviewing and
modifying size standards, when
appropriate, ensures that intended
beneficiaries have access to the small
business programs designed to assist
them.
Executive Order 13563
A description of the need for this
regulatory action and benefits and costs
associated with this action, including
possible distributional impacts that
relate to Executive Order 13563, are
included above in the Regulatory Impact
Analysis under Executive Order 12866.
In an effort to engage interested
parties in this action, SBA has presented
its methodology (discussed above under
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION) to various
industry associations and trade groups.
SBA also met with various industry
groups to get their feedback on its
methodology and other size standards
issues. In addition, SBA presented its
size standards methodology to
businesses in 13 cities in the U.S. and
sought their input as part of the Jobs Act
Tours. The presentation included
information on the status of the
comprehensive size standards review
and on how interested parties can
provide SBA with input and feedback
regarding the size standards review.
Additionally, SBA sent letters to the
Directors of the Offices of Small and
Disadvantaged Business Utilization
(OSDBU) at several Federal agencies
with considerable procurement
responsibilities requesting their
feedback on how the agencies use SBA
size standards and whether current
standards meet their programmatic
needs (both procurement and nonprocurement). SBA gave appropriate
consideration to all input, suggestions,
recommendations, and relevant
information obtained from industry
groups, individual businesses, and
Federal agencies in preparing this
proposed rule.
The review of NAICS Sector 61,
Educational Services, is consistent with
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:13 Nov 14, 2011
Jkt 226001
Executive Order 13563, Section 6,
calling for retrospective analyses of
existing rules. SBA’s last comprehensive
review of size standards was during the
late 1970s and early 1980s. Since then,
except for periodic adjustments for
monetary based size standards, most
reviews were limited to a few specific
industries in response to requests from
the public and Federal agencies. SBA
recognizes that changes in industry
structure and the Federal marketplace
over time have rendered existing size
standards for some industries no longer
supportable by current data.
Accordingly, SBA has begun a
comprehensive review of its size
standards to ensure that existing size
standards have supportable bases and to
revise them when necessary. In
addition, on September 27, 2010, the
President of the United States signed the
Small Business Jobs Act of 2010 (Jobs
Act). The Jobs Act directs SBA to
conduct a detailed review of all size
standards and to make appropriate
adjustments to reflect market
conditions. Specifically, the Jobs Act
requires SBA to conduct a detailed
review of at least one-third of all size
standards during every 18-month period
from the date of its enactment and do a
complete review of all size standards
not less frequently than once every 5
years thereafter.
Executive Order 12988
This action meets applicable
standards set forth in Sections 3(a) and
3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988, Civil
Justice reforms, to minimize litigation,
eliminate ambiguity, and reduce
burden. The action does not have
retroactive or preemptive effect.
Executive Order 13132
For the purposes of Executive Order
13132, SBA has determined that this
proposed rule will not have substantial,
direct effect on the States, on the
relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government. Therefore, SBA
has determined that this proposed rule
has no federalism implications
warranting preparation of a federalism
assessment.
Paperwork Reduction Act
For the purpose of the Paperwork
Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. Ch. 35, SBA
has determined that this rule will not
impose new reporting or record keeping
requirements.
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act
(RFA), this rule, if finalized, may have
a significant impact on a substantial
number of small entities in NAICS
Sector 61, Educational Services. As
described above, this rule may affect
small entities seeking Federal contracts,
loans under SBA’s 7(a), 504 Guaranteed
Loan and Economic Injury Disaster Loan
Programs, and assistance under other
Federal small business programs.
Immediately below, SBA sets forth an
initial regulatory flexibility analysis
(IRFA) of this proposed rule addressing
the following questions: (1) What are the
need for and objective of the rule?
(2) What are SBA’s description and
estimate of the number of small entities
to which the rule will apply? (3) What
are the projected reporting, record
keeping and other compliance
requirements of the rule? (4) What are
the relevant Federal rules that may
duplicate, overlap or conflict with the
rule? and (5) What alternatives will
allow the Agency to accomplish its
regulatory objectives while minimizing
the impact on small entities?
1. What are the need for and objective
of the rule?
Most of the size standards in NAICS
Sector 61, Educational Services, have
not been reviewed since the early 1980s.
Technology, productivity growth,
international competition, mergers and
acquisitions, and updated industry
definitions may have changed the
structure of many industries in the
Sector. Such changes can be sufficient
to support a revision to size standards
for some industries. Based on the
analysis of the latest data available, SBA
believes that the proposed size
standards in this rule more
appropriately reflect the size of
businesses in those industries that need
Federal assistance. The newly enacted
Small Business Jobs Act also requires
SBA to review all size standards and
make necessary adjustments to reflect
market conditions.
2. What is SBA’s description and
estimate of the number of small entities
to which the rule will apply?
If the proposed rule is adopted in its
present form, SBA estimates that about
1,500 additional firms will become
small because of increases in size
standards in nine industries. That
represents about 2.1 percent of total
firms that are small under current size
standards in all industries within
NAICS Sector 61. This will result in an
increase in the small business share of
total industry receipts for this Sector
E:\FR\FM\15NOP1.SGM
15NOP1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 220 / Tuesday, November 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules
from about 18 percent under the current
size standard to nearly 23 percent under
the proposed standards. The proposed
standards, if adopted, will enable more
small businesses to retain their small
business status for a longer period.
Many have lost their eligibility and find
it difficult to compete at such low levels
with companies that are significantly
larger than they are. SBA believes the
competitive impact will be positive for
existing small businesses and for those
that exceed the size standards but are on
the very low end of those that are not
small. They might otherwise be called
or referred to as mid-sized businesses,
although SBA only defines what is
small; other entities are other than
small.
3. What are the projected reporting,
recordkeeping and other compliance
requirements of the rule and an estimate
of the classes of small entities, which
will be subject to the requirements?
Proposed size standards changes do
not impose any additional reporting or
recordkeeping requirements on small
entities. However, qualifying for Federal
procurement and a number of other
programs requires that entities register
in the CCR database and certify at least
annually that they are small in the
Online Representations and
Certifications Application (ORCA).
Therefore, businesses opting to
participate in those programs must
comply with CCR and ORCA
requirements. There are no costs
associated with either CCR registration
or ORCA certification. Changing size
standards alters eligibility for SBA
programs that assist small businesses,
but does not impose a regulatory burden
as they neither regulate nor control
business behavior.
5. What alternatives will allow the
Agency to accomplish its regulatory
objectives while minimizing the impact
on small entities?
4. What are the relevant Federal rules,
which may duplicate, overlap or
conflict with the rule?
By law, SBA is required to develop
numerical size standards for
establishing eligibility for Federal small
business assistance programs. Other
than varying size standards by industry
and changing the size measures, no
practical alternative exists to the
systems of numerical size standards.
Under § 3(a)(2)(C) of the Small
Business Act, 15 U.S.C. 632(a)(2)(c),
Federal agencies must use SBA’s size
standards to define a small business,
unless specifically authorized by statute
to do otherwise. In 1995, SBA published
in the Federal Register a list of statutory
and regulatory size standards that
identified the application of SBA’s size
standards as well as other size standards
used by Federal agencies (60 FR 57988
(November 24, 1995)). SBA is not aware
of any Federal rule that would duplicate
or conflict with establishing size
standards.
However, the Small Business Act and
SBA’s regulations allow Federal
agencies to develop different size
standards if they believe that SBA’s size
standards are not appropriate for their
programs, with the approval of SBA’s
Administrator (13 CFR 121.903).
Additionally, the Regulatory Flexibility
Act authorizes an Agency to establish an
alternative small business definition
after consultation with the Office of
Advocacy of the U.S. Small Business
Administration (5 U.S.C. 601(3)).
NAICS codes
*
611110 ................
611210 ................
611310 ................
*
*
jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
*
*
VerDate Mar<15>2010
Authority: 15 U.S.C. 632, 634(b)(6), 662,
and 694a(9).
2. In § 121.201, in the table, revise the
entries for ‘‘611110,’’ ‘‘611210,’’
‘‘611310,’’ ‘‘611420,’’ ‘‘611430,’’
‘‘611519,’’ ‘‘611630,’’ ‘‘611699,’’ and
‘‘611710,’’ to read as follows:
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Jkt 226001
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\15NOP1.SGM
$10.0
19.0
25.5
........................
........................
........................
10.0
10.0
........................
........................
*
*
14.0
........................
*
*
10.0
........................
*
All Other Miscellaneous Schools and Instruction ...................................................................
Educational Support Services ................................................................................................
16:13 Nov 14, 2011
Size standards
in number of
employees
*
Language Schools ..................................................................................................................
*
*
*
Other Technical and Trade Schools .......................................................................................
*
*
Size standards
in millions of
dollars
Computer Training ..................................................................................................................
Professional and Management Development Training ..........................................................
*
611699 ................
611710 ................
1. Revise the authority citation for
part 121 to read as follows:
*
*
*
611630 ................
PART 121—SMALL BUSINESS SIZE
REGULATIONS
Elementary and Secondary Schools ......................................................................................
Junior Colleges .......................................................................................................................
Colleges, Universities and Professional Schools ...................................................................
*
611519 ................
Administrative practice and
procedure, Government procurement,
Government property, Grant programs—
business, Individuals with disabilities,
Loan programs—business, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements, Small
businesses.
For the reasons set forth in the
preamble, SBA proposes to amend 13
CFR part 121 as follows:
§ 121.201 What size standards has SBA
identified by North American Industry
Classification System codes?
*
*
611420 ................
611430 ................
List of Subjects in 13 CFR Part 121
NAICS U.S. industry title
*
70679
15NOP1
10.0
14.0
........................
........................
70680
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 220 / Tuesday, November 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules
NAICS codes
*
*
*
*
Dated: September 9, 2011.
Karen G. Mills,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2011–29445 Filed 11–14–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8025–01–P
SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION
13 CFR Part 121
RIN 3245–AG28
Small Business Size Standards: Real
Estate and Rental and Leasing
U.S. Small Business
Administration.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
The U.S. Small Business
Administration (SBA) proposes to
increase small business size standards
for 20 industries and one sub-industry
in North American Industry
Classification System (NAICS) Sector
53, Real Estate and Rental and Leasing.
As part of its ongoing comprehensive
review of all size standards, SBA has
evaluated all size standards in NAICS
Sector 53 to determine whether the
existing size standards should be
retained or revised. This proposed rule
is one of a series of proposals that will
examine size standards of industries
grouped by NAICS Sector. SBA issued
a White Paper entitled ‘‘Size Standards
Methodology’’ and published in the
October 21, 2009 issue of the Federal
Register. That ‘‘Size Standards
Methodology’’ is available on its Web
site at https://www.sba.gov/size for
public review and comments. The ‘‘Size
Standards Methodology’’ White Paper
explains how SBA establishes, reviews
and modifies its receipts based and
employee based small business size
standards. In this proposed rule, SBA
has applied its methodology that
pertains to establishing, reviewing, and
modifying a receipts based size
standard.
DATES: SBA must receive comments to
this proposed rule on or before January
17, 2012.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments,
identified by RIN 3245–AG28, by one of
the following methods: (1) Federal
eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov; follow the
instructions for submitting comments;
jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
Size standards
in millions of
dollars
NAICS U.S. industry title
16:13 Nov 14, 2011
Jkt 226001
*
or (2) Mail/Hand Delivery/Courier:
Khem R. Sharma, Ph.D., Chief, Size
Standards Division, 409 Third Street
SW., Mail Code 6530, Washington, DC
20416. SBA will not accept comments to
this proposed rule submitted by email.
SBA will post all comments to this
proposed rule on https://
www.regulations.gov. If you wish to
submit confidential business
information (CBI) as defined in the User
Notice at https://www.regulations.gov,
you must submit such information to:
U.S. Small Business Administration,
Khem R. Sharma, Ph.D., Chief, Size
Standards Division, 409 Third Street
SW., Mail Code 6530, Washington, DC
20416, or send an email to
sizestandards@sba.gov. You should
highlight the information that you
consider to be CBI and explain why you
believe SBA should hold this
information as confidential. SBA will
review your information and determine
whether it will make the information
public or not.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Khem R. Sharma, Ph.D., Chief, Size
Standards Division, (202) 205–6618 or
sizestandards@sba.gov.
To
determine eligibility for Federal small
business assistance, SBA establishes
small business size definitions (referred
to as size standards) for private sector
industries in the United States. SBA
uses two primary measures of business
size—average annual receipts and
average number of employees. SBA uses
financial assets, electric output, and
refining capacity to measure the size of
a few specialized industries. In
addition, SBA’s Small Business
Investment Company (SBIC), Certified
Development Company (504) and 7(a)
Loan Programs use either the industry
based size standards or net worth and
net income based alternative size
standards to determine eligibility for
those programs. At the beginning of the
current comprehensive size standards
review, there were 41 different size
standards covering 1,141 NAICS
industries and 18 sub-industry activities
(‘‘exceptions’’ in SBA’s table of size
standards). Thirty-one of these size
levels were based on average annual
receipts, seven were based on average
number of employees, and three were
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
*
Size standards
in number of
employees
*
based on other measures. In addition,
SBA has established 11 other size
standards for its financial and
procurement programs.
Over the years, SBA has received
comments that its size standards have
not kept up with changes in the
economy, in particular the changes in
the Federal contracting marketplace and
industry structure. The last time SBA
conducted a comprehensive review of
all size standards was during the late
1970s and early 1980s. Since then, most
reviews of size standards have been
limited to in-depth analyses of specific
industries in response to requests from
the public and Federal agencies. SBA
also reviews the effect of inflation on its
standards and makes necessary
adjustments to its monetary based size
standards at least once every five years.
SBA’s latest inflation adjustment to size
standards was published in the Federal
Register on July 18, 2008 (73 FR 41237).
Because of changes in the Federal
marketplace and industry structure
since the last overall review, SBA
recognizes that current data may no
longer support some of its existing size
standards. Accordingly, in 2007, SBA
began a comprehensive review of all
size standards to determine if they are
consistent with current data, and to
adjust them when necessary. In
addition, on September 27, 2010, the
President of the United States signed the
Small Business Jobs Act of 2010 (Jobs
Act). The Jobs Act directs SBA to
conduct a detailed review of all size
standards and to make appropriate
adjustments to reflect market
conditions. Specifically, the Jobs Act
requires SBA to conduct a detailed
review of at least one-third of all size
standards during every 18-month period
from the date of its enactment. In
addition, the Jobs Act requires that SBA
conduct a review of all size standards
no less frequently than once every 5
years thereafter. Reviewing existing
small business size standards and
making appropriate adjustments based
on current data are also consistent with
Executive Order 13563 on improving
regulation and regulatory review.
Rather than review all size standards
at one time, SBA has adopted a more
manageable approach of reviewing a
group of industries within a NAICS
Sector. A NAICS Sector generally
E:\FR\FM\15NOP1.SGM
15NOP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 220 (Tuesday, November 15, 2011)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 70667-70680]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-29445]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION
13 CFR Part 121
RIN 3245-AG29
Small Business Size Standards: Educational Services
AGENCY: U.S. Small Business Administration.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA) proposes to
increase small business size standards for nine industries in North
American Industry Classification System (NAICS) Sector 61, Educational
Services. As part of its ongoing comprehensive size standards review,
SBA has evaluated all size standards in NAICS Sector 61 to determine
whether the existing size standards should be retained or revised. This
proposed rule is one of a series of proposals that will examine size
standards of industries grouped by NAICS Sector. SBA issued a White
Paper entitled ``Size Standards Methodology'' and published a notice in
the October 21, 2009 issue of the Federal Register that ``Size
Standards Methodology'' is available on its Web site at https://www.sba.gov/size for public review and comments. The ``Size Standards
Methodology'' White Paper explains how SBA establishes, reviews and
modifies its receipts based and employee based small business size
standards. In this proposed rule, SBA has applied its methodology that
pertains to establishing, reviewing and modifying a receipts based size
standard.
DATES: SBA must receive comments to this proposed rule on or before
January 17, 2012.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by RIN 3245-AG29 by one
of the following methods: (1) Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov; follow the instructions for submitting comments;
or (2) Mail/Hand Delivery/Courier: Khem R. Sharma, Ph.D., Chief, Size
Standards Division, 409 Third Street SW., Mail Code 6530, Washington,
DC 20416. SBA will not accept comments to this proposed rule submitted
by email.
SBA will post all comments to this proposed rule on https://www.regulations.gov. If you wish to submit confidential business
information (CBI) as defined in the User Notice at https://www.regulations.gov, you must submit such information to U.S. Small
Business Administration, Khem R. Sharma, Ph.D., Chief, Size Standards
Division, 409 Third Street SW., Mail Code 6530, Washington, DC 20416,
or send an email to sizestandards@sba.gov. You should highlight the
information that you consider to be CBI and explain why you believe SBA
should hold this information as confidential. SBA will review your
information and determine whether it will make the information public
or not.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Khem R. Sharma, Ph.D., Chief, Size
Standards Division, (202) 205-6618 or sizestandards@sba.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: To determine eligibility for Federal small
business assistance, SBA establishes small business size definitions
(referred to as size standards) for private sector industries in the
United States. SBA uses two primary measures of business size: average
annual receipts and average number of employees. SBA uses financial
assets, electric output, and refining capacity to measure the size for
a few specialized industries. In addition, SBA's Small Business
Investment Company (SBIC), Certified Development Company (504) and 7(a)
Loan Programs use either the industry based size standards or net worth
and net income based size standards to determine eligibility for those
programs. At the beginning of SBA's comprehensive size standards
review, there were 41 different size standards, covering 1,141 NAICS
industries and 18
[[Page 70668]]
sub-industry activities (``exceptions'' in SBA's table of size
standards). Thirty-one of these size levels were based on average
annual receipts, seven were based on average number of employees, and
three were based on other measures. In addition, SBA has established 11
other size standards for its financial and procurement programs.
Over the years, SBA has received comments that its size standards
have not kept up with changes in the economy, in particular the changes
in the Federal contracting marketplace and industry structure. The last
time SBA conducted a comprehensive review of size standards was during
the late 1970s and early 1980s. Since then, most reviews of size
standards have been limited to in-depth analyses of specific industries
in response to requests from the public and Federal agencies. SBA also
makes periodic inflation adjustments to its monetary based size
standards. SBA's latest inflation adjustment to size standards was
published in the Federal Register on July 18, 2008 (73 FR 41237).
Because of changes in the Federal marketplace and industry
structure since the last overall review, SBA recognizes that current
data may no longer support some of its existing size standards.
Accordingly, in 2007, SBA began a comprehensive review of all size
standards to determine if they are consistent with current data, and to
adjust them when necessary. In addition, on September 27, 2010, the
President of the United States signed the Small Business Jobs Act of
2010 (Jobs Act). The Jobs Act directs SBA to conduct a detailed review
of all size standards and to make appropriate adjustments to reflect
market conditions. Specifically, the Jobs Act requires SBA to conduct a
detailed review of at least one-third of all size standards during
every 18-month period from the date of its enactment. In addition, the
Jobs Act requires that SBA conduct a review of all size standards not
less frequently than once every 5 years thereafter. Reviewing existing
small business size standards and making appropriate adjustments based
on current data are also consistent with Executive Order 13563 on
improving regulation and regulatory review.
Rather than review all size standards at one time, SBA has adopted
a more manageable approach of reviewing a group of industries within an
NAICS Sector. An NAICS Sector generally consists of 25 to 75
industries, except for the manufacturing sector, which has considerably
more. Once SBA completes its review of size standards for industries in
an NAICS Sector, it will issue a proposed rule to revise size standards
for those industries for which currently available data and other
relevant factors support doing so.
Below is a discussion of SBA's size standards methodology for
establishing receipts based size standards, which SBA applied to this
proposed rule, including analyses of industry structure, Federal
procurement trends and other factors for industries reviewed in this
proposed rule, the impact of the proposed revisions to size standards
on Federal small business assistance, and the evaluation of whether a
revised size standard would exclude dominant firms from being
considered small.
Size Standards Methodology
SBA has developed a ``Size Standards Methodology'' for developing,
reviewing and modifying size standards when necessary. SBA has
published the document on its Web site at https://www.sba.gov/size for
public review and comments and included it, as a supporting document,
in the electronic docket for this proposed rule at https://www.regulations.gov. SBA does not apply all features of its ``Size
Standards Methodology'' to all industries because not all are
appropriate. For example, since this proposed rule covers all
industries with receipts based size standards in NAICS Sector 61, the
methodology described here applies to establishing receipts based
standards. However, the methodology is made available in its entirety
for parties who have an interest in SBA's overall approach to
establishing, evaluating and modifying small business size standards.
SBA always explains its analysis in individual proposed and final rules
relating to size standards for specific industries.
SBA welcomes comments from the public on a number of issues that it
raises in its ``Size Standards Methodology,'' such as suggestions on
alternative approaches to establishing and modifying size standards,
whether there are alternative or additional factors that SBA should
consider, whether SBA's approach to small business size standards makes
sense in the current economic environment, whether SBA's use of anchor
size standards is appropriate in the current economy, whether there are
gaps in SBA's methodology because of the lack of comprehensive data,
and whether there are other facts or issues that SBA should consider.
Comments on SBA's methodology should be submitted via (1) The Federal
eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov; the docket number is
SBA-2009-0008; follow the instructions for submitting comments; or (2)
Mail/Hand Delivery/Courier: Khem R. Sharma, Ph.D., Chief, Size
Standards Division, 409 Third Street SW., Mail Code 6530, Washington,
DC 20416. As with comments received to this and other proposed rules,
SBA will post all comments on its methodology on https://www.regulations.gov. As of November 15, 2011, SBA has received seven
comments to its ``Size Standards Methodology.'' The comments are
available to the public at https://www.regulations.gov. SBA continues to
welcome comments on its methodology from interested parties.
Congress granted SBA's Administrator discretion to establish
detailed small business size standards. 15 U.S.C. 632(a)(2). Section
3(a)(3) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 632(a)(3)) requires that
``* * * the [SBA] Administrator shall ensure that the size standard
varies from industry to industry to the extent necessary to reflect the
differing characteristics of the various industries and consider other
factors deemed to be relevant by the Administrator.'' Accordingly, the
economic structure of an industry is the basis for developing and
modifying small business size standards. SBA identifies the small
business segment of an industry by examining data on the economic
characteristics defining the industry structure itself (as described
below). In addition to analyzing an industry's structure when it
establishes small business size standards, SBA considers current
economic conditions, together with its own mission, program objectives,
and the Administration's current policies, suggestions from industry
groups and Federal agencies, and public comments on the proposed rule.
SBA also examines whether a size standard based on industry and other
relevant data successfully excludes businesses that are dominant in the
industry. This proposed rule affords the public an opportunity to
review and comment on SBA's proposals to revise size standards in NAICS
Sector 61, as well as on the data and methodology it uses to evaluate
and revise a size standard.
Industry Analysis
For the current comprehensive size standards review, SBA has
established three ``base'' or ``anchor'' size standards: $7 million in
average annual receipts for industries that have receipts based size
standards, 500 employees for manufacturing and other industries that
have employee based size standards (except for Wholesale Trade), and
100 employees for industries in the Wholesale Trade Sector. SBA
established 500 employees as the anchor
[[Page 70669]]
size standard for manufacturing industries at its inception in 1953.
Shortly thereafter SBA established $1 million in average annual
receipts as the anchor size standard for nonmanufacturing industries.
SBA has periodically increased the receipts based anchor size standard
for inflation, and it stands today at $7 million. Since 1986, the size
standard for all industries in the Wholesale Trade Sector has been 100
employees for SBA financial assistance and for most other Federal
programs. However, NAICS codes for Wholesale Trade Industries (NAICS
Sector 42) and their 100 employee size standards do not apply to
Federal procurement programs. Rather, for Federal procurement the size
standard for all industries in Wholesale Trade and for all industries
in Retail Trade (NAICS Sector 44-45) is 500 employees under SBA's
nonmanufacturer rule (13 CFR 121.406(b)).
These long-standing anchor size standards have stood the test of
time and gained legitimacy through practice and general public
acceptance. An anchor size standard is neither a minimum nor a maximum.
It is a common size standard for a large number of industries that have
similar economic characteristics and serves as a reference point in
evaluating size standards for individual industries. SBA uses the
anchor in lieu of trying to establish precise small business size
standards for each industry. Otherwise, theoretically, the number of
size standards might be as high as the number of industries for which
SBA establishes size standards (1,141). Furthermore, the data SBA
analyzes are static, while the U.S. economy is not. Hence, absolute
precision is impossible. Therefore, SBA presumes an anchor size
standard is appropriate for a particular industry unless that industry
displays economic characteristics that are considerably different from
others with the same anchor size standard.
When evaluating a size standard, SBA compares the economic
characteristics of the specific industry under review to the average
characteristics of industries with one of the three anchor size
standards (referred to as ``anchor comparison group''). This allows SBA
to assess the industry structure and to determine whether the industry
is appreciably different from the other industries in the anchor
comparison group. If the characteristics of a specific industry under
review are similar to the average characteristics of the anchor
comparison group, the anchor size standard is considered appropriate
for that industry. SBA may consider adopting a size standard below the
anchor when (1) All or most of the industry characteristics are
significantly smaller than the average characteristics of the anchor
comparison group or (2) other industry considerations strongly suggest
that the anchor size standard would be an unreasonably high size
standard for the industry.
If the specific industry's characteristics are significantly higher
than those of the anchor comparison group, then a size standard higher
than the anchor size standard may be appropriate. The larger the
differences are between the characteristics of the industry under
review and those in the anchor comparison group, the larger will be the
difference between the appropriate industry size standard and the
anchor size standard. To determine a size standard above the anchor
size standard, SBA analyzes the characteristics of a second comparison
group. For industries with receipts based size standards, including
those in NAICS Sector 61 that are reviewed in this proposed rule, SBA
has developed a second comparison group consisting of industries with
the highest levels of receipts based size standards. To determine the
level of a size standard above the anchor size standard, SBA analyzes
the characteristics of this second comparison group. The size standards
for this group of industries range from $23 million to $35.5 million in
average annual receipts, with the weighted average size standard for
the group being $29 million. SBA refers to this comparison group as the
``higher level receipts based size standard group.''
The primary factors that SBA evaluates when analyzing the
structural characteristics of an industry include average firm size,
startup costs and entry barriers, industry competition, and
distribution of firms by size. SBA also evaluates, as an additional
primary factor, the impact that revising size standards might have on
Federal contracting assistance to small businesses. These are,
generally, the five most important factors SBA examines when
establishing or revising a size standard for an industry. In addition,
SBA considers and evaluates other information that it believes is
relevant to a particular industry (such as technological changes,
growth trends, SBA financial assistance and other program factors,
etc.). The SBA also considers impacts of size standard revisions on
eligibility for Federal small business assistance, current economic
conditions, the Administration's policies, and suggestions from
industry groups and Federal agencies. Public comments on a proposed
rule also provide important additional information. SBA thoroughly
reviews all public comments before making a final decision on its
proposed size standards. Below are brief descriptions of each of the
five primary factors that SBA has evaluated for each industry in NAICS
Sector 61 being reviewed in this proposed rule. A more detailed
description of this analysis is provided in SBA ``Size Standards
Methodology,'' available at https://www.sba.gov/size.
1. Average firm size. SBA computes two measures of average firm
size: Simple average and weighted average. For industries with receipts
based size standards, the simple average is the total receipts of the
industry divided by the total number of firms in the industry. The
weighted average firm size is the sum of weighted simple averages in
different receipts size classes, where weights are the shares of total
industry receipts for respective size classes. The simple average
weighs all firms within an industry equally, regardless of their size.
The weighted average overcomes that limitation by giving more weight to
larger firms.
If the average firm size of an industry under review is
significantly higher than the average firm size of industries in the
anchor comparison industry group, this will generally support a size
standard higher than the anchor size standard. Conversely, if the
industry's average firm size is similar to or significantly lower than
that of the anchor comparison industry group, it will be a basis to
adopt the anchor size standard, or in rare cases, a standard lower than
the anchor.
2. Startup costs and entry barriers. Startup costs reflect a firm's
initial size in an industry. New entrants to an industry must have
sufficient capital and other assets to start and maintain a viable
business. If new firms entering a particular industry have greater
capital requirements than firms in industries in the anchor comparison
group, this can be a basis for establishing a size standard higher than
the anchor standard. In lieu of data on actual startup costs, SBA uses
average assets as a proxy to measure the capital requirements for new
entrants to an industry.
To calculate average assets, SBA begins with the total sales to
total assets ratio for an industry from the Risk Management
Association's Annual Statement Studies. SBA then applies these ratios
to the average receipts of firms in that industry. An industry with
average assets that are significantly higher than those of the anchor
comparison group is likely to have higher startup costs; this in turn
will
[[Page 70670]]
support a size standard higher than the anchor. Conversely, an industry
with average assets that are similar to or significantly lower than
those of the anchor comparison group is likely to have lower startup
costs; this in turn will support adoption of the anchor size standard,
or in rare cases, one lower than the anchor.
3. Industry competition. Industry competition is generally measured
by the share of total industry receipts generated by the largest firms
in an industry. SBA generally evaluates the share of industry receipts
generated by the four largest firms in each industry. This is referred
to as the ``four-firm concentration ratio,'' a commonly used economic
measure of market competition. SBA compares the four-firm concentration
ratio for an industry under review to the average four-firm
concentration ratio for industries in the anchor comparison group. If a
significant share of economic activity within the industry is
concentrated among a few relatively large companies, all else being
equal, SBA will establish a size standard higher than the anchor size
standard. SBA does not consider the four-firm concentration ratio as an
important factor in assessing a size standard if its value for an
industry under review is less than 40 percent. For industries in which
the four-firm concentration ratio is 40 percent or more, SBA examines
the average size of the four largest firms in determining a size
standard.
4. Distribution of firms by size. SBA examines the shares of
industry total receipts accounted for by firms of different receipts
and employment size classes in an industry. This is an additional
factor SBA evaluates in assessing competition within an industry. If
most of an industry's economic activity is attributable to smaller
firms, this indicates that small businesses are competitive in that
industry. This supports adopting the anchor size standard. If most of
an industry's economic activity is attributable to larger firms, this
indicates that small businesses are not competitive in that industry.
This will support adopting a size standard above the anchor.
Concentration is a measure of inequality of distribution. To
determine the degree of inequality of distribution in an industry, SBA
computes the Gini coefficient, using the Lorenz curve. The Lorenz curve
presents the cumulative percentages of units (firms) along the
horizontal axis and the cumulative percentages of receipts (or other
measures of size) along the vertical axis. (For further detail, please
refer to SBA's ``Size Standards Methodology'' on SBA's Web site at
https://www.sba.gov/size.) Gini coefficient values vary from zero to
one. If receipts are distributed equally among all the firms in an
industry, the value of the Gini coefficient will equal zero. If an
industry's total receipts are attributed to a single firm, the Gini
coefficient will equal one.
SBA compares the Gini coefficient value for an industry under
review with that for industries in the anchor comparison group. If an
industry shows a higher Gini coefficient value than industries in the
anchor comparison industry group this may, all else being equal,
warrant a higher size standard than the anchor. Conversely, if an
industry's Gini coefficient is similar to or lower than that for the
anchor group, the anchor standard, or in some cases a standard lower
than the anchor, may be adopted.
5. Impact on Federal contracting and SBA loan programs. SBA
examines the impact a size standard change may have on Federal small
business assistance. This most often focuses on the share of Federal
contracting dollars awarded to small businesses in the industry in
question. In general, if the small business share of Federal
contracting in an industry with significant Federal contracting is
appreciably less than the small business share of the industry's total
receipts, there is justification for considering a size standard higher
than the existing size standard. The disparity between the small
business Federal market share and the industry-wide small business
share may have a variety of causes, such as extensive administrative
and compliance requirements associated with Federal contracts,
different skill set requirements for Federal contracts as compared to
typical commercial contracting work, and the size of Federal contracts.
These, as well as other factors, are likely to influence the type of
firms within an industry that compete for Federal contracts. By
comparing the Federal contracting small business share with the
industry-wide small business share, SBA includes in its size standards
analysis the latest Federal contracting trends. This analysis may
indicate a size standard larger than the current standard.
SBA considers Federal procurement trends in the size standards
analysis only if (1) The small business share of Federal contracting
dollars is at least 10 percent lower than the small business share of
total industry receipts and (2) total Federal contracting averages $100
million or more during the latest three fiscal years. These thresholds
reflect a significant level of contracting where a revision to a size
standard may have an impact on expanding small business opportunities.
Besides the impact on small business Federal contracting, SBA also
evaluates the impact of a proposed size standard on SBA's loan
programs. For this, SBA examines the volume of SBA guaranteed loans
within an industry and the size of firms obtaining those loans. This
allows SBA to assess whether the existing or the proposed size standard
for a particular industry may restrict the level of financial
assistance to small firms. If the analysis shows that the current size
standards have impeded financial assistance to small businesses, higher
size standards are supportable. However, if under current size
standards small businesses have been receiving significant amounts of
financial assistance through SBA's loan programs, or if the financial
assistance has been provided mainly to businesses that are much smaller
than the existing size standard, this factor is not considered for
determining the size standard.
Sources of Industry and Program Data
SBA's primary source of industry data for most industries covered
by this proposed rule was a special tabulation of the data from 2007
Economic Census (see https://www.census.gov/econ/census07/) prepared by
the U.S. Bureau of the Census (Census Bureau) for SBA. The three
industries, namely NAICS 611110, NAICS 611210, and NAICS 611310, are
not covered by the Economic Census. The data for these industries were
based on the 2007 County Business Patterns (see https://www.census.gov/econ/cbp/). The special tabulation provides SBA with data on the number
of firms, number of establishments, number of employees, annual
payroll, and annual receipts of companies by NAICS Sector (2-digit
level), Subsector (3-digit level), Industry Group (4-digit level),
Industry (6-digit level). These data are arrayed by various classes of
firms' size based on the overall number of employees and receipts of
the entire enterprise (all establishments and affiliated firms) from
all industries. The special tabulation enables SBA to evaluate average
firm size, the four-firm concentration ratio, and distribution of firms
by receipts and employment size.
In some cases, where data were not available due to disclosure
prohibitions, SBA either estimated missing values using available
relevant data or examined data at a higher level of industry
aggregation, such as at the NAICS 2-digit (Sector), 3-digit
[[Page 70671]]
(Subsector), or 4-digit (Industry Group) level. In some instances, SBA
analysis was based only on those factors for which data were available
or estimates of missing values were possible.
The data from the Census Bureau's tabulation are limited to the 6-
digit NAICS industry level and hence do not provide economic
characteristics at the sub-industry level. Thus, when establishing,
reviewing, or modifying size standards at the sub-industry level (that
is, one of the ``exceptions'' in SBA's table of size standards), SBA
evaluates the data from the U.S. General Service Administration's (GSA)
Federal Procurement Data System--Next Generation (FPDS-NG) and Central
Contractor Registration (CCR) databases following a two-step procedure.
First, using FPDS-NG, SBA identifies product service codes (PSCs) that
correspond to specific sub-industry activities or ``exceptions'' and
then identifies firms that are active in Federal contracting involving
those PSCs. Then, SBA obtains those firms' revenue and employment data
from the CCR database. SBA uses that data to evaluate the actual size
of businesses that FPDS-NG identifies for those procurements. In this
proposed rule, SBA applied this approach to determine industry and
Federal contracting factors for ``Job Corps Centers,'' which is an
exception under NAICS 611519, Other Technical and Trade Schools.
To calculate average assets, SBA used total sales to total assets
ratios from the Risk Management Association's Annual Statement Studies
from years 2007 to 2009.
To evaluate Federal contracting trends, SBA examined data on
Federal contract awards for fiscal years 2007 to 2009. The data are
available from the GSA's FPDS-NG database.
To assess the impact on financial assistance to small businesses,
SBA examined data on its own guaranteed loan programs for fiscal years
2008 to 2010.
Data sources and estimation procedures that SBA uses in its size
standards analysis are documented in detail in the SBA's ``Size
Standards Methodology'' White Paper, which is available at https://www.sba.gov/size.
Dominance in Field of Operation
Section 3(a) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 632(a)) defines a
small business concern as one that is (1) Independently owned and
operated, (2) not dominant in its field of operation, and (3) within a
specific small business size definition or size standard established by
the SBA Administrator. SBA considers as part of its evaluation whether
a business concern at a proposed size standard would be dominant in its
field of operation. For this, SBA generally examines the industry's
market share of firms at the proposed standard. Market share and other
factors may indicate whether a firm can exercise a major controlling
influence on a national basis in an industry where a significant number
of business concerns are engaged. If a contemplated size standard
includes a dominant firm, SBA will consider a lower size standard to
exclude the dominant firm from being defined as small.
Selection of Size Standards
To simplify size standards, for the ongoing comprehensive review of
receipts based size standards, SBA has proposed to select size
standards from a limited number of levels. For many years, SBA has been
concerned about the complexity of determining small business status
caused by a large number of varying receipts based size standards (see
69 FR 13130 (March 4, 2004) and 57 FR 62515 (December 31, 1992)). At
the beginning of the current comprehensive size standards review, there
were 31 different levels of receipts based size standards. They ranged
from $0.75 million to $35.5 million, and many of them applied to one or
only a few industries. SBA believes that size standards with such a
large number of small variations among them are both unnecessary and
difficult to justify analytically. To simplify managing and using size
standards, SBA proposes that there be fewer size standard levels. This
will produce more common size standards for businesses operating in
related industries. This will also result in greater consistency among
the size standards for industries that have similar economic
characteristics.
SBA proposes, therefore, to apply one of eight receipts based size
standards to each industry in NAICS Sector 61. All size standards in
NAICS Sector 61 are based on annual receipts. The eight ``fixed''
receipts based size standard levels are $5 million, $7 million, $10
million, $14 million, $19 million, $25.5 million, $30 million, and
$35.5 million. To establish these eight receipts based size standard
levels SBA considered the current minimum, the current maximum, and the
most commonly used current receipts based size standards. Currently,
the most commonly used receipts based size standards cluster around the
following: $2.5 million to $4.5 million, $7 million, $9 million to $10
million, $12.5 million to $14 million, $25 million to $25.5 million,
and $33.5 million to $35.5 million. SBA selected $7 million as one of
eight fixed levels of receipts based size standards because it is an
anchor standard for receipts based standards. The lowest or minimum
receipts based size level will be $5 million. Other than the standards
for agriculture and those based on commissions (such as real estate
brokers and travel agents), $5 million will include those industries
that at the start of the comprehensive size standards review had the
lowest receipts based standards, which ranged from $2 million to $4.5
million. Among the higher level size clusters, SBA has set four fixed
levels, namely: $10 million, $14 million, $25.5 million, and $35.5
million. Because there are large intervals between some of the fixed
levels, SBA also established two intermediate levels, namely $19
million between $14 million and $25.5 million, and $30 million between
$25.5 million and $35.5 million. These two intermediate levels reflect
roughly the same proportional differences as between the other two
successive levels.
Evaluation of Industry Structure
SBA evaluated the structure of each of the 17 industries and one
sub-industry in NAICS Sector 61, Educational Services, to assess the
appropriateness of the current size standards. As described above, SBA
compared data on the economic characteristics of each industry in NAICS
Sector 61 to the average characteristics of industries in two
comparison groups. The first comparison group consists of all
industries with $7 million size standards and is referred to as the
``receipts based anchor comparison group.'' Because the goal of SBA's
size standards review is to assess whether a specific industry's size
standard should be the same as or different from the anchor size
standard, this is the most logical group of industries to analyze. In
addition, this group includes a sufficient number of firms to provide a
meaningful assessment and comparison of industry characteristics.
If the characteristics of an industry under review are similar to
the average characteristics of industries in the anchor comparison
group, the anchor size standard is generally considered appropriate for
that industry. If an industry's structure is significantly different
from industries in the anchor group, a size standard lower or higher
than the anchor size standard might be selected. The level of the new
size standard is based on the difference between the characteristics of
the anchor comparison group and a second industry comparison group. As
described above, the second comparison
[[Page 70672]]
group for receipts based standards consists of industries with the
highest receipts based size standards, ranging from $23 million to
$35.5 million. The average size standard for this group is $29 million.
SBA refers to this group of industries as the ``higher level receipts
based size standard comparison group.'' SBA determines differences in
industry structure between an industry under review and the industries
in the two comparison groups by comparing data on each of the industry
factors, including average firm size, average assets size, the four-
firm concentration ratio, and the Gini coefficient of distribution of
firms by size. Table 1 shows two measures of the average firm size
(simple and weighted), average assets size, the four-firm concentration
ratio, average receipts of the four largest firms, and the Gini
coefficient for both anchor level and higher level comparison groups
for receipts based size standards.
Table 1--Average Characteristics of Receipts Based Comparison Groups
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Average firm size ($ million) Average
------------------------------------ Average assets Four-firm receipts of four
Receipts based comparison group Weighted size ($ concentration largest firms Gini coefficient
Simple average average million) ratio (%)* ($ million)*
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Anchor Level................................ 1.32 19.63 0.84 16.6 196.4 0.693
Higher Level................................ 5.07 116.84 3.20 32.1 1,376.0 0.830
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* To be used for industries with a four-firm concentration ratio of 40% or greater.
Derivation of Size Standards Based on Industry Factors
For each industry factor in Table 1, SBA derives a separate size
standard based on the differences between the values for an industry
under review and the values for the two comparison groups. If the
industry value for a particular factor is near the corresponding factor
for the anchor comparison group, SBA will consider the $7 million
anchor size standard appropriate for that factor.
An industry factor significantly above or below the anchor
comparison group will generally warrant a size standard for that
industry above or below the $7 million anchor. The level of the new
size standard in these cases is based on the proportional difference
between the industry value and the values for the two comparison
groups.
For example, if an industry's simple average receipts are $3.3
million, that would support a $19 million size standard. The $3.3
million level is 52.8 percent between the average firm size of $1.32
million for the anchor comparison group and $5.07 million for the
higher level comparison group (($3.30 million-$1.32 million) / ($5.07
million-$1.32 million) = 0.528 or 52.8%). This proportional difference
is applied to the difference between the $7 million anchor size
standard and average size standard of $29 million for the higher level
size standard group and then added to $7 million to estimate a size
standard of $18.62 million ([{$29.0 million-$7.0 million{time} *
0.528] + $7.0 million = $18.62 million). The final step is to round the
estimated $18.62 million size standard to the nearest fixed size
standard, which in this example is $19 million. SBA applies the above
calculation to derive a size standard for each industry factor.
Detailed formulas involved in these calculations are presented in SBA's
``Size Standards Methodology,'' which is available on its Web site at
https://www.sba.gov/size. (However, it should be noted that the figures
in the ``Size Standards Methodology'' White Paper are based on 2002
Economic Census data and are different from those presented in this
proposed rule. That is because when SBA prepared its ``Size Standards
Methodology,'' the 2007 Economic Census data were not yet available).
Table 2 (below) shows ranges of values for each industry factor and the
levels of size standards supported by those values.
Table 2--Values of Industry Factors and Supported Size Standards
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Or if average
Or if weighted Or if average receipts of Then size
If simple average receipts average assets size is largest four Or if Gini standard is
size is ($ million) receipts size ($ million) firms is ($ coefficient is ($ million)
is ($ million) million)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
< 1.15...................... < 15.22........ < 0.73......... < 142.8........ < 0.686........ 5.0
1.15 to 1.57................ 15.22 to 26.26. 0.73 to 1.00... 142.8 to 276.9. 0.686 to 0.702. 7.0
1.58 to 2.17................ 26.27 to 41.73. 1.01 to 1.37... 277.0 to 464.5. 0.703 to 0.724. 10.0
2.18 to 2.94................ 41.74 to 61.61. 1.38 to 1.86... 464.6 to 705.8. 0.725 to 0.752. 14.0
2.95 to 3.92................ 61.62 to 87.02. 1.87 to 2.48... 705.9 to 0.753 to 0.788. 19.0
1,014.1.
3.93 to 4.86................ 87.03 to 111.32 2.49 to 3.07... 1,014.2 to 0.789 to 0.822. 25.5
1,309.0.
4.87 to 5.71................ 111.33 to 3.08 to 3.61... 1,309.1 to 0.823 to 0.853. 30.0
133.41. 1,577.1.
> 5.71...................... > 133.41....... > 3.61......... > 1,577.1...... > 0.853........ 35.5
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Derivation of Size Standard Based on Federal Contracting Factor
Besides industry structure, SBA also evaluates Federal contracting
data to assess how successful small businesses are in getting Federal
contracts under existing size standards. For the current comprehensive
size standards review, for industries where the small business share of
total Federal contracting dollars is between 10 and 30 percent lower
than their shares in total industry receipts, SBA has designated a size
standard at one level higher than their current size standard. For
industries where the small business share of total Federal contracting
dollars is more than 30 percent lower than their shares in total
industry receipts, SBA has designated a size standard at two levels
higher than the current size standard.
Because of the complex relationships among a number of variables
affecting small business participation in the
[[Page 70673]]
Federal marketplace, SBA has chosen not to designate a size standard
for the Federal contracting factor alone that is more than two levels
above the current size standard. SBA believes that a larger adjustment
to size standards based on Federal contracting activity should be based
on a more detailed analysis of the impact of any subsequent revision to
the current size standard. In limited situations, however, SBA may
conduct a more extensive examination of Federal contracting experience.
This may enable SBA to support a different size standard than indicated
by this general rule and take into consideration significant and unique
aspects of small business competitiveness in the Federal contract
market. SBA welcomes comments on its methodology for incorporating the
Federal contracting factor in the size standard analysis and
suggestions for alternative methods and other relevant information on
small business experience in the Federal contract market.
Of the 17 industries reviewed in this proposed rule, seven
industries averaged $100 million or more annually in Federal
contracting during fiscal years 2007 to 2009. Also, a review of Federal
contracts awarded to the sub-industry Job Corps Centers during fiscal
year 2009 indicates that the sub-industry received more than $100
million in Federal contracts as well. The Federal contracting factor
was significant (i.e., the difference between the small business share
of total industry receipts and the small business share of Federal
contracting dollars was 10 percentage points or more) in three of those
seven industries and a separate size standard was derived for that
factor for each of them.
New Size Standards Based on Industry and Federal Contracting Factors
Table 3 shows the results of analyses of industry and Federal
contracting factors for each industry covered by this proposed rule.
Many of the NAICS industries in columns 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, and 8 show two
numbers. The upper number is the value for the industry or Federal
contracting factor shown on the top of the column, and the lower number
is the size standard supported by that factor. For the four-firm
concentration ratio, SBA estimates a size standard if its value is 40
percent or more. If the four-firm concentration ratio for an industry
is less than 40 percent, there is no size standard estimated for that
factor. If the four-firm concentration ratio is more than 40 percent,
SBA indicates in column 6 the average size of the industry's top four
firms together with a size standard based on that average. Column 9
shows a calculated new size standard for each industry. This is the
average of the size standards supported by each factor and rounded to
the nearest fixed size level. Analytical details involved in the
averaging procedure are described in SBA ``Size Standard Methodology.''
For comparison with the new standards, the current size standards are
in column 10 of Table 3.
Table 3--Size Standards Supported by Each Factor for Each Industry
[Millions of dollars]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(3) (6) Four- (9) (10)
(2) Simple Weighted (4) Average (5) Four- firm (8) Federal Calculated Current
(1) NAICS code/ NAICS industry average average assets firm ratio average (7) Gini contract size size
title firm size firm size size ($ (%) size ($ coefficient factor (%) standard ($ standard ($
($ million) ($ million) million) million) million) million)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
611110--Elementary and Secondary $3.3 $14.7 ........... 1.7 $259.3 0.668 ........... $10.0 $7.0
Schools...........................
19.0 5.0 ........... ........... ........... $5.0 ........... ........... ...........
611210--Junior Colleges............ 14.9 62.0 ........... 25.4 443.4 0.735 ........... 19.0 7.0
35.5 19.0 ........... ........... ........... $14.0 ........... ........... ...........
611310--Colleges, Universities and 67.5 324.3 ........... 9.6 3,959.4 0.779 0.8 25.5 7.0
Professional Schools..............
35.5 35.5 ........... ........... ........... $19.0 ........... ........... ...........
611410--Business and Secretarial 1.3 6.2 ........... 19.8 20.2 0.668 ........... 7.0 7.0
Schools...........................
7.0 5.0 ........... ........... ........... $5.0 ........... ........... ...........
611420--Computer Training.......... 1.2 11.3 ........... 17.0 104.5 0.741 23.3 10.0 7.0
7.0 5.0 ........... ........... ........... $14.0 ........... ........... ...........
611430--Professional and Management 1.3 12.8 0.9 9.9 178.2 0.739 -17.7 10.0 7.0
Development Training..............
7.0 5.0 7.0 ........... ........... $14.0 $10.0 ........... ...........
611511--Cosmetology and Barber 0.8 6.4 ........... 11.7 35.0 0.546 ........... 5.0 7.0
Schools...........................
5.0 5.0 ........... ........... ........... $5.0 ........... ........... ...........
611512--Flight Training............ 2.6 56.9 ........... 52.0 282.0 0.836 -17.3 19.0 25.5
14.0 14.0 ........... ........... 10.0 $30.0 $30.0 ........... ...........
611513--Apprenticeship Training.... 1.0 5.7 ........... 10.2 31.9 0.612 ........... 5.0 7.0
5.0 5.0 ........... ........... ........... $5.0 ........... ........... ...........
611519--Other Technical and Trade 1.8 19.4 1.2 17.8 267.4 0.778 -13.8 14.0 7.0
Schools...........................
10.0 7.0 10.0 ........... ........... $19.0 $10.0 ........... ...........
Except--Job Corps Centers.......... 585.8 1,907.3 ........... 94.0 2,891.2 0.690 20.0 30.0 35.5
35.5 35.5 ........... ........... 35.5 $7.0 ........... ........... ...........
611610--Fine Arts Schools.......... 0.3 1.7 0.1 3.2 26.3 0.325 ........... 5.0 7.0
5.0 5.0 5.0 ........... ........... $5.0 ........... ........... ...........
611620--Sports and Recreation 0.3 1.5 ........... 4.0 36.8 0.327 ........... 5.0 7.0
Instruction.......................
5.0 5.0 ........... ........... ........... $5.0 ........... ........... ...........
611630--Language Schools........... 0.7 52.8 ........... 31.1 66.7 0.704 ........... 10.0 7.0
5.0 14.0 ........... ........... ........... $10.0 ........... ........... ...........
611691--Exam Preparation and 0.6 43.9 ........... 29.5 259.1 0.642 ........... 7.0 7.0
Tutoring..........................
5.0 14.0 ........... ........... ........... $5.0 ........... ........... ...........
611692--Automobile Driving Schools. 0.3 2.2 ........... 8.6 13.8 0.370 ........... 5.0 7.0
[[Page 70674]]
5.0 5.0 ........... ........... ........... $5.0 ........... ........... ...........
611699--All Other Miscellaneous 1.0 21.5 0.7 27.1 242.4 0.758 3.2 10.0 7.0
Schools and Instruction...........
5.0 7.0 7.0 ........... ........... $19.0 ........... ........... ...........
611710--Educational Support 1.5 39.2 1.2 21.2 467.1 0.811 -5.1 14.0 7.0
Services..........................
7.0 10.0 10.0 ........... ........... $25.5 ........... ........... ...........
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Special Considerations
Job Corps Centers
The current size standard for Federal contracts for Job Corps
Centers (``exception'' to NAICS code 611519) is $35.5 million in
average annual receipts. For Federal procurement programs, this size
standard applies to Federal contracts that meet specific criteria. The
criteria that constitute a Jobs Corps Center contract or company are
detailed in Footnote 16 to SBA's table of size standards (13 CFR
121.201): ``For classifying a Federal Procurement, the purpose of the
solicitation must be for the management and operation of a U.S.
Department of Labor Job Corps Centers. The activities involved include
admissions activities, life skills training, educational activities,
comprehensive career preparation activities, career development
activities, career transition activities, as well as the management and
support functions and services needed to operate and maintain the
facility. For SBA assistance as a small business concern, other than
for Federal Government procurements, a concern must be primarily
engaged in providing the services to operate and maintain Federal Job
Corps Centers.''
To determine if the current $35.5 million size standard is
appropriate, SBA evaluated average firm size, market concentration, and
size distribution of firms involved in the Job Corps Centers sub-
industry using the data from FPDS-NG and CCR and the procedure
described under the section of this rule entitled ``Sources of Industry
and Program Data.'' Based on the data for fiscal year 2009, Federal
contracts averaged more than $100 million annually, but the small
business share of Federal contracting dollars was larger than the small
business share of total receipts. Therefore, the Federal contracting
factor was not important for the evaluation of this sub-industry. The
results, as shown in Table 3, support decreasing the current size
standard to $30 million. However, for reasons discussed below, SBA has
proposed to retain the $35.5 million size standard.
Evaluation of SBA Loan Data
Before deciding on an industry's size standard, SBA also considers
the impact of new or revised standards on SBA's loan programs.
Accordingly, SBA examined its 7(a) and 504 Loan Program data for fiscal
years 2008 to 2010 to assess whether the existing or proposed size
standards need further adjustments to ensure credit opportunities for
small businesses through those programs. For the industries reviewed,
the data show that it is mostly businesses much smaller than the
current size standards that utilize SBA's 7(a) and 504 loans.
Therefore, no size standard in NAICS Sector 61, Educational Services,
needs an adjustment based on this factor.
Proposed Changes to Size Standards
Table 4 (below) summarizes the results of SBA analyses of industry
and federal procurement factors from Table 3. The results support
increases in size standards for nine industries, decreases for six
industries and one sub-industry (exception to NAICS 611519, Job Corps
Centers), and no changes for two industries.
However, lowering small business size standards is not in the best
interests of small businesses under the current economic environment.
The U.S. economy was in recession from December 2007 to June 2009, the
longest and deepest of any recessions since World War II. The economy
lost more than eight million non-farm jobs during 2008-2009. In
response, Congress passed and the President signed the American
Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery Act) to promote
economic recovery and to preserve and create jobs. Although the
recession officially ended in June 2009, the unemployment rate was 9.4
percent or higher from May 2009 to December 2010. It somewhat moderated
to 8.8 percent in March 2011, but it has been 9 percent or higher for
the May-July quarter. The unemployment rate is forecast to remain at
around 9 percent through the end of 2011. More recently, Congress
passed and the President signed the Small Business Jobs Act of 2010
(Jobs Act) to promote small business job creation. The Jobs Act puts
more capital into the hands of entrepreneurs and small business owners;
includes recommendations from the President's Task Force on Federal
Contracting Opportunities for Small Business that strengthens small
businesses' ability to compete for contracts and creates a better
playing field for small businesses; building on the President's
National Export Initiative, promotes small business exporting; expands
training and counseling for small businesses; and provides $12 billion
in tax relief to help small businesses invest in their firms and create
jobs.
Reducing the size standard for Job Corps Centers (the exception to
NAICS 511619) would result in significant jobs losses in that industry,
and it would adversely affect those unemployed and underemployed people
that Job Corps Centers serve. This is another reason why SBA is not
lowering the size standard for this industry.
[[Page 70675]]
Table 4--Summary of Size Standards Analysis
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Calculated Current size
NAICS code NAICS industry title size standard standard ($
($ million) million)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
611110.................................. Elementary and Secondary Schools...... $10.0 $7.0
611210.................................. Junior Colleges....................... 19.0 7.0
611310.................................. Colleges, Universities and 25.5 7.0
Professional Schools.
611410.................................. Business and Secretarial Schools...... 7.0 7.0
611420.................................. Computer Training..................... 10.0 7.0
611430.................................. Professional and Management 10.0 7.0
Development Training.
611511.................................. Cosmetology and Barber Schools........ 5.0 7.0
611512.................................. Flight Training....................... 19.0 25.5
611513.................................. Apprenticeship Training............... 5.0 7.0
611519.................................. Other Technical and Trade Schools..... 14.0 7.0
Except.................................. Job Corps Centers..................... 30.0 35.5
611610.................................. Fine Arts Schools..................... 5.0 7.0
611620.................................. Sports and Recreation Instruction..... 5.0 7.0
611630.................................. Language Schools...................... 10.0 7.0
611691.................................. Exam Preparation and Tutoring......... 7.0 7.0
611692.................................. Automobile Driving Schools............ 5.0 7.0
611699.................................. All Other Miscellaneous Schools and 10.0 7.0
Instruction.
611710.................................. Educational Support Services.......... 14.0 7.0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Further, lowering size standards would decrease the number of firms
that could participate in Federal financial and procurement assistance
for small businesses. Size standards based solely on analytical results
without any other considerations would cut off currently eligible small
firms from those programs. That would run counter to what SBA and the
Federal government are doing to help small businesses. Reducing size
eligibility for Federal assistance, especially under current economic
conditions, would not preserve or create more jobs; rather, it would
have the opposite effect. Therefore, in this proposed rule, SBA does
not propose to reduce size standards for any industries. For six
industries and one sub-industry for which analyses might support
lowering size standards, SBA proposes to retain the current size
standards. SBA nevertheless invites comments and suggestions on whether
it should lower size standards as suggested by analyses of industry and
program data or retain the current standards for those industries in
view of current economic conditions.
As discussed above, SBA has decided that lowering small business
size standards would be inconsistent with what the Federal government
is doing to stimulate the economy and encourage job growth through the
Recovery Act and Jobs Act. Therefore, for those industries for which
its analyses suggested decreasing their size standards, SBA proposes to
retain the current size standards. Thus, of the 17 industries and one
sub-industry in NAICS Sector 61 that SBA reviewed in this proposed
rule, the Agency proposes to increase size standards for nine
industries and retain the current standards for eight industries and
one sub-industry. Industries for which SBA has proposed to increase
their size standards and proposed standards are in Table 5 (below).
In addition, not lowering size standards in NAICS Sector 61 is
consistent with SBA's prior actions for NAICS Sector 44-45 (Retail
Trade), NAICS Sector 72 (Accommodation and Food Services), and NAICS
Sector 81 (Other Services), which the Agency proposed (74 FR 53924, 74
FR 53913, and 74 FR 53941, October 21, 2009) and adopted in its final
rules (75 FR 61597, 75 FR 61604, and 75 FR 61591, October 6, 2010). It
is also consistent with the Agency' recently proposed rules for NAICS
Sector 54, Professional, Technical, and Scientific Services (76 FR
14323, March 16, 2011), NAICS Sector 48-49, Transportation and
Warehousing (76 FR 27935, May 13, 2011), NAICS Sector 51, Information
(See 76 FR 63216, October 12, 2011), and NAICS Sector 56,
Administrative and Support, Waste Management and Remediation Services
(See 76 FR 63510, October 12, 2011). In each of those final and
proposed rules, SBA opted not to reduce small business size standards
for the same reasons it has provided above in this proposed rule.
Table 5--Summary of Proposed Size Standard Revisions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Proposed size Current size
NAICS code NAICS industry title standard ($ standard ($
million) million)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
611110.................................. Elementary and Secondary Schools...... $10.0 $7.0
611210.................................. Junior Colleges....................... 19.0 7.0
611310.................................. Colleges, Universities and 25.5 7.0