Small Business Size Standards: Utilities, 42441-42454 [2012-17441]
Download as PDF
42441
Proposed Rules
Federal Register
Vol. 77, No. 139
Thursday, July 19, 2012
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.
SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION
13 CFR Part 121
RIN 3245–AG25
U.S. Small Business
Administration.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
The U.S. Small Business
Administration (SBA) proposes to revise
the small business size standards for
nine industries in North American
Industry Classification System (NAICS)
Sector 22, Utilities. Six of those
industries deal with electric power
generation, distribution and
transmission (NAICS 221111, NAICS
221112, NAICS 221113, NAICS 221119,
NAICS 221121, and NAICS 221122) and
have a common size standard based on
electric output. For those six industries,
SBA proposes to replace the current size
standard of 4 million megawatt hours in
electric output with an employee based
size standard of 500 employees. SBA
also proposes to increase the small
business size standards for three
industries in NAICS Sector 22 that have
receipt based size standards, namely—
NAICS 221310, Water Supply and
Irrigation Systems, from $7 million to
$25.5 million; NAICS 221320, Sewage
Treatment Facilities, from $7 million to
$19 million; and NAICS 221330, Steam
and Air-conditioning Supply, from
$12.5 million to $14 million. As part of
its ongoing initiative to review all size
standards, SBA evaluated all industries
in NAICS Sector 22 that have either
electric output based or receipts based
size standards to determine whether the
existing size standards should be
retained or revised. This rule is one of
a series of proposed rules that will
examine industries grouped by NAICS
sector. SBA has issued a White Paper
entitled ‘‘Size Standards Methodology’’
and published in the October 21, 2009
issue of the Federal Register a notice
that ‘‘Size Standards Methodology’’ is
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
SUMMARY:
15:06 Jul 18, 2012
SBA must receive comments to
this proposed rule on or before
September 17, 2012.
ADDRESSES: Identify your comments by
RIN 3245–AG25 and submit them by
one of the following methods: (1)
Federal eRulemaking Portal:
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
submitted by email.
SBA will post all comments to this
proposed rule on www.regulations.gov.
If you wish to submit confidential
business information (CBI) as defined in
the User Notice at 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. 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.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Khem R. Sharma, Ph.D., Chief, Size
Standards Division, (202) 205–6618 or
sizestandards@sba.gov.
DATES:
Small Business Size Standards:
Utilities
VerDate Mar<15>2010
available on its Web site at
www.sba.gov/size for public review and
comments. The ‘‘Size Standards
Methodology’’ White Paper explains
how SBA establishes, reviews and
modifies its small business size
standards. In this proposed rule, SBA
has applied its methodology that
pertains to establishing, reviewing, and
modifying a size standard based on
average annual receipts and electric
output.
Jkt 226001
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
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
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
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.
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 a few 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 size standards
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
E:\FR\FM\19JYP1.SGM
19JYP1
42442
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 139 / Thursday, July 19, 2012 / Proposed Rules
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
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 is 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 industries. 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 recently developed a ‘‘Size
Standards Methodology’’ for
developing, reviewing and modifying
size standards when necessary. SBA has
published this document on its Web site
at 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
www.regulations.gov. SBA does not
apply every feature of its ‘‘Size
Standards Methodology’’ to all
industries because not all features are
appropriate. For example, since this
proposed rule covers all industries with
receipts based size standards in NAICS
Sector 22, the methodology described
here applies to establishing receipts
based standards. However, the
methodology is made available in its
entirety for parties who are interested 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
standard revisions for specific
industries.
SBA welcomes comments from the
public on a number of issues concerning
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
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:06 Jul 18, 2012
Jkt 226001
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:
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 www.regulations.gov. As of July 19,
2012, SBA has received 14 comments to
its ‘‘Size Standards Methodology.’’ The
comments are available to the public at
www.regulations.gov. SBA continues to
welcome comments on its methodology
from interested parties.
Congress granted discretion to the
SBA’s Administrator 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 serves
as the underlying 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 analysis of industry
structure, SBA also 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, when it
establishes small business size
standards. 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 22, as well as on the data
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
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
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, SBA has set 100 employees as the
size standard for all industries in the
Wholesale Trade Sector for SBA
financial assistance programs. However,
NAICS codes for Wholesale Trade
Industries (NAICS Sector 42) and their
100 employee size standard do not
apply to Federal procurement programs.
Rather, for Federal procurement
purposes, the size standard is 500
employees for all industries in
Wholesale Trade and for all industries
in Retail Trade (NAICS Sector 44–45)
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
E:\FR\FM\19JYP1.SGM
19JYP1
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 139 / Thursday, July 19, 2012 / Proposed Rules
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 22 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
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:06 Jul 18, 2012
Jkt 226001
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.). SBA also
considers possible 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 22 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
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
42443
standard higher than the anchor size
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
eStatement Studies. SBA then applies
these ratios to the average receipts of
firms in that industry. An industry with
a significantly higher level of average
assets than that of the anchor
comparison group is likely to have
higher startup costs; this in turn will
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 that 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
E:\FR\FM\19JYP1.SGM
19JYP1
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
42444
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 139 / Thursday, July 19, 2012 / Proposed Rules
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 by constructing 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
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 sets required for
Federal contracts as compared to typical
commercial contracting work, and the
size of Federal contracts. These, and
other factors, are likely to influence the
type of firms that compete for Federal
contracts. By comparing the Federal
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:06 Jul 18, 2012
Jkt 226001
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)
the amount of 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
contracting opportunities to small
businesses.
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 and number 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 within an industry,
this can support higher size standards.
However, if small businesses within an
industry under current size standards
have been receiving significant amounts
of financial assistance through SBA’s
loan programs, or businesses receiving
the financial assistance are much
smaller than the existing size standards,
this factor may not be considered for
determining the size standards.
Sources of Industry and Program Data
SBA’s primary source of industry data
used in this proposed rule is a special
tabulation of the data from 2007
Economic Census (see www.census.gov/
econ/census07/) prepared by the U.S.
Bureau of the Census (Census Bureau)
for SBA. 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
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
and distribution of firms by receipts and
employment size.
In some cases, where industry data
were not available due to disclosure
prohibitions in the Census Bureau’s
tabulation, 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
(Subsector), or 4-digit (Industry Group)
level. In some instances, SBA had to
base its analysis only on those factors
for which data were available or
estimates of missing values were
possible.
For industries that provide electric
power generation, distribution and
transmission (NAICS codes 221111–
221122), SBA received data from the
U.S. Energy Information Agency (EIA)
(www.eia.gov/cneaf/electricity) and an
industry association. The Census
Bureau’s Economic Census does not
provide data on electric output. The EIA
data include annual electric output in
megawatt hours and total annual
revenues from electricity sales by class
of ownership of individual entities
involved in the generation,
transmission, or distribution of
electricity in the U.S. SBA analyzed EIA
electric output data for investor-owned
utilities and power marketers for 1974–
2009 to evaluate industry structure of
these industries. The industry
association data also included the EIA
data and additional information on
affiliation among firms in the electric
power generation, transmission, and
distribution industries.
To calculate average assets, SBA used
sales to total assets ratios from the Risk
Management Association’s Annual
eStatement Studies, 2008–2010.
To evaluate Federal contracting
trends, SBA examined data representing
Federal contract awards for fiscal years
2008–2010. The data are available from
the U.S. General Service
Administration’s Federal Procurement
Data System—Next Generation (FPDS–
NG).
To assess the impact on financial
assistance to small businesses SBA
examined data on its own guaranteed
loan programs for fiscal years 2008–
2010.
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
E:\FR\FM\19JYP1.SGM
19JYP1
42445
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 139 / Thursday, July 19, 2012 / Proposed Rules
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 size 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 would
include 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 only one or 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 of the three industries in NAICS
Sector 22 with a receipts-based size
standard. 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. At the
start of the current comprehensive size
standards review, the most commonly
used receipts based size standards
clustered 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
Of 10 industries in NAICS Sector 22,
Utilities, SBA has evaluated the
structure of six industries engaged in
generation, distribution and
transmission of electricity that have size
standards based on electric output of 4
million megawatt hours and three
industries that have size standards
based on average annual receipts to
assess the appropriateness of the current
size standards. In this proposed rule,
SBA has not reviewed one industry that
has an employee based size standard in
NAICS Sector 22 (NAICS 221210,
Natural Gas Distribution). That
employee based size standard will
remain in effect until SBA reviews all
employee based size standards at a later
date.
As explained previously, 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
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
$29 million. SBA refers to this group of
industries as the ‘‘higher level receipts
based size standard comparison group.’’
SBA determines differences in industry
structure between an industry under
review and the industries in the two
comparison groups by comparing data
on each of the industry factors,
including average firm size, average
assets size, the four-firm concentration
ratio, and the Gini coefficient of
distribution of firms by size. Table 1,
Average Characteristics of Receipts
Based Comparison Groups, below,
shows two measures of the average firm
size (simple and weighted), average
assets size, the four-firm concentration
ratio, average receipts of the four largest
firms, and the Gini coefficient for both
anchor level and higher level
comparison groups for receipts based
size standards.
TABLE 1—AVERAGE CHARACTERISTICS OF RECEIPTS BASED COMPARISON GROUPS
Avg. firm size
($ million)
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Receipts based comparison group
Simple
average
Anchor Level ....................................................................
Higher Level .....................................................................
Weighted
average
1.32
5.07
19.63
116.84
Avg. assets
size ($ million)
Four-firm
concentration
ratio (%)*
Avg. receipts
of four largest
firms
($ million)*
Gini
coefficient
0.84
3.20
16.6
32.1
196.4
1,376.0
0.693
0.830
* To be used for industries with a four-firm concentration ratio of 40% or greater.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:06 Jul 18, 2012
Jkt 226001
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\19JYP1.SGM
19JYP1
42446
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 139 / Thursday, July 19, 2012 / Proposed Rules
Derivation of Receipts Based Size
Standards Based on Industry Factors
For each industry factor in Table 1,
Average Characteristics of Receipts
Based Comparison Groups, above, 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 with a value
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 $19
million.
SBA applies the above calculation to
derive a size standard for each industry
factor. Detailed formulas involved in
these calculations are presented in
SBA’s ‘‘Size Standards Methodology,’’
which is available on its Web site at
www.sba.gov/size. (However, it should
be noted that the figures in the ‘‘Size
Standards Methodology’’ White Paper
are based on 2002 Economic Census
data and are different from those
presented in this proposed rule. That is
because when SBA prepared its ‘‘Size
Standards Methodology,’’ the 2007
Economic Census data were not yet
available). Table 2, Values of Industry
Factors and Supported Size Standards,
below, shows ranges of values for each
industry factor and the levels of size
standards supported by those values.
TABLE 2—VALUES OF INDUSTRY FACTORS AND SUPPORTED SIZE STANDARDS
If simple avg. receipts
size is ($ million)
Or if weighted avg.
receipts size is
($ million)
Or if avg. assets size is
($ million)
Or if avg. 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 ............................
<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 .........................
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Derivation of Receipts Based Size
Standards Based on Federal
Contracting Factor
Besides industry structure, SBA also
evaluates Federal contracting data to
assess how successful small business
are in getting Federal contracts under
the existing size standards. For the
current comprehensive size standards
review, SBA has decided to designate a
size standard at one level higher than
the current size standard for industries
where the small business share of total
Federal contracting dollars is between
10 and 30 percentage points lower than
their shares in total industry receipts
and at two levels higher than the current
size standard if the difference is more
than 30 percentage points.
SBA has chosen not to designate a
size standard for the Federal contracting
factor alone that is higher than two
levels above the current size standard.
The FPDS–NG data have a number of
limitations and there are also complex
relationships among a number of
variables affecting small business
participation in the Federal
marketplace. SBA believes, therefore,
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:06 Jul 18, 2012
Jkt 226001
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 comment on its
methodology of 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.
Among the three industries that have
receipts based size standards in NAICS
Sector 22, two (NAICS codes 221310
and 221320) received an average of $100
million or more annually in Federal
contracts during fiscal years 2008–2010.
Of these two industries, the Federal
contracting factor was significant (i.e.,
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Then size
standard is
($ million)
5.0
7.0
10.0
14.0
19.0
25.5
30.0
35.5
the difference between the small
business share of total industry receipts
and small business share of Federal
contracting dollars was 10 percentage
points or more) for only NAICS 221310.
New Receipts Based Size Standards
Based on Industry and Federal
Contracting Factors
Table 3, New Receipts Based Size
Standards Supported by Each Factor for
Each Industry (millions of dollars),
below, shows the results of analyses of
industry and Federal contracting factors
for each of the three industries with
receipts based standards in NAICS
Sector 22. Each NAICS Industry in
columns 2, 3, 4, 6, 7 and 8 shows two
numbers. The upper number is the
value for the industry or federal
contracting factor shown on the top of
the column; the lower number is the
size standard supported by that factor.
For the four-firm concentration ratio, a
size standard is estimated based on the
average receipts of the top four firms if
its value is 40 percent or more. If the
four-firm concentration ratio for an
industry (column 5) is less than 40
percent, no size standard is estimated
E:\FR\FM\19JYP1.SGM
19JYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 139 / Thursday, July 19, 2012 / Proposed Rules
for that factor. Column 9 shows the new
size standard for each industry,
calculated as the average of size
standards supported by each factor and
rounded to the nearest fixed size level.
Analytical details involved in the
averaging procedure are described in the
SBA ‘‘Size Standard Methodology’’
White Paper which is available on its
Web site at www.sba.gov/size. For
42447
comparison, the current size standards
are also shown in column 10 of Table
3, New Receipts Based Size Standards
Supported by Each Factor for Each
Industry (millions of dollars), below.
TABLE 3—NEW RECEIPTS BASED SIZE STANDARDS SUPPORTED BY EACH FACTOR FOR EACH INDUSTRY
[Millions of dollars]
(1)
NAICS
221310, Water supply and irrigation systems .......................
221320, Sewage treatment facilities .....................................
221330, Steam and air-conditioning supply .........................
(2)
Simple
average firm
size
($ million)
(3)
Weighted
average firm
size
($ million)
(4)
Average
assets size
($ million)
$2.2
14.0
$110.7
25.5
$7.5
$35.5
46.5
....................
$886.6
19.0
0.854
$35.5
3.5
19.0
37.0
10.0
....................
....................
55.8
....................
182.7
7.0
27.3
35.5
50.6
14.0
....................
....................
61.4
....................
155.2
7.0
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Evaluation of Electric Utilities
Industries (NAICS Codes 221111 to
221122)
NAICS Industry Group 2211, Electric
Power Generation, transmission, and
distribution, consists of six industries
that currently have a common size
standard of 4 million megawatt hours
(MWh) from the sale and total electric
output for the preceding fiscal year.
These industries are: NAICS 221111,
Hydroelectric Power Generation; NAICS
221112, Fossil Fuel Electric Power
Generation; NAICS 221113, Nuclear
Electric Power Generation; NAICS
221119, Other Electric Power
Generation; NAICS 221121, Electric
Bulk Power Transmission and Control;
and NAICS 221122, Electric Power
Distribution. To qualify as small under
this size standard, a firm, including its
affiliates, must be primarily engaged in
the generation, transmission and/or
distribution of electric energy for sale
and its total electric output for
preceding fiscal year does not exceed 4
million megawatt hours (see Footnote 1
in 13 CFR 121.201). SBA included this
requirement with the 4 million MWh
size standard to prevent large nonelectric firms and/or their electric
services subsidiaries from qualifying as
small.
In this proposed rule, SBA has
considered three possible changes to the
current size standard for the six
industries under NAICS Industry Group
2211: (1) Increasing the current MWh
based size standard from 4 million
MWh to 8 million MWh, and modifying
Footnote 1; (2) adding an employee
based size standard of 500 employees
along with the 8 million MWh size
standard and eliminating Footnote 1;
and (3) replacing the current 4 million
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:59 Jul 18, 2012
Jkt 226001
(5)
Four-firm
ratio (%)
(6)
Four-firm
average
size
($ million)
MWh size standard with an employee
based size standard of 500 employees
and eliminating Footnote 1.
SBA is concerned that the ‘‘primarily
engaged’’ requirement to qualify as
small under the MWh based size
standard may restrict Federal
contracting opportunities for small
businesses that are developing
capabilities in electric energy
production and are still engaged in
activities in other industries. To qualify
as small under receipts based and
employee based size standards for other
industries, SBA’s size regulations do not
include the ‘‘primary industry’’
requirement to compete as an eligible
small business on Federal procurement.
In addition, the current footnote could
be interpreted incorrectly that the
concern and each of its affiliates must
be primarily engaged in electric
generation, transmission, or generation.
That was never the intent of the
footnote. Rather the footnote was meant
to look at primary industry of the
concern and its affiliates as a whole.
The ‘‘primarily engaged’’ requirement
would no longer be necessary by
combining an employee based size
standard with the MWh based size
standard or by replacing it with an
employee based size standard.
SBA established the 4 million MWh
size standard for electric services in
1974 (39 FR 22163, June 20, 1974 and
39 FR 30345, August 22, 1974). Prior to
that, a generic receipts based size
standard of $1 million was applied to
electric services and other services
industries for which SBA had not
established an industry specific size
standard. SBA provided only the
general reasons for adopting the 4
million MWh size standard in the 1974
proposed and final rules. SBA’s analysis
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
(7)
Gini
coefficient
(8)
Federal
contract
factor (%)
(9)
New size
standard
($ million)
(10)
Current size
standard
($ million)
¥15.0%
$10.0
....................
$25.5
....................
$7.0
0.834
$30.0
9.8%
....................
....................
19.0
....................
7.0
0.501
$5.0
....................
....................
....................
14.0
....................
12.5
of industry data available at that time
from the Federal Power Administration
had found that the largest 20 percent of
firms dominated the industry in terms
of total electric output, sales, assets, etc.
SBA also observed a trend of increased
concentration in the industry. At the 4
million MWh size standard, as the
proposed and final rules noted, a small
business would account for not more
than 0.3 percent of total industry
output.
The electric power industry has
undergone significant structural changes
since the 1970s. As with other regulated
industries, the electric power industry
underwent deregulation leading to
unbundling of generation, transmission,
and distribution activities. Retail
competition also has been introduced in
15 states in place of local monopolies in
the electric power market. Merger and
acquisition activities in recent years,
especially by holding companies, have
further contributed to the growing
concentration in the electric power
industry. New firms producing electric
power using alternative energy sources
(solar, wind, etc.) have entered the
industry and these firms tend to be
generally smaller than firms producing
electricity using conventional energy
sources such as fossil fuel. Electric
power marketers selling electricity in
wholesale and retail markets have also
emerged as the result of deregulation.
Thus, the electric power industry today
comprises different firms that generate,
transmit, and/or distribute electric
services as compared to one company
integrating all of these activities in the
past. Although the electric power
industry has undergone significant
changes, many large electric power
producers still continue to generate,
transmit, and/or distribute electric
E:\FR\FM\19JYP1.SGM
19JYP1
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
42448
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 139 / Thursday, July 19, 2012 / Proposed Rules
power either themselves or through
various subsidiaries. The current
industry’s structure reflecting the
deregulated environment may have
implications on the appropriateness of
the current size standard for electric
utilities.
The uniqueness of the electric power
industry presents several challenges in
analyzing the size standard for NAICS
Industry Group 2211. Due to the highly
capital intensive nature of generating
and transmitting electricity, a few very
large firms account for most of the
generation and transmission of electric
power. However, a large number of
small firms also generate and distribute
a small amount of electric power. As a
result of the concentration of most of the
activity in the few largest firms and the
small number of firms operating in most
of the specific industries for electric
generation, transmission, and
distribution industries, data from the
Census Bureau’s special tabulation
contain a significant amount of
suppressed data, limiting our ability to
use them for size standards analysis
using SBA’s size standards
methodology. More importantly, the
Census Bureau’s Economic Census does
not collect data on electric output and
no comparison groups exist to assess
differing characteristics of individual
industries based on electric output,
thereby rendering most of the SBA’s size
standards methodology not applicable
to analyze MWh based size standards
for electric utilities.
Consequently, SBA has examined the
changes in electric power industry
structure since 1974 using data on
privately owned for-profit electric
generators to assess whether the current
size standard should be modified to
more appropriately reflect today’s
electric power industry composition. As
mentioned earlier, these data were
obtained from the EIA’s Web site and
were adjusted for affiliation using the
information provided by an industry
association. Data on electric power
generators are the appropriate data
available that are most comparable with
the data SBA evaluated in 1974.
Because of the lack of comparable
historical data on electric transmission
and distribution, the new size standard
that SBA has considered proposing for
electric generators will also apply to the
transmission, and distribution
industries. Although deregulation has
resulted in unbundling of generation,
transmission, and distribution activities,
many of the firms engaged in the
electric power generation are still
engaged in transmission or/and
distribution activities. Thus, SBA
believes that a common size standard is
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:06 Jul 18, 2012
Jkt 226001
still more appropriate for all the electric
generation, transmission, and
distribution industries than having a
separate size standard for each of these
activities, whether it is based on MWh,
number of employees, or combination of
both.
Based on the historical analysis of
industry factors, one of the three
alternatives SBA considered is to
increase the current 4 million MWh size
standard for NAICS Industry Group
2211, to 8 million MWh. SBA bases this
proposed increase on several
considerations. First, the data show that
the industry has become much more
concentrated today than it was in the
early 1970s. Data on electric power
generators from the U.S. Department of
Energy’s Energy Information Agency
(EIA) and an analysis provided to SBA
by an industry association showed that
the share of the largest 20 percent of
firms in the industry output increased
from 73 percent in 1974 to 97 percent
in 2009. Similarly, the Gini coefficient
index characterizing the distribution of
firms by electric output size increased
from 0.698 to 0.909 during that period.
These two trends indicate a significant
increase in industry concentration and
strongly support an increase to the
existing size standard. Second, despite
the increased industry concentration,
average firm size decreased by almost 16
percent from 7.6 million MWh in 1974
to 6.4 million MWh in 2009. As
mentioned above, many new, very small
firms have entered the electric power
generation industry. This decline in
average firm size indicates that the
current size standard may not need to be
increased. Third, to attain the 1974
market share of a small electric utility
company of 0.3 percent and the 1974
cumulative market share of small
electric utilities of 6.7 percent of the
industry output in 2009 would support
an increase to the current size standard
in the range of 6 million MWh to 9
million MWh.
SBA examined Federal contracting
trends for electric power generation,
transmission, and distribution during
fiscal years 2008–2010. Federal
contracting for NAICS Industry Group
2211 averaged $1.7 billion per year
during this period. Of these total
Federal contract dollars, small
businesses obtained approximately 6
percent, which was very similar to the
small business share of total industry
receipts. Because the small business
share in the Federal market was similar
to the small business share of total
industry receipts, the Federal
contracting was not a significant factor.
However, small business shares of both
total contract dollars and total industry
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
receipts for electric services industries
were appreciably lower than those for
other industries, warranting an increase
to the current size standard.
SBA considered proposing an 8
million MWh size standard, as it would
maintain the small business coverage
ratio at the 4 million MWh size standard
in 1974. This would also make the small
business coverage ratio for electric
services industries more comparable
with the small business ratios for most
other industries that have size standards
in terms of the number of employees or
average annual receipts. The small
business coverage ratios (i.e., the
percentage of total firms in an industry
classified as small) for electric services
industries under the current 4 million
MWh size standard are appreciably
lower than those for other industries.
SBA, however, is concerned that a size
standard that is more than two times the
current size standard would include
extremely large firms with billions of
dollars in revenues, as well as firms that
may not need Federal assistance
designed for small businesses. Smaller
firms within the electric power industry
today tend to be much more specialized
in providing alternative sources of
energy on a much smaller scale than
traditional electric power generators.
Wholesale and retail power marketers
that sell power generated by very large
electric power generators also tend to be
relatively small. A size standard more
than two times the current size standard
may put these small electric power
generators and small power marketers in
competitive disadvantage, and it may
result in mischaracterizing the small
business segment of the electric power
industry.
If SBA were to adopt the solely MWh
based measure of 8 million MWh size
standard for NAICS Industry Group
2211 considered above, it believes that
Footnote 1 needs to be revised to make
it clearer how SBA determines whether
a firm is primarily engaged in electric
generation, transmission, or
distribution. As discussed previously, a
reader of the current footnote might
incorrectly interpret that the concern
and each of its affiliates must be
primarily engaged in electric generation,
transmission or generation. To correct
this, SBA would consider revising
Footnote 1 by substituting the term
‘‘primarily engaged’’ with ‘‘primary
industry’’ and applying 13 CFR 121.107
when determining the primary industry
of the firm. With these changes, the
revised Footnote 1 would read as
follows:
1. NAICS codes 221111, 221112,
221113, 221119, 221121, and 221122—
A firm, combined with its affiliates, is
E:\FR\FM\19JYP1.SGM
19JYP1
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 139 / Thursday, July 19, 2012 / Proposed Rules
small if its primary industry is the
generation, transmission, and/or
distribution of electric energy for sale,
and its total electric output for the
preceding fiscal year did not exceed 8
million megawatt hours. In determining
small business eligibility, the megawatt
hours of the firm and each affiliate are
combined and the determination of
primary industry is based on the
provisions of 13 CFR 121.107.
Comments supporting the first
alternative in which SBA considered to
increase the size standard to 8 million
MWh should also address whether the
suggested changes to the existing
footnote will sufficiently clarify and
improve upon the application of a
primary industry requirement.
As an alternative to increasing the
current MWh based size standard, SBA
considered adding an employee based
size standard along with the proposed 8
million MWh size standard and
removing Footnote 1 on the ‘‘primarily
engaged’’ requirement. As discussed
above, SBA is concerned that the
current requirement for a firm to be
primarily engaged in generation,
transmission, or distribution of electric
power to qualify for Federal small
business assistance may have adversely
affected small businesses interested in
Federal contracting opportunities. Since
deregulation, Federal agencies have
been seeking out small businesses
involved in the electric power
generation using alternative energy
sources and/or in electric power
distribution for procurement of electric
power. SBA has received several size
protests involving the application of the
requirement that businesses be
primarily engaged in generation,
transmission, or distribution of electric
power to qualify for Federal small
business assistance. The purpose of the
‘‘primarily engaged’’ requirement was to
prevent a large business not involved in
the electric power generation,
transmission, or distribution industries
from qualifying itself or its electric
power affiliate(s) as small. Based on
review of those cases, SBA believes that
requirement under today industry’s
structure may be too restrictive and,
therefore, unintentionally limiting
Federal contracting opportunities for
small businesses involved in electric
generation and distribution. By
combining an employee based size
standard with the MWh based size
standard, affiliations with other
businesses will be fully captured
through number of employees, thereby
rendering the ‘‘primarily engaged’’
requirement unnecessary.
Accordingly, SBA has considered
adding a 500 employee size standard
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:06 Jul 18, 2012
Jkt 226001
along with the 8 million MWh size
standard and removing Footnote 1. The
500 employee size standard is based on
a comparison of the small business
coverage ratios under the proposed 8
million MWh size standard and the
same small business coverage ratio in
terms of number of employees. An
electric power generator with 250 to 500
employees has a market share of
approximately 0.3 percent and the
cumulative market share of
approximately 9 percent of the industry
electric output. Although SBA could
have also considered proposing a 250
employee size standard, it believes that
a 500 employee size standard is more
appropriate for two reasons. First, a 500
employee size standard is more
consistent with SBA’s ‘‘Size Standards
Methodology’’ that considers 500
employees as a starting point (i.e., 500
employees is the employee based
anchor size standard) for considering an
employee based size standard for an
industry. Second, since the industry
coverage ratios under the 250 employees
size standard would be considerably
lower than typically observed in most
other industries with receipts based or
employee based size standards,
selecting the higher 500 employee size
standard may better capture the small
business segment within the electric
utilities industry.
Adding number of employees as a
component of the size standard would
not be unique to industries in NAICS
Industry Group 2211. The small
business size standard for NAICS
324110, Petroleum Refineries, has had
two components to its size standard for
at least 20 years. Currently a petroleum
refiner is small for Federal government
procurement if it has no more than
1,500 employees and refining capacity
of 125,000 barrels per calendar day.
As the second alternative to
increasing the current size standard to 8
million MWh, SBA also considered
proposing to replace the current MWh
based size standard with a 500
employee size standard. An employee
based size standard has several
advantages over the MWh based size
standard. First, as stated earlier, the
‘‘primarily engaged’’ requirement
(Footnote 1) would no longer be
necessary under the employee based
size standard as it will capture the total
size of firms that are involved in both
electric services industries and
nonelectric industries. Second, this
would eliminate the difficulty in
ascertaining the ‘‘primarily engaged’’
requirement in size status protests
involving companies that are engaged in
both electric services and other
industries. Third, without the
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
42449
‘‘primarily engaged’’ requirement under
an employee based size standard, new
entrants to electric power industry
(especially small firms that generate
electric power using alternative sources
and still have significant involvement in
other industries) can qualify for small
business contracting opportunities.
Fourth, the number of employees is a
more appropriate measure to determine
small business size status. Under the
MWh based measure, to qualify as small
for electric services only the electric
output generated, transmitted, or
distributed is counted. All other
activities of the firm are not counted in
determining its size. Consequently, a
firm involved in multiple industries
may be significantly larger than another
firm at the same electric output level
that is exclusively involved in electric
services. This is inconsistent with how
SBA defines size standards for other
industries in which the size of a firm
includes the employees or receipts from
all industries. Fifth, the number of
employees would also be consistent
with the size measure SBA uses for all
manufacturers, and several other
industries. SBA also uses an employee
based size standard to establish
eligibility to provide manufactured
products for Federal government as
small distributors. Electric generation,
while not classified as manufacturing
under the NAICS, involves processes
that are akin to manufacturing in
creating electric power. The process
transforms some form of raw materials
(such as fossil fuel, wind, solar, hydro,
etc.) to electric power through the
application of significant levels of
capital equipment and infrastructure.
Furthermore, as discussed in SBA’s
‘‘Size Standards Methodology,’’ an
industry that is capital intensive is
generally viewed by SBA as supporting
an employee based size standard. Sixth,
this would enable SBA to analyze size
standards for electric services industries
more consistently by using its ‘‘Size
Standards Methodology’’ that it applies
to all receipts and employee based size
standards. Seventh, an employee based
size standard would also help simplify
size standards.
Among the three options considered,
SBA strongly favors, for the reasons
discussed above, adopting the second
alternative to the MWh based size
standard that would replace the current
4 million MWh size standard and the
‘‘primarily engaged’’ requirement in
Footnote 1 with an employee based size
standard of 500 employees. SBA is
specifically interested in comments
addressing adverse consequences, if
any, of using a 500 employee size
E:\FR\FM\19JYP1.SGM
19JYP1
42450
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 139 / Thursday, July 19, 2012 / Proposed Rules
standard instead of a MWh based size
standard. The comments should explain
how an employee based size standard
could impact small businesses and why
the number of employees would be a
less preferable size standard measure to
a MWh based measure. Barring any
adverse consequences, SBA would
strongly consider eliminating the MWh
based size standard and adopting just an
employee size standard instead.
However, the Agency is reluctant to
eliminate the MWh based size standard
without first providing the public with
an opportunity to comment on this
change, along with an assessment of
whether an updated 8 million MWh size
standard or combining it with a 500
employee size standard would be more
appropriate instead.
To simplify size standards, SBA has
established or proposed common size
standards for closely related industries
in other NAICS Sectors. Within NAICS
Sector 22, SBA is proposing a 500
employees common size standard for all
industries in NAICS Industry Group
2211 for consistency with the current
common size standard and for
simplification of size standards by
having fewer differing size standard
levels. In addition, as mentioned earlier,
Census suppresses much of the industry
level data due to the limited number of
electric generation, transmission, and
distribution firms. The data reflect that
activity is concentrated among a few
large firms. This makes analyzing
industry specific size standards
extremely difficult. In addition, many
businesses engaged in electric services
also operate in one or two of the other
industries. Consequently, industry
specific size standards may result in
businesses typically engaged in other
closely related industries subject to
differing size standards.
Evaluation of Dominance in Field of
Operation
SBA has determined that no firm in
NAICS Sector 22, Utilities, for which it
has proposed to increase or modify size
standards, will be large enough at the
proposed size standard 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 0.3 percent to
1.5 percent. These levels of market share
effectively preclude a firm at the
proposed size standards from exerting
control on its industry.
Proposed Changes to Size Standards
Based on the analyses discussed
above, SBA proposes to increase
receipts based size standards for three
industries and change measure of size
from the megawatt hours to the number
of employees in six industries in Sector
22. The proposed changes are
summarized in Table 4, Summary of
Proposed Size Standards Revisions,
below.
TABLE 4—SUMMARY OF PROPOSED SIZE STANDARDS REVISIONS
NAICS Code
221111
221112
221113
221119
221121
221122
221310
221320
221330
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
NAICS industry title
Current size standard
Hydroelectric Power Generation ...............................
Fossil Fuel Electric Power Generation ......................
Nuclear Electric Power Generation ...........................
Other Electric Power Generation ..............................
Electric Bulk Power Transmission and Control .........
Electric Power Distribution ........................................
Water Supply and Irrigation Systems .......................
Sewage Treatment Facilities .....................................
Steam and Air-Conditioning Supply ..........................
4 million megawatt hours ..........................................
4 million megawatt hours ..........................................
4 million megawatt hours ..........................................
4 million megawatt hours ..........................................
4 million megawatt hours ..........................................
4 million megawatt hours ..........................................
$7.0 million ................................................................
$7.0 million ................................................................
$12.5 million ..............................................................
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD 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
the number of employees is a more
suitable measure of size for certain
industries that currently have either
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:06 Jul 18, 2012
Jkt 226001
receipts or megawatt hours based size
standards 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 of other factors that
it should consider for assessing industry
characteristics when evaluating or
revising size standards. SBA also seeks
information on other 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
weigh some factors more than others
should include suggestions on specific
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Proposed size
standard
500 employees.
500 employees.
500 employees.
500 employees.
500 employees.
500 employees.
$25.5 million.
$19.0 million.
$14.0 million.
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 221310 and 221320) while for
NAICS 221330 the proposed increase is
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. SBA has proposed to replace the
current 4 million megawatt hours size
standard for all six industries in NAICS
Industry Group 2211 with a 500
employee size standard and eliminate
Footnote 1 requiring that a business
concern be primarily engaged in electric
generation, transmission, or distribution
to qualify as small for Federal small
E:\FR\FM\19JYP1.SGM
19JYP1
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 139 / Thursday, July 19, 2012 / Proposed Rules
business assistance. SBA invites
comments on whether replacing the
current megawatt hours based size
standard with an employee based size
standard is appropriate or whether it
will have any adverse impacts on small
businesses. Comments that the
employee based size standard would
have an adverse impact or that it is not
appropriate should explain how it could
impact small businesses and why a
standard based on MWh is preferable to
one based on number of employees.
7. SBA also considered proposing to
increase the current MWh based size
standard for electric services industries
to 8 million MWh as one alternative and
to add a 500 employee size standard to
the updated 8 million MWh standard as
another alternative. Under the latter
alternative, SBA also considered
proposing to eliminate Footnote 1. SBA
seeks comments on whether a
combination of megawatt hours and the
number of employees is a more
appropriate size standard than either the
number of employees only or megawatt
hours only.
8. If SBA were to adopt only the MWh
based size standard of 8 million MWh
for NAICS Industry Group 2211, it
considered revising Footnote 1 to read
as follows: ‘‘NAICS codes 221111,
221112, 221113, 221119, 221121, and
221122—A firm, combined with its
affiliates, is small if its primary industry
is the generation, transmission, and/or
distribution of electric energy for sale,
and its total electric output for the
preceding fiscal year did not exceed 8
million megawatt hours. In determining
small business eligibility, the megawatt
hours of the firm and each affiliate are
combined and the determination of
primary industry is based on the
provisions of 13 CFR 121.107.’’ SBA
seeks comments on whether the revision
to the existing footnote is necessary and
if so whether the revised footnote will
sufficiently clarify and improve upon
the application of a primary industry
requirement.
9. SBA has proposed a 500 employee
based common size standard for all
industries within NAICS Industry
Group 2211 (electric generation,
transmission, and distribution). SBA
seeks comments on whether it should
continue using a common size standard
or adopt separate size standard for
electric generation, transmission, and
distribution. If commenters believe that
separate size standards would be more
appropriate, they should explain why
and recommend appropriate size
standards for specific industries.
10. For analytical simplicity and
efficiency, in this proposed rule, SBA
has refined its size standard
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:06 Jul 18, 2012
Jkt 226001
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
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 22, Utilities, will better
reflect the economic characteristics of
small businesses and the Federal
government marketplace in those
industries. 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
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
42451
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
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 programs provide 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 (WOSB), and servicedisabled veteran-owned small business
concerns (SDVO SBC). 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 400 additional
firms will obtain small business status
and become eligible for these programs.
That represents approximately seven
percent of the total number of firms that
are classified as small under the current
standards in all industries within
NAICS Sector 22 that are reviewed in
this proposed rule. If adopted as
proposed, this will increase the small
business share of total industry receipts
from approximately 21 percent under
the current size standards to 27 percent.
Three groups will benefit from these
proposed size standards if they are
adopted as proposed: (1) Some
businesses that are above the current
size standards will gain small business
status under the revised size standards,
thereby enabling them 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 revised
size standards, thereby enabling them to
continue their participation in the
E:\FR\FM\19JYP1.SGM
19JYP1
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
42452
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 139 / Thursday, July 19, 2012 / Proposed Rules
programs; and (3) Federal agencies will
have a larger pool of small businesses
from which to draw for their small
business procurement programs.
Under SBA’s 7(a) Business and 504
Loan Programs, based on the fiscal years
2008 to 2010 data, SBA estimates that
around 10 to 15 additional loans
totaling about $2 million to $3 million
in Federal loan guarantees could be
made to these newly defined small
businesses under the proposed size
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 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 those 400 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
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.
Additionally, the costs to the Federal
Government may be higher on some
Federal contracts. With a greater
number of businesses defined as small,
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:06 Jul 18, 2012
Jkt 226001
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 setaside contracting might result in
competition among fewer total bidders,
although there will be more small
businesses eligible to submit offers.
However, 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. In
addition, higher costs may result if more
full and open contracts are awarded to
HUBZone businesses that receive price
evaluation preferences.
The proposed size standards, if
adopted, may have some distributional
effects among large and small
businesses. Although SBA cannot
estimate with certainty the actual
outcome of the gains and losses among
small and large businesses, 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.
The proposed revisions to the existing
size standards for NAICS Sector 22,
Utilities, 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,
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
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, is
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 size standards 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 on 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 size standards in
NAICS Sector 22, Utilities, is consistent
with Executive Order 13563, Section 6,
calling for retrospective analyses of
existing rules. As discussed previously,
SBA’s last comprehensive review of size
standards was during the late 1970s and
early 1980s. Since then, except for
periodic adjustments of monetary based
size standards for inflation, 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.
E:\FR\FM\19JYP1.SGM
19JYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 139 / Thursday, July 19, 2012 / Proposed Rules
Accordingly, in 2007, SBA began 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.
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
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.
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act
(RFA), this proposed rule, if adopted,
may have a significant impact on a
substantial number of small entities in
NAICS Sector 22, Utilities. As described
above, this rule may affect small entities
seeking Federal contracts, loans under
SBA’s 7(a), 504 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)
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:06 Jul 18, 2012
Jkt 226001
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 22, Utilities, 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 its
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 recently 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
400 additional firms will become small
because of proposed revisions to size
standards in nine industries. That
represents about 7 percent of total firms
that are small under current size
standards in all industries within
NAICS Sector 22 covered by this
proposed rule. This will result in an
increase in the small business share of
total industry receipts for those
industries from about 21 percent under
the current size standards to about 27
percent under the proposed size
standards. The proposed size 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 current 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
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
42453
businesses, although SBA only defines
what is small; other entities are other
than small.
3. What are the projected reporting,
record keeping and other compliance
requirements of the rule?
Proposed size standards changes do
not impose any additional reporting or
record keeping requirements on small
entities. However, qualifying for Federal
procurement and a number of other
Federal programs requires that entities
register in the Central Contractor
Registration (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.
4. What are the relevant Federal rules,
which may duplicate, overlap or
conflict with the rule?
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)).
5. What alternatives will allow the
Agency to accomplish its regulatory
objectives while minimizing the impact
on small entities?
By law, SBA is required to develop
numerical size standards for
establishing eligibility for Federal small
E:\FR\FM\19JYP1.SGM
19JYP1
42454
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 139 / Thursday, July 19, 2012 / Proposed Rules
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.
List of Subjects in 13 CFR Part 121
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:
PART 121—SMALL BUSINESS SIZE
REGULATIONS
1. The authority citation for part 121
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 15 U.S.C. 632, 634(b)(6), 662,
and 694a(9).
2. In § 121.201, in the table, revise the
entries for ‘‘221111’’, ‘‘221112’’,
‘‘221113’’, ‘‘221119’’,’’221121’’,
‘‘221122’’, ‘‘221310’’, ‘‘221320’’, and
‘‘221330’’ to read as follows:
§ 121.201 What size standards has SBA
identified by North American Industry
Classification System codes?
*
*
*
*
*
SMALL BUSINESS SIZE STANDARDS BY NAICS INDUSTRY
NAICS U.S. industry title
Size standards
in millions of
dollars
*
*
*
*
Hydroelectric Power Generation ............................................................................................................
Fossil Fuel Electric Power Generation ..................................................................................................
Nuclear Electric Power Generation ........................................................................................................
Other Electric Power Generation ...........................................................................................................
Electric Bulk Power Transmission and Control .....................................................................................
Electric Power Distribution .....................................................................................................................
*
........................
........................
........................
........................
........................
........................
*
*
*
*
Water Supply and Irrigation Systems ....................................................................................................
Sewage Treatment Facilities ..................................................................................................................
Steam and Air-Conditioning Supply .......................................................................................................
*
NAICS
codes
*
221111
221112
221113
221119
221121
221122
*
221310
221320
221330
*
*
*
3. In § 121.201, at the end the table
‘‘Small Business Size Standards by
NAICS Industry,’’ remove and reserve
Footnote 1 to read as follows:
*
*
*
*
*
FOOTNOTES
*
1. [Reserved].
*
*
*
*
Dated: February 28, 2012.
Karen G. Mills,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2012–17441 Filed 7–18–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8025–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
[Docket No. FAA–2012–0755; Directorate
Identifier 99–CE–65–AD]
RIN 2120–AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Piaggio Aero
Industries S.p.A.
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM); rescission.
AGENCY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:06 Jul 18, 2012
Jkt 226001
*
*
We propose to rescind
Airworthiness Directive (AD) 200–07–
11 for all Piaggio Aero Industries S.p.A
Model P–180 airplanes. That AD was
prompted by mandatory continuing
airworthiness information (MCAI)
issued by the airworthiness authority for
Italy. We issued that AD to prevent the
brake hydraulic fluid from leaking
because of the brake assembly rods
contacting the brake valve tubing, which
could result in the inability to
adequately stop the airplane during
ground operations. Since we issued that
AD, we have determined this is no
longer an unsafe condition and that
regularly scheduled annual inspections
address this subject.
DATES: We must receive comments on
this proposed AD by September 4, 2012.
ADDRESSES: You may send comments,
using the procedures found in 14 CFR
11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following
methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to
https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
• Fax: 202–493–2251.
• Mail: U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations,
M–30, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.
• Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail
address above between 9 a.m. and
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
$25.5
19.0
14.0
*
Size standards
in number of
employees
*
500
500
500
500
500
500
*
........................
........................
........................
*
5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except
Federal holidays.
Examining the AD Docket
You may examine the AD docket on
the Internet at https://
www.regulations.gov; or in person at the
Docket Operations Office between
9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD
docket contains this proposed AD, the
regulatory evaluation, any comments
received, and other information. The
street address for the Docket Office
(phone: 800–647–5527) is in the
ADDRESSES section. Comments will be
available in the AD docket shortly after
receipt.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Mike Kiesov, Aerospace Safety
Engineer, FAA, Small Airplane
Directorate, 901 Locust, Kansas City,
Missouri 64106; telephone: (816) 329–
4144; fax: (816) 329–4090; email: mike.
kiesov@faa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Comments Invited
We invite you to send any written
relevant data, views, or arguments about
this proposal. Send your comments to
an address listed under the ADDRESSES
section. Include ‘‘Docket No. FAA–
2012–0755; Directorate Identifier 99–
CE–65–AD’’ at the beginning of your
E:\FR\FM\19JYP1.SGM
19JYP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 139 (Thursday, July 19, 2012)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 42441-42454]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-17441]
========================================================================
Proposed Rules
Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of
the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these
notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in
the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules.
========================================================================
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 139 / Thursday, July 19, 2012 /
Proposed Rules
[[Page 42441]]
SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION
13 CFR Part 121
RIN 3245-AG25
Small Business Size Standards: Utilities
AGENCY: U.S. Small Business Administration.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA) proposes to
revise the small business size standards for nine industries in North
American Industry Classification System (NAICS) Sector 22, Utilities.
Six of those industries deal with electric power generation,
distribution and transmission (NAICS 221111, NAICS 221112, NAICS
221113, NAICS 221119, NAICS 221121, and NAICS 221122) and have a common
size standard based on electric output. For those six industries, SBA
proposes to replace the current size standard of 4 million megawatt
hours in electric output with an employee based size standard of 500
employees. SBA also proposes to increase the small business size
standards for three industries in NAICS Sector 22 that have receipt
based size standards, namely--NAICS 221310, Water Supply and Irrigation
Systems, from $7 million to $25.5 million; NAICS 221320, Sewage
Treatment Facilities, from $7 million to $19 million; and NAICS 221330,
Steam and Air-conditioning Supply, from $12.5 million to $14 million.
As part of its ongoing initiative to review all size standards, SBA
evaluated all industries in NAICS Sector 22 that have either electric
output based or receipts based size standards to determine whether the
existing size standards should be retained or revised. This rule is one
of a series of proposed rules that will examine industries grouped by
NAICS sector. SBA has issued a White Paper entitled ``Size Standards
Methodology'' and published in the October 21, 2009 issue of the
Federal Register a notice that ``Size Standards Methodology'' is
available on its Web site at www.sba.gov/size for public review and
comments. The ``Size Standards Methodology'' White Paper explains how
SBA establishes, reviews and modifies its small business size
standards. In this proposed rule, SBA has applied its methodology that
pertains to establishing, reviewing, and modifying a size standard
based on average annual receipts and electric output.
DATES: SBA must receive comments to this proposed rule on or before
September 17, 2012.
ADDRESSES: Identify your comments by RIN 3245-AG25 and submit them by
one of the following methods: (1) Federal eRulemaking Portal:
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 submitted by email.
SBA will post all comments to this proposed rule on
www.regulations.gov. If you wish to submit confidential business
information (CBI) as defined in the User Notice at 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. 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.
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 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.
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 a few 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 size standards 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
[[Page 42442]]
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 is 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 industries. 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 recently developed a ``Size Standards Methodology'' for
developing, reviewing and modifying size standards when necessary. SBA
has published this document on its Web site at 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 www.regulations.gov.
SBA does not apply every feature of its ``Size Standards Methodology''
to all industries because not all features are appropriate. For
example, since this proposed rule covers all industries with receipts
based size standards in NAICS Sector 22, the methodology described here
applies to establishing receipts based standards. However, the
methodology is made available in its entirety for parties who are
interested 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
standard revisions for specific industries.
SBA welcomes comments from the public on a number of issues
concerning 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: 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 www.regulations.gov. As of July
19, 2012, SBA has received 14 comments to its ``Size Standards
Methodology.'' The comments are available to the public at
www.regulations.gov. SBA continues to welcome comments on its
methodology from interested parties.
Congress granted discretion to the SBA's Administrator 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 serves as the underlying 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 analysis of industry structure, SBA
also 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, when it establishes small business size
standards. 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 22, 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 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, SBA has set 100 employees as
the size standard for all industries in the Wholesale Trade Sector for
SBA financial assistance programs. However, NAICS codes for Wholesale
Trade Industries (NAICS Sector 42) and their 100 employee size standard
do not apply to Federal procurement programs. Rather, for Federal
procurement purposes, the size standard is 500 employees for all
industries in Wholesale Trade and for all industries in Retail Trade
(NAICS Sector 44-45) 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
[[Page 42443]]
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 22 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.). SBA also considers possible 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 22 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 size 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 eStatement Studies. SBA then applies these ratios
to the average receipts of firms in that industry. An industry with a
significantly higher level of average assets than that of the anchor
comparison group is likely to have higher startup costs; this in turn
will 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 that 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
[[Page 42444]]
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 by constructing 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 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 sets required for Federal contracts as compared to
typical commercial contracting work, and the size of Federal contracts.
These, and other factors, are likely to influence the type of firms
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) the amount of 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
contracting opportunities to small businesses.
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 and number 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 within an industry, this can support higher size standards.
However, if small businesses within an industry under current size
standards have been receiving significant amounts of financial
assistance through SBA's loan programs, or businesses receiving the
financial assistance are much smaller than the existing size standards,
this factor may not be considered for determining the size standards.
Sources of Industry and Program Data
SBA's primary source of industry data used in this proposed rule is
a special tabulation of the data from 2007 Economic Census (see
www.census.gov/econ/census07/) prepared by the U.S. Bureau of the
Census (Census Bureau) for SBA. 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 industry data were not available due to
disclosure prohibitions in the Census Bureau's tabulation, 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 (Subsector), or 4-digit (Industry Group) level. In
some instances, SBA had to base its analysis only on those factors for
which data were available or estimates of missing values were possible.
For industries that provide electric power generation, distribution
and transmission (NAICS codes 221111-221122), SBA received data from
the U.S. Energy Information Agency (EIA) (www.eia.gov/cneaf/electricity) and an industry association. The Census Bureau's Economic
Census does not provide data on electric output. The EIA data include
annual electric output in megawatt hours and total annual revenues from
electricity sales by class of ownership of individual entities involved
in the generation, transmission, or distribution of electricity in the
U.S. SBA analyzed EIA electric output data for investor-owned utilities
and power marketers for 1974-2009 to evaluate industry structure of
these industries. The industry association data also included the EIA
data and additional information on affiliation among firms in the
electric power generation, transmission, and distribution industries.
To calculate average assets, SBA used sales to total assets ratios
from the Risk Management Association's Annual eStatement Studies, 2008-
2010.
To evaluate Federal contracting trends, SBA examined data
representing Federal contract awards for fiscal years 2008-2010. The
data are available from the U.S. General Service Administration's
Federal Procurement Data System--Next Generation (FPDS-NG).
To assess the impact on financial assistance to small businesses
SBA examined data on its own guaranteed loan programs for fiscal years
2008-2010.
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
[[Page 42445]]
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 size 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 would include 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 only
one or 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 of the three industries in NAICS Sector 22 with a
receipts-based size standard. 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. At the start of
the current comprehensive size standards review, the most commonly used
receipts based size standards clustered 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
Of 10 industries in NAICS Sector 22, Utilities, SBA has evaluated
the structure of six industries engaged in generation, distribution and
transmission of electricity that have size standards based on electric
output of 4 million megawatt hours and three industries that have size
standards based on average annual receipts to assess the
appropriateness of the current size standards. In this proposed rule,
SBA has not reviewed one industry that has an employee based size
standard in NAICS Sector 22 (NAICS 221210, Natural Gas Distribution).
That employee based size standard will remain in effect until SBA
reviews all employee based size standards at a later date.
As explained previously, 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
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 $29 million.
SBA refers to this group of industries as the ``higher level receipts
based size standard comparison group.'' SBA determines differences in
industry structure between an industry under review and the industries
in the two comparison groups by comparing data on each of the industry
factors, including average firm size, average assets size, the four-
firm concentration ratio, and the Gini coefficient of distribution of
firms by size. Table 1, Average Characteristics of Receipts Based
Comparison Groups, below, shows two measures of the average firm size
(simple and weighted), average assets size, the four-firm concentration
ratio, average receipts of the four largest firms, and the Gini
coefficient for both anchor level and higher level comparison groups
for receipts based size standards.
Table 1--Average Characteristics of Receipts Based Comparison Groups
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Avg. firm size ($
million) Avg. assets Four-firm Avg. receipts
Receipts based comparison ---------------------- size ($ concentration of four Gini
group Simple Weighted million) ratio (%)* largest firms coefficient
average average ($ 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.
[[Page 42446]]
Derivation of Receipts Based Size Standards Based on Industry Factors
For each industry factor in Table 1, Average Characteristics of
Receipts Based Comparison Groups, above, 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 with a value 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 $19 million.
SBA applies the above calculation to derive a size standard for
each industry factor. Detailed formulas involved in these calculations
are presented in SBA's ``Size Standards Methodology,'' which is
available on its Web site at www.sba.gov/size. (However, it should be
noted that the figures in the ``Size Standards Methodology'' White
Paper are based on 2002 Economic Census data and are different from
those presented in this proposed rule. That is because when SBA
prepared its ``Size Standards Methodology,'' the 2007 Economic Census
data were not yet available). Table 2, Values of Industry Factors and
Supported Size Standards, below, shows ranges of values for each
industry factor and the levels of size standards supported by those
values.
Table 2--Values of Industry Factors and Supported Size Standards
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Or if avg.
Or if weighted Or if avg. receipts of Then size
If simple avg. receipts size avg. receipts assets size is largest four Or if Gini standard is ($
is ($ million) size is ($ ($ million) firms is ($ coefficient is million)
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 Receipts Based Size Standards Based on Federal
Contracting Factor
Besides industry structure, SBA also evaluates Federal contracting
data to assess how successful small business are in getting Federal
contracts under the existing size standards. For the current
comprehensive size standards review, SBA has decided to designate a
size standard at one level higher than the current size standard for
industries where the small business share of total Federal contracting
dollars is between 10 and 30 percentage points lower than their shares
in total industry receipts and at two levels higher than the current
size standard if the difference is more than 30 percentage points.
SBA has chosen not to designate a size standard for the Federal
contracting factor alone that is higher than two levels above the
current size standard. The FPDS-NG data have a number of limitations
and there are also complex relationships among a number of variables
affecting small business participation in the Federal marketplace. SBA
believes, therefore, 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 comment on its methodology of 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.
Among the three industries that have receipts based size standards
in NAICS Sector 22, two (NAICS codes 221310 and 221320) received an
average of $100 million or more annually in Federal contracts during
fiscal years 2008-2010. Of these two industries, the Federal
contracting factor was significant (i.e., the difference between the
small business share of total industry receipts and small business
share of Federal contracting dollars was 10 percentage points or more)
for only NAICS 221310.
New Receipts Based Size Standards Based on Industry and Federal
Contracting Factors
Table 3, New Receipts Based Size Standards Supported by Each Factor
for Each Industry (millions of dollars), below, shows the results of
analyses of industry and Federal contracting factors for each of the
three industries with receipts based standards in NAICS Sector 22. Each
NAICS Industry in columns 2, 3, 4, 6, 7 and 8 shows two numbers. The
upper number is the value for the industry or federal contracting
factor shown on the top of the column; the lower number is the size
standard supported by that factor. For the four-firm concentration
ratio, a size standard is estimated based on the average receipts of
the top four firms if its value is 40 percent or more. If the four-firm
concentration ratio for an industry (column 5) is less than 40 percent,
no size standard is estimated
[[Page 42447]]
for that factor. Column 9 shows the new size standard for each
industry, calculated as the average of size standards supported by each
factor and rounded to the nearest fixed size level. Analytical details
involved in the averaging procedure are described in the SBA ``Size
Standard Methodology'' White Paper which is available on its Web site
at www.sba.gov/size. For comparison, the current size standards are
also shown in column 10 of Table 3, New Receipts Based Size Standards
Supported by Each Factor for Each Industry (millions of dollars),
below.
Table 3--New Receipts Based Size Standards Supported by Each Factor for Each Industry
[Millions of dollars]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10)
NAICS Simple Weighted Average Four-firm Four-firm Gini Federal New size Current
average average assets size ratio (%) average coefficient contract standard size
firm size firm size ($ million) size factor (%) ($ million) standard
($ million) ($ million) ($ million) ($ million)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
221310, Water supply and irrigation $2.2 $110.7 $7.5 46.5 $886.6 0.854 -15.0% ........... ...........
systems...........................
14.0 25.5 $35.5 ........... 19.0 $35.5 $10.0 $25.5 $7.0
221320, Sewage treatment facilities 3.5 37.0 ........... 55.8 182.7 0.834 9.8% ........... ...........
19.0 10.0 ........... ........... 7.0 $30.0 ........... 19.0 7.0
221330, Steam and air-conditioning 27.3 50.6 ........... 61.4 155.2 0.501 ........... ........... ...........
supply............................
35.5 14.0 ........... ........... 7.0 $5.0 ........... 14.0 12.5
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Evaluation of Electric Utilities Industries (NAICS Codes 221111 to
221122)
NAICS Industry Group 2211, Electric Power Generation, transmission,
and distribution, consists of six industries that currently have a
common size standard of 4 million megawatt hours (MWh) from the sale
and total electric output for the preceding fiscal year. These
industries are: NAICS 221111, Hydroelectric Power Generation; NAICS
221112, Fossil Fuel Electric Power Generation; NAICS 221113, Nuclear
Electric Power Generation; NAICS 221119, Other Electric Power
Generation; NAICS 221121, Electric Bulk Power Transmission and Control;
and NAICS 221122, Electric Power Distribution. To qualify as small
under this size standard, a firm, including its affiliates, must be
primarily engaged in the generation, transmission and/or distribution
of electric energy for sale and its total electric output for preceding
fiscal year does not exceed 4 million megawatt hours (see Footnote 1 in
13 CFR 121.201). SBA included this requirement with the 4 million MWh
size standard to prevent large non-electric firms and/or their electric
services subsidiaries from qualifying as small.
In this proposed rule, SBA has considered three possible changes to
the current size standard for the six industries under NAICS Industry
Group 2211: (1) Increasing the current MWh based size standard from 4
million MWh to 8 million MWh, and modifying Footnote 1; (2) adding an
employee based size standard of 500 employees along with the 8 million
MWh size standard and eliminating Footnote 1; and (3) replacing the
current 4 million MWh size standard with an employee based size
standard of 500 employees and eliminating Footnote 1.
SBA is concerned that the ``primarily engaged'' requirement to
qualify as small under the MWh based size standard may restrict Federal
contracting opportunities for small businesses that are developing
capabilities in electric energy production and are still engaged in
activities in other industries. To qualify as small under receipts
based and employee based size standards for other industries, SBA's
size regulations do not include the ``primary industry'' requirement to
compete as an eligible small business on Federal procurement. In
addition, the current footnote could be interpreted incorrectly that
the concern and each of its affiliates must be primarily engaged in
electric generation, transmission, or generation. That was never the
intent of the footnote. Rather the footnote was meant to look at
primary industry of the concern and its affiliates as a whole. The
``primarily engaged'' requirement would no longer be necessary by
combining an employee based size standard with the MWh based size
standard or by replacing it with an employee based size standard.
SBA established the 4 million MWh size standard for electric
services in 1974 (39 FR 22163, June 20, 1974 and 39 FR 30345, August
22, 1974). Prior to that, a generic receipts based size standard of $1
million was applied to electric services and other services industries
for which SBA had not established an industry specific size standard.
SBA provided only the general reasons for adopting the 4 million MWh
size standard in the 1974 proposed and final rules. SBA's analysis of
industry data available at that time from the Federal Power
Administration had found that the largest 20 percent of firms dominated
the industry in terms of total electric output, sales, assets, etc. SBA
also observed a trend of increased concentration in the industry. At
the 4 million MWh size standard, as the proposed and final rules noted,
a small business would account for not more than 0.3 percent of total
industry output.
The electric power industry has undergone significant structural
changes since the 1970s. As with other regulated industries, the
electric power industry underwent deregulation leading to unbundling of
generation, transmission, and distribution activities. Retail
competition also has been introduced in 15 states in place of local
monopolies in the electric power market. Merger and acquisition
activities in recent years, especially by holding companies, have
further contributed to the growing concentration in the electric power
industry. New firms producing electric power using alternative energy
sources (solar, wind, etc.) have entered the industry and these firms
tend to be generally smaller than firms producing electricity using
conventional energy sources such as fossil fuel. Electric power
marketers selling electricity in wholesale and retail markets have also
emerged as the result of deregulation. Thus, the electric power
industry today comprises different firms that generate, transmit, and/
or distribute electric services as compared to one company integrating
all of these activities in the past. Although the electric power
industry has undergone significant changes, many large electric power
producers still continue to generate, transmit, and/or distribute
electric
[[Page 42448]]
power either themselves or through various subsidiaries. The current
industry's structure reflecting the deregulated environment may have
implications on the appropriateness of the current size standard for
electric utilities.
The uniqueness of the electric power industry presents several
challenges in analyzing the size standard for NAICS Industry Group
2211. Due to the highly capital intensive nature of generating and
transmitting electricity, a few very large firms account for most of
the generation and transmission of electric power. However, a large
number of small firms also generate and distribute a small amount of
electric power. As a result of the concentration of most of the
activity in the few largest firms and the small number of firms
operating in most of the specific industries for electric generation,
transmission, and distribution industries, data from the Census
Bureau's special tabulation contain a significant amount of suppressed
data, limiting our ability to use them for size standards analysis
using SBA's size standards methodology. More importantly, the Census
Bureau's Economic Census does not collect data on electric output and
no comparison groups exist to assess differing characteristics of
individual industries based on electric output, thereby rendering most
of the SBA's size standards methodology not applicable to analyze MWh
based size standards for electric utilities.
Consequently, SBA has examined the changes in electric power
industry structure since 1974 using data on privately owned for-profit
electric generators to assess whether the current size standard should
be modified to more appropriately reflect today's electric power
industry composition. As mentioned earlier, these data were obtained
from the EIA's Web site and were adjusted for affiliation using the
information provided by an industry association. Data on electric power
generators are the appropriate data available that are most comparable
with the data SBA evaluated in 1974. Because of the lack of comparable
historical data on electric transmission and distribution, the new size
standard that SBA has considered proposing for electric generators will
also apply to the transmission, and distribution industries. Although
deregulation has resulted in unbundling of generation, transmission,
and distribution activities, many of the firms engaged in the electric
power generation are still engaged in transmission or/and distribution
activities. Thus, SBA believes that a common size standard is still
more appropriate for all the electric generation, transmission, and
distribution industries than having a separate size standard for each
of these activities, whether it is based on MWh, number of employees,
or combination of both.
Based on the historical analysis of industry factors, one of the
three alternatives SBA considered is to increase the current 4 million
MWh size standard for NAICS Industry Group 2211, to 8 million MWh. SBA
bases this proposed increase on several considerations. First, the data
show that the industry has become much more concentrated today than it
was in the early 1970s. Data on electric power generators from the U.S.
Department of Energy's Energy Information Agency (EIA) and an analysis
provided to SBA by an industry association showed that the share of the
largest 20 percent of firms in the industry output increased from 73
percent in 1974 to 97 percent in 2009. Similarly, the Gini coefficient
index characterizing the distribution of firms by electric output size
increased from 0.698 to 0.909 during that period. These two trends
indicate a significant increase in industry concentration and strongly
support an increase to the existing size standard. Second, despite the
increased industry concentration, average firm size decreased by almost
16 percent from 7.6 million MWh in 1974 to 6.4 million MWh in 2009. As
mentioned above, many new, very small firms have entered the electric
power generation industry. This decline in average firm size indicates
that the current size standard may not need to be increased. Third, to
attain the 1974 market share of a small electric utility company of 0.3
percent and the 1974 cumulative market share of small electric
utilities of 6.7 percent of the industry output in 2009 would support
an increase to the current size standard in the range of 6 million MWh
to 9 million MWh.
SBA examined Federal contracting trends for electric power
generation, transmission, and distribution during fiscal years 2008-
2010. Federal contracting for NAICS Industry Group 2211 averaged $1.7
billion per year during this period. Of these total Federal contract
dollars, small businesses obtained approximately 6 percent, which was
very similar to the small business share of total industry receipts.
Because the small business share in the Federal market was similar to
the small business share of total industry receipts, the Federal
contracting was not a significant factor. However, small business
shares of both total contract dollars and total industry receipts for
electric services industries were appreciably lower than those for
other industries, warranting an increase to the current size standard.
SBA considered proposing an 8 million MWh size standard, as it
would maintain the small business coverage ratio at the 4 million MWh
size standard in 1974. This would also make the small business coverage
ratio for electric services industries more comparable with the small
business ratios for most other industries that have size standards in
terms of the number of employees or average annual receipts. The small
business coverage ratios (i.e., the percentage of total firms in an
industry classified as small) for electric services industries under
the current 4 million MWh size standard are appreciably lower than
those for other industries. SBA, however, is concerned that a size
standard that is more than two times the current size standard would
include extremely large firms with billions of dollars in revenues, as
well as firms that may not need Federal assistance designed for small
businesses. Smaller firms within the electric power industry today tend
to be much more specialized in providing alternative sources of energy
on a much smaller scale than traditional electric power generators.
Wholesale and retail power marketers that sell power generated by very
large electric power generators also tend to be relatively small. A
size standard more than two times the current size standard may put
these small electric power generators and small power marketers in
competitive disadvantage, and it may result in mischaracterizing the
small business segment of the electric power industry.
If SBA were to adopt the solely MWh based measure of 8 million MWh
size standard for NAICS Industry Group 2211 considered above, it
believes that Footnote 1 needs to be revised to make it clearer how SBA
determines whether a firm is primarily engaged in electric generation,
transmission, or distribution. As discussed previously, a reader of the
current footnote might incorrectly interpret that the concern and each
of its affiliates must be primarily engaged in electric generation,
transmission or generation. To correct this, SBA would consider
revising Footnote 1 by substituting the term ``primarily engaged'' with
``primary industry'' and applying 13 CFR 121.107 when determining the
primary industry of the firm. With these changes, the revised Footnote
1 would read as follows:
1. NAICS codes 221111, 221112, 221113, 221119, 221121, and 221122--
A firm, combined with its affiliates, is
[[Page 42449]]
small if its primary industry is the generation, transmission, and/or
distribution of electric energy for sale, and its total electric output
for the preceding fiscal year did not exceed 8 million megawatt hours.
In determining small business eligibility, the megawatt hours of the
firm and each affiliate are combined and the determination of primary
industry is based on the provisions of 13 CFR 121.107.
Comments supporting the first alternative in which SBA considered
to increase the size standard to 8 million MWh should also address
whether the suggested changes to the existing footnote will
sufficiently clarify and improve upon the application of a primary
industry requirement.
As an alternative to increasing the current MWh based size
standard, SBA considered adding an employee based size standard along
with the proposed 8 million MWh size standard and removing Footnote 1
on the ``primarily engaged'' requirement. As discussed above, SBA is
concerned that the current requirement for a firm to be primarily
engaged in generation, transmission, or distribution of electric power
to qualify for Federal small business assistance may have adversely
affected small businesses interested in Federal contracting
opportunities. Since deregulation, Federal agencies have been seeking
out small businesses involved in the electric power generation using
alternative energy sources and/or in electric power distribution for
procurement of electric power. SBA has received several size protests
involving the application of the requirement that businesses be
primarily engaged in generation, transmission, or distribution of
electric power to qualify for Federal small business assistance. The
purpose of the ``primarily engaged'' requirement was to prevent a large
business not involved in the electric power generation, transmission,
or distribution industries from qualifying itself or its electric power
affiliate(s) as small. Based on review of those cases, SBA believes
that requirement under today industry's structure may be too
restrictive and, therefore, unintentionally limiting Federal
contracting opportunities for small businesses involved in electric
generation and distribution. By combining an employee based size
standard with the MWh based size standard, affiliations with other
businesses will be fully captured through number of employees, thereby
rendering the ``primarily engaged'' requirement unnecessary.
Accordingly, SBA has considered adding a 500 employee size standard
along with the 8 million MWh size standard and removing Footnote 1. The
500 employee size standard is based on a comparison of the small
business coverage ratios under the proposed 8 million MWh size standard
and the same small business coverage ratio in terms of number of
employees. An electric power generator with 250 to 500 employees has a
market share of approximately 0.3 percent and the cumulative market
share of approximately 9 percent of the industry electric output.
Although SBA could have also considered proposing a 250 employee size
standard, it believes that a 500 employee size standard is more
appropriate for two reasons. First, a 500 employee size standard is
more consistent with SBA's ``Size Standards Methodology'' that
considers 500 employees as a starting point (i.e., 500 employees is the
employee based anchor size standard) for considering an employee based
size standard for an industry. Second, since the industry coverage
ratios under the 250 employees size standard would be considerably
lower than typically observed in most other industries with receipts
based or employee based size standards, selecting the higher 500
employee size standard may better capture the small business segment
within the electric utilities industry.
Adding number of employees as a component of the size standard
would not be unique to industries in NAICS Industry Group 2211. The
small business size standard for NAICS 324110, Petroleum Refineries,
has had two components to its size standard for at least 20 years.
Currently a petroleum refiner is small for Federal government
procurement if it has no more than 1,500 employees and refining
capacity of 125,000 barrels per calendar day.
As the second alternative to increasing the current size standard
to 8 million MWh, SBA also considered proposing to replace the current
MWh based size standard with a 500 employee size standard. An employee
based size standard has several advantages over the MWh based size
standard. First, as stated earlier, the ``primarily engaged''
requirement (Footnote 1) would no longer be necessary under the
employee based size standard as it will capture the total size of firms
that are involved in both electric services industries and nonelectric
industries. Second, this would eliminate the difficulty in ascertaining
the ``primarily engaged'' requirement in size status protests involving
companies that are engaged in both electric services and other
industries. Third, without the ``primarily engaged'' requirement under
an employee based size standard, new entrants to electric power
industry (especially small firms that generate electric power using
alternative sources and still have significant involvement in other
industries) can qualify for small business contracting opportunities.
Fourth, the number of employees is a more appropriate measure to
determine small business size status. Under the MWh based measure, to
qualify as small for electric services only the electric output
generated, transmitted, or distributed is counted. All other activities
of the firm are not counted in determining its size. Consequently, a
firm involved in multiple industries may be significantly larger than
another firm at the same electric output level that is exclusively
involved in electric services. This is inconsistent with how SBA
defines size standards for other industries in which the size of a firm
includes the employees or receipts from all industries. Fifth, the
number of employees would also be consistent with the size measure SBA
uses for all manufacturers, and several other industries. SBA also uses
an employee based size standard to establish eligibility to provide
manufactured products for Federal government as small distributors.
Electric generation, while not classified as manufacturing under the
NAICS, involves processes that are akin to manufacturing in creating
electric power. The process transforms some form of raw materials (such
as fossil fuel, wind, solar, hydro, etc.) to electric power through the
application of significant levels of capital equipment and
infrastructure. Furthermore, as discussed in SBA's ``Size Standards
Methodology,'' an industry that is capital intensive is generally
viewed by SBA as supporting an employee based size standard. Sixth,
this would enable SBA to analyze size standards for electric services
industries more consistently by using its ``Size Standards
Methodology'' that it applies to all receipts and employee based size
standards. Seventh, an employee based size standard would also help
simplify size standards.
Among the three options considered, SBA strongly favors, for the
reasons discussed above, adopting the second alternative to the MWh
based size standard that would replace the current 4 million MWh size
standard and the ``primarily engaged'' requirement in Footnote 1 with
an employee based size standard of 500 employees. SBA is specifically
interested in comments addressing adverse consequences, if any, of
using a 500 employee size
[[Page 42450]]
standard instead of a MWh based size standard. The comments should
explain how an employee based size standard could impact small
businesses and why the number of employees would be a less preferable
size standard measure to a MWh based measure. Barring any adverse
consequences, SBA would strongly consider eliminating the MWh based
size standard and adopting just an employee size standard instead.
However, the Agency is reluctant to eliminate the MWh based size
standard without first providing the public with an opportunity to
comment on this change, along with an assessment of whether an updated
8 million MWh size standard or combining it with a 500 employee size
standard would be more appropriate instead.
To simplify size standards, SBA has established or proposed common
size standards for closely related industries in other NAICS Sectors.
Within NAICS Sector 22, SBA is proposing a 500 employees common size
standard for all industries in NAICS Industry Group 2211 for
consistency with the current common size standard and for
simplification of size standards by having fewer differing size
standard levels. In addition, as mentioned earlier, Census suppresses
much of the industry level data due to the limited number of electric
generation, transmission, and distribution firms. The data reflect that
activity is concentrated among a few large firms. This makes analyzing
industry specific size standards extremely difficult. In addition, many
businesses engaged in electric services also operate in one or two of
the other industries. Consequently, industry specific size standards
may result in businesses typically engaged in other closely related
industries subject to differing size standards.
Evaluation of Dominance in Field of Operation
SBA has determined that no firm in NAICS Sector 22, Utilities, for
which it has proposed to increase or modify size standards, will be
large enough at the proposed size standard 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 0.3
percent to 1.5 percent. These levels of market share effectively
preclude a firm at the proposed size standards from exerting control on
its industry.
Proposed Changes to Size Standards
Based on the analyses discussed above, SBA proposes to increase
receipts based size standards for three industries and change measure
of size from the megawatt hours to the number of employees in six
industries in Sector 22. The proposed changes are summarized in Table
4, Summary of Proposed Size Standards Revisions, below.
Table 4--Summary of Proposed Size Standards Revisions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NAICS Code NAICS industry title Current size standard Proposed size standard
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
221111................... Hydroelectric Power 4 million megawatt hours 500 employees.
Generation.
221112................... Fossil Fuel Electric 4 million megawatt hours 500 employees.
Power Generation.
221113................... Nuclear Electric Power 4 million megawatt hours 500 employees.
Generation.
221119................... Other Electric Power 4 million megawatt hours 500 employees.
Generation.
221121................... Electric Bulk Power 4 million megawatt hours 500 employees.
Transmission and
Control.
221122................... Electric Power 4 million megawatt hours 500 employees.
Distribution.
221310................... Water Supply and $7.0 million............ $25.5 million.
Irrigation Systems.
221320................... Sewage Treatment $7.0 million............ $19.0 million.
Facilities.
221330................... Steam and Air- $12.5 million........... $14.0 million.
Conditioning Supply.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 the
number of employees is a more suitable measure of size for certain
industries that currently have either receipts or megawatt hours based
size standards 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 of other factors that it should consider for
assessing industry characteristics when evaluating or revising size
standards. SBA also seeks information on other 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 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 221310 and 221320) while for NAICS 221330
the proposed increase is 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. SBA has proposed to replace the current 4 million megawatt hours
size standard for all six industries in NAICS Industry Group 2211 with
a 500 employee size standard and eliminate Footnote 1 requiring that a
business concern be primarily engaged in electric generation,
transmission, or distribution to qualify as small for Federal small
[[Page 42451]]
business assistance. SBA invites comments on whether replacing the
current megawatt hours based size standard with an employee based size
standard is appropriate or whether it will have any adverse impacts on
small businesses. Comments that the employee based size standard would
have an adverse impact or that it is not appropriate should explain how
it could impact small businesses and why a standard based on MWh is
preferable to one based on number of employees.
7. SBA also considered proposing to increase the current MWh based
size standard for electric services industries to 8 million MWh as one
alternative and to add a 500 employee size standard to the updated 8
million MWh standard as another alternative. Under the latter
alternative, SBA also considered proposing to eliminate Footnote 1. SBA
seeks comments on whether a combination of megawatt hours and the
number of employees is a more appropriate size standard than either the
number of employees only or megawatt hours only.
8. If SBA were to adopt only the MWh based size standard of 8
million MWh for NAICS Industry Group 2211, it considered revising
Footnote 1 to read as follows: ``NAICS codes 221111, 221112, 221113,
221119, 221121, and 221122--A firm, combined with its affiliates, is
small if its primary industry is the generation, transmission, and/or
distribution of electric energy for sale, and its total electric output
for the preceding fiscal year did not exceed 8 million megawatt hours.
In determining small business eligibility, the megawatt hours of the
firm and each affiliate are combined and the determination of primary
industry is based on the provisions of 13 CFR 121.107.'' SBA seeks
comments on whether the revision to the existing footnote is necessary
and if so whether the revised footnote will sufficiently clarify and
improve upon the application of a primary industry requirement.
9. SBA has proposed a 500 employee based common size standard for
all industries within NAICS Industry Group 2211 (electric generation,
transmission, and distribution). SBA seeks comments on whether it
should continue using a common size standard or adopt separate size
standard for electric generation, transmission, and distribution. If
commenters believe that separate size standards would be more
appropriate, they should explain why and recommend appropriate size
standards for specific industries.
10. 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 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 22, Utilities, will better reflect the
economic characteristics of small businesses and the Federal government
marketplace in those industries. 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 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 programs
provide 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
(WOSB), and service-disabled veteran-owned small business concerns
(SDVO SBC). 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 400 additional firms will obtain
small business status and become eligible for these programs. That
represents approximately seven percent of the total number of firms
that are classified as small under the current standards in all
industries within NAICS Sector 22 that are reviewed in this proposed
rule. If adopted as proposed, this will increase the small business
share of total industry receipts from approximately 21 percent under
the current size standards to 27 percent.
Three groups will benefit from these proposed size standards if
they are adopted as proposed: (1) Some businesses that are above the
current size standards will gain small business status under the
revised size standards, thereby enabling them 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 revised size standards,
thereby enabling them to continue their participation in the
[[Page 42452]]
programs; and (3) Federal agencies will have a larger pool of small
businesses from which to draw for their small business procurement
programs.
Under SBA's 7(a) Business and 504 Loan Programs, based on the
fiscal years 2008 to 2010 data, SBA estimates that around 10 to 15
additional loans totaling about $2 million to $3 million in Federal
loan guarantees could be made to these newly defined small businesses
under the proposed size 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 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 those 400 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 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.
Additionally, 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.
However, 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. In addition, higher costs may result if more full
and open contracts are awarded to HUBZone businesses that receive price
evaluation preferences.
The proposed size standards, if adopted, may have some
distributional effects among large and small businesses. Although SBA
cannot estimate with certainty the actual outcome of the gains and
losses among small and large businesses, 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. The proposed revisions to the existing size standards for
NAICS Sector 22, Utilities, 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, is
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 size standards 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 on 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
non-procurement). 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 size standards in NAICS Sector 22, Utilities, is
consistent with Executive Order 13563, Section 6, calling for
retrospective analyses of existing rules. As discussed previously,
SBA's last comprehensive review of size standards was during the late
1970s and early 1980s. Since then, except for periodic adjustments of
monetary based size standards for inflation, 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.
[[Page 42453]]
Accordingly, in 2007, SBA began 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.
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), this proposed rule, if
adopted, may have a significant impact on a substantial number of small
entities in NAICS Sector 22, Utilities. As described above, this rule
may affect small entities seeking Federal contracts, loans under SBA's
7(a), 504 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 22, Utilities, 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 its 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 recently 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 400 additional firms will become small because of proposed
revisions to size standards in nine industries. That represents about 7
percent of total firms that are small under current size standards in
all industries within NAICS Sector 22 covered by this proposed rule.
This will result in an increase in the small business share of total
industry receipts for those industries from about 21 percent under the
current size standards to about 27 percent under the proposed size
standards. The proposed size 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 current 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, record keeping and other
compliance requirements of the rule?
Proposed size standards changes do not impose any additional
reporting or record keeping requirements on small entities. However,
qualifying for Federal procurement and a number of other Federal
programs requires that entities register in the Central Contractor
Registration (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.
4. What are the relevant Federal rules, which may duplicate, overlap or
conflict with the rule?
Under Sec. 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)).
5. What alternatives will allow the Agency to accomplish its regulatory
objectives while minimizing the impact on small entities?
By law, SBA is required to develop numerical size standards for
establishing eligibility for Federal small
[[Page 42454]]
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.
List of Subjects in 13 CFR Part 121
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:
PART 121--SMALL BUSINESS SIZE REGULATIONS
1. The authority citation for part 121 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 15 U.S.C. 632, 634(b)(6), 662, and 694a(9).
2. In Sec. 121.201, in the table, revise the entries for
``221111'', ``221112'', ``221113'', ``221119'',''221121'', ``221122'',
``221310'', ``221320'', and ``221330'' to read as follows:
Sec. 121.201 What size standards has SBA identified by North American
Industry Classification System codes?
* * * * *
Small Business Size Standards by NAICS Industry
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Size standards Size standards
NAICS codes NAICS U.S. industry in millions of in number of
title dollars employees
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
221111........ Hydroelectric Power .............. 500
Generation.
221112........ Fossil Fuel Electric .............. 500
Power Generation.
221113........ Nuclear Electric Power .............. 500
Generation.
221119........ Other Electric Power .............. 500
Generation.
221121........ Electric Bulk Power .............. 500
Transmission and
Control.
221122........ Electric Power .............. 500
Distribution.
* * * * * * *
221310........ Water Supply and $25.5 ..............
Irrigation Systems.
221320........ Sewage Treatment 19.0 ..............
Facilities.
221330........ Steam and Air- 14.0 ..............
Conditioning Supply.
* * * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. In Sec. 121.201, at the end the table ``Small Business Size
Standards by NAICS Industry,'' remove and reserve Footnote 1 to read as
follows:
* * * * *
FOOTNOTES
1. [Reserved].
* * * * *
Dated: February 28, 2012.
Karen G. Mills,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2012-17441 Filed 7-18-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8025-01-P