8(a)_Compliance_Guide.pdf

8(a) BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT

PROGRAM

COMPLIANCE GUIDE

SMALL BUSINESS SIZE REGULATIONS

8(a) BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT/SMALL DISADVANTAGED BUSINESS STATUS DETERