Consolidation of Mentor-Protégé Programs and Other Government Contracting Amendments; Correction, 380-381 [2021-28256]
Download as PDF
380
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 3 / Wednesday, January 5, 2022 / Rules and Regulations
List of Subjects in 12 CFR Part 747
PART 747—ADMINISTRATIVE
ACTIONS, ADJUDICATIVE HEARINGS,
RULES OF PRACTICE AND
PROCEDURE, AND INVESTIGATIONS
Civil monetary penalties, Credit
unions.
By the National Credit Union
Administration Board on December 30, 2021.
Melane Conyers-Ausbrooks,
Secretary of the Board.
For the reasons stated in the
preamble, the Board amends 12 CFR
part 747 as follows:
Authority: 12 U.S.C. 1766, 1782, 1784,
1785, 1786, 1787, 1790a, 1790d; 15 U.S.C.
1639e; 42 U.S.C. 4012a; Pub. L. 101–410;
Pub. L. 104–134; Pub. L. 109–351; Pub. L.
114–74.
2. Revise § 747.1001 to read as
follows:
■
(a) The NCUA is required by the
Federal Civil Penalties Inflation
Adjustment Act of 1990 (Pub. L. 101–
410, 104 Stat. 890, as amended (28
U.S.C. 2461 note)), to adjust the
maximum amount of each civil
monetary penalty (CMP) within its
jurisdiction by the rate of inflation. The
following chart displays those adjusted
amounts, as calculated pursuant to the
statute:
U.S. Code citation
CMP description
(1) 12 U.S.C. 1782(a)(3) .........
Inadvertent failure to submit a report or the inadvertent submission of a
false or misleading report.
Non-inadvertent failure to submit a report or the non-inadvertent submission of a false or misleading report.
Failure to submit a report or the submission of a false or misleading report done knowingly or with reckless disregard.
(2) 12 U.S.C. 1782(a)(3) .........
(3) 12 U.S.C. 1782(a)(3) .........
(4) 12 U.S.C. 1782(d)(2)(A) ....
(5) 12 U.S.C. 1782(d)(2)(B) ....
(6) 12 U.S.C. 1782(d)(2)(C) ....
(7) 12 U.S.C. 1785(a)(3) .........
(8) 12 U.S.C. 1785(e)(3) .........
(9) 12 U.S.C. 1786(k)(2)(A) ....
(10) 12 U.S.C. 1786(k)(2)(B) ..
(11) 12 U.S.C. 1786(k)(2)(C) ..
(12) 12 U.S.C. 1786(k)(2)(C) ..
New maximum amount
Tier 1 CMP for inadvertent failure to submit certified statement of insured
shares and charges due to the National Credit Union Share Insurance
Fund (NCUSIF), or inadvertent submission of false or misleading
statement.
Tier 2 CMP for non-inadvertent failure to submit certified statement or
submission of false or misleading statement.
Tier 3 CMP for failure to submit a certified statement or the submission
of a false or misleading statement done knowingly or with reckless disregard.
Non-compliance with insurance logo requirements ....................................
Non-compliance with NCUA security requirements ....................................
Tier 1 CMP for violations of law, regulation, and other orders or agreements.
Tier 2 CMP for violations of law, regulation, and other orders or agreements and for recklessly engaging in unsafe or unsound practices or
breaches of fiduciary duty.
Tier 3 CMP for knowingly committing the violations under Tier 1 or 2
(natural person).
Tier 3 CMP for knowingly committing the violations under Tier 1 or 2 (insured credit union).
(13) 12 U.S.C.
1786(w)(5)(A)(ii).
(14) 15 U.S.C. 1639e(k) .........
Non-compliance with senior examiner post-employment restrictions ........
(15) 42 U.S.C. 4012a(f)(5) ......
Non-compliance with flood insurance requirements ...................................
Non-compliance with appraisal independence requirements .....................
(b) The adjusted amounts displayed in
paragraph (a) of this section apply to
civil monetary penalties that are
assessed after the date the increase takes
effect, including those whose associated
violation or violations pre-dated the
increase and occurred on or after
November 2, 2015.
SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION
[FR Doc. 2021–28555 Filed 1–4–22; 8:45 am]
AGENCY:
BILLING CODE 7535–01–P
TKELLEY on DSK125TN23PROD with RULES1
1. The authority for part 747
continues to read as follows:
■
§ 747.1001 Adjustment of civil monetary
penalties by the rate of inflation.
13 CFR Part 121
RIN 3245–AG94
Consolidation of Mentor-Prote´ge´
Programs and Other Government
Contracting Amendments; Correction
U.S. Small Business
Administration.
ACTION: Correcting amendment.
The U.S. Small Business
Administration (SBA) is correcting a
final rule that was published in the
Federal Register on October 16, 2020.
The rule merged the 8(a) Business
Development (BD) Mentor-Prote´ge´
Program and the All Small MentorSUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:55 Jan 04, 2022
Jkt 256001
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
$4,404.
$44,043.
$2,202,123 or 1 percent of the total
assets of the credit union, whichever is less.
$4,027.
$40,259.
$2,013,008 or 1 percent of the total
assets of the credit union, whichever is less.
$137.
$320.
$11,011.
$55,052.
$2,202,123.
$2,202,123 or 1 percent of the total
assets of the credit union, whichever is less.
$362,217.
First violation: $12,647; Subsequent
violations: $25,293.
$2,392.
Prote´ge´ Program to eliminate confusion
and remove unnecessary duplication of
functions within SBA. This document is
making a correction to the final
regulations.
DATES: Effective January 5, 2022.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Mark Hagedorn, U.S. Small Business
Administration, Office of General
Counsel, 409 Third Street SW,
Washington, DC 20416; (202) 205–7625;
mark.hagedorn@sba.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On
October 16, 2020, SBA published a final
rule revising the regulations pertaining
to the 8(a) BD and size programs in
order to further reduce unnecessary or
excessive burdens on small businesses
and to more clearly delineate SBA’s
E:\FR\FM\05JAR1.SGM
05JAR1
TKELLEY on DSK125TN23PROD with RULES1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 3 / Wednesday, January 5, 2022 / Rules and Regulations
intent in certain regulations (85 FR
66146). This is the fifth set of
corrections. The first set of corrections
was published in the Federal Register
on November 16, 2020 (85 FR 72916).
The second set of corrections was
published in the Federal Register on
January 14, 2021 (86 FR 2957). The third
set of corrections was published in the
Federal Register on February 23, 2021
(86 FR 10732). The fourth set of
corrections was published in the
Federal Register on July 22, 2021 (86 FR
38538). This document augments those
corrections.
It is well established that business
concerns are not affiliates of joint
ventures of which they are members for
size purposes. However, SBA
regulations have long provided that
when determining a concern’s size SBA
will consider all revenue in whatever
form received or accrued from whatever
source. Therefore, since 2004 SBA
regulations have required a joint venture
partner to include its proportionate
share of joint venture receipts and
employees in its own receipts and
employee count, respectively. (69 FR
29192). The final rule of October 16,
2020, revised § 121.103(h) to clarify how
a joint venture partner must calculate its
proportionate share of joint venture
receipts and employees for purposes of
determining its own size status.
Specifically, the final rule provided that
the joint venture partner must include
its percentage share of joint venture
receipts and employees in its own
receipts or employees. The appropriate
percentage share is the same percentage
figure as the percentage figure
corresponding to the joint venture
partner’s share of work performed by
the joint venture. For employee-based
size standards, the appropriate way to
apportion individuals employed by the
joint venture is the same percentage of
employees as the joint venture partner’s
percentage ownership share in the joint
venture, after first subtracting any joint
venture employee already accounted for
in the employee count of one of the
partners.
It has come to SBA’s attention that
some have misinterpreted the intent of
the final rule. Specifically, because the
regulations no longer allow joint
ventures to be populated with
individuals intended to perform small
business set-aside contracts awarded to
the joint venture, some have reasoned
that a joint venture populated with its
own separate contracting-performing
employees does not qualify as a joint
venture for all SBA program purposes.
From this logic it ostensibly follows that
a joint venture partner need not include
in its own receipts its proportionate
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:55 Jan 04, 2022
Jkt 256001
share of receipts and employees from
populated joint ventures. This was not
SBA’s intent.
When SBA revised its regulations to
2016 to prohibit populated joint
ventures on small business contracts, it
did so in response to programmatic
concerns that allowing populated joint
ventures between a mentor and its
prote´ge´ would not ensure that the
prote´ge´ firm and its employees benefit
by developing new expertise,
experience, and past performance. (81
FR 48558). As SBA explained, if the
individuals hired by the joint venture to
perform the work under the contract did
not come from the prote´ge´ firm, there is
no guarantee that they would ultimately
end up working for the prote´ge´ firm
after the contract is completed. In such
a case, the prote´ge´ firm would have
gained nothing out of that contract. The
prote´ge´ itself did not perform work
under the contract and the individual
employees who performed work did not
at any point work for the prote´ge´ firm.
Additionally, SBA believed that
requiring joint ventures to be
unpopulated ensures that the lead small
business partner to the joint venture
will meet its performance of work
requirements and will actually benefit
from the joint venture arrangement. This
is especially important for joint ventures
between a mentor and its prote´ge´ as
well as joint ventures to perform socioeconomic set-aside contracts, where the
lead joint venture partner has the
necessary size or socio-economic status
and the non-lead partner does not.
Nothing, however, in the final rule or
the 2016 rulemaking signaled a change
in policy concerning the treatment of
receipts and employees from populated
joint ventures for purposes of
determining a joint venture partner’s
size. SBA never intended to change how
revenues earned by a joint venture
should be counted for size purposes. As
noted above, a joint venture partner of
any kind must include its proportionate
share of joint venture receipts and
employees in its own receipts and
employee count to ensure that all its
revenues and employees are properly
considered in determining that partner’s
size. In this context it is irrelevant
whether the joint venture partner’s
proportionate share of receipts and
employees are from populated or
unpopulated joint ventures. Thus, while
populated joint ventures are no longer
eligible to submit offers for small
business contracts, receipts and
employees from populated joint
ventures are still attributable to the
underlying joint venture partners for
size purposes. This rule corrects the
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 9990
381
above misconception by clarifying that
a concern must include in its receipts
and employee count its proportionate
share of joint venture receipts and joint
venture employees, respectively,
regardless of whether the joint venture
is populated or unpopulated.
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, Small
businesses.
Accordingly, 13 CFR part 121 is
corrected by making the following
correcting amendment:
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),
636(a)(36), 662, and 694a(9); Pub. L. 116–136,
Section 1114.
2. Amend § 121.103 by revising the
paragraph heading and the first and
second sentences of paragraph (h)
introductory text to read as follows:
■
§ 121.103 How does SBA determine
affiliation?
*
*
*
*
*
(h) Receipts/employees attributable to
joint venture partners. For size
purposes, a concern must include in its
receipts its proportionate share of joint
venture receipts (whether that joint
venture is populated or unpopulated),
unless the proportionate share already is
accounted for in receipts reflecting
transactions between the concern and
its joint ventures (e.g., subcontracts from
a joint venture entity to joint venture
partners). In determining the number of
employees, a concern must include in
its total number of employees its
proportionate share of joint venture
employees (whether the joint venture is
populated or unpopulated). * * *
*
*
*
*
*
Antonio Doss,
Deputy Associate Administrator, Office of
Government Contracting and Business
Development.
[FR Doc. 2021–28256 Filed 1–4–22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8026–03–P
E:\FR\FM\05JAR1.SGM
05JAR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 3 (Wednesday, January 5, 2022)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 380-381]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-28256]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION
13 CFR Part 121
RIN 3245-AG94
Consolidation of Mentor-Prot[eacute]g[eacute] Programs and Other
Government Contracting Amendments; Correction
AGENCY: U.S. Small Business Administration.
ACTION: Correcting amendment.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA) is correcting a
final rule that was published in the Federal Register on October 16,
2020. The rule merged the 8(a) Business Development (BD) Mentor-
Prot[eacute]g[eacute] Program and the All Small Mentor-
Prot[eacute]g[eacute] Program to eliminate confusion and remove
unnecessary duplication of functions within SBA. This document is
making a correction to the final regulations.
DATES: Effective January 5, 2022.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mark Hagedorn, U.S. Small Business
Administration, Office of General Counsel, 409 Third Street SW,
Washington, DC 20416; (202) 205-7625; [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On October 16, 2020, SBA published a final
rule revising the regulations pertaining to the 8(a) BD and size
programs in order to further reduce unnecessary or excessive burdens on
small businesses and to more clearly delineate SBA's
[[Page 381]]
intent in certain regulations (85 FR 66146). This is the fifth set of
corrections. The first set of corrections was published in the Federal
Register on November 16, 2020 (85 FR 72916). The second set of
corrections was published in the Federal Register on January 14, 2021
(86 FR 2957). The third set of corrections was published in the Federal
Register on February 23, 2021 (86 FR 10732). The fourth set of
corrections was published in the Federal Register on July 22, 2021 (86
FR 38538). This document augments those corrections.
It is well established that business concerns are not affiliates of
joint ventures of which they are members for size purposes. However,
SBA regulations have long provided that when determining a concern's
size SBA will consider all revenue in whatever form received or accrued
from whatever source. Therefore, since 2004 SBA regulations have
required a joint venture partner to include its proportionate share of
joint venture receipts and employees in its own receipts and employee
count, respectively. (69 FR 29192). The final rule of October 16, 2020,
revised Sec. 121.103(h) to clarify how a joint venture partner must
calculate its proportionate share of joint venture receipts and
employees for purposes of determining its own size status.
Specifically, the final rule provided that the joint venture partner
must include its percentage share of joint venture receipts and
employees in its own receipts or employees. The appropriate percentage
share is the same percentage figure as the percentage figure
corresponding to the joint venture partner's share of work performed by
the joint venture. For employee-based size standards, the appropriate
way to apportion individuals employed by the joint venture is the same
percentage of employees as the joint venture partner's percentage
ownership share in the joint venture, after first subtracting any joint
venture employee already accounted for in the employee count of one of
the partners.
It has come to SBA's attention that some have misinterpreted the
intent of the final rule. Specifically, because the regulations no
longer allow joint ventures to be populated with individuals intended
to perform small business set-aside contracts awarded to the joint
venture, some have reasoned that a joint venture populated with its own
separate contracting-performing employees does not qualify as a joint
venture for all SBA program purposes. From this logic it ostensibly
follows that a joint venture partner need not include in its own
receipts its proportionate share of receipts and employees from
populated joint ventures. This was not SBA's intent.
When SBA revised its regulations to 2016 to prohibit populated
joint ventures on small business contracts, it did so in response to
programmatic concerns that allowing populated joint ventures between a
mentor and its prot[eacute]g[eacute] would not ensure that the
prot[eacute]g[eacute] firm and its employees benefit by developing new
expertise, experience, and past performance. (81 FR 48558). As SBA
explained, if the individuals hired by the joint venture to perform the
work under the contract did not come from the prot[eacute]g[eacute]
firm, there is no guarantee that they would ultimately end up working
for the prot[eacute]g[eacute] firm after the contract is completed. In
such a case, the prot[eacute]g[eacute] firm would have gained nothing
out of that contract. The prot[eacute]g[eacute] itself did not perform
work under the contract and the individual employees who performed work
did not at any point work for the prot[eacute]g[eacute] firm.
Additionally, SBA believed that requiring joint ventures to be
unpopulated ensures that the lead small business partner to the joint
venture will meet its performance of work requirements and will
actually benefit from the joint venture arrangement. This is especially
important for joint ventures between a mentor and its
prot[eacute]g[eacute] as well as joint ventures to perform socio-
economic set-aside contracts, where the lead joint venture partner has
the necessary size or socio-economic status and the non-lead partner
does not. Nothing, however, in the final rule or the 2016 rulemaking
signaled a change in policy concerning the treatment of receipts and
employees from populated joint ventures for purposes of determining a
joint venture partner's size. SBA never intended to change how revenues
earned by a joint venture should be counted for size purposes. As noted
above, a joint venture partner of any kind must include its
proportionate share of joint venture receipts and employees in its own
receipts and employee count to ensure that all its revenues and
employees are properly considered in determining that partner's size.
In this context it is irrelevant whether the joint venture partner's
proportionate share of receipts and employees are from populated or
unpopulated joint ventures. Thus, while populated joint ventures are no
longer eligible to submit offers for small business contracts, receipts
and employees from populated joint ventures are still attributable to
the underlying joint venture partners for size purposes. This rule
corrects the above misconception by clarifying that a concern must
include in its receipts and employee count its proportionate share of
joint venture receipts and joint venture employees, respectively,
regardless of whether the joint venture is populated or unpopulated.
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, Small businesses.
Accordingly, 13 CFR part 121 is corrected by making the following
correcting amendment:
PART 121--SMALL BUSINESS SIZE REGULATIONS
0
1. The authority citation for part 121 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 15 U.S.C. 632, 634(b)(6), 636(a)(36), 662, and
694a(9); Pub. L. 116-136, Section 1114.
0
2. Amend Sec. 121.103 by revising the paragraph heading and the first
and second sentences of paragraph (h) introductory text to read as
follows:
Sec. 121.103 How does SBA determine affiliation?
* * * * *
(h) Receipts/employees attributable to joint venture partners. For
size purposes, a concern must include in its receipts its proportionate
share of joint venture receipts (whether that joint venture is
populated or unpopulated), unless the proportionate share already is
accounted for in receipts reflecting transactions between the concern
and its joint ventures (e.g., subcontracts from a joint venture entity
to joint venture partners). In determining the number of employees, a
concern must include in its total number of employees its proportionate
share of joint venture employees (whether the joint venture is
populated or unpopulated). * * *
* * * * *
Antonio Doss,
Deputy Associate Administrator, Office of Government Contracting and
Business Development.
[FR Doc. 2021-28256 Filed 1-4-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8026-03-P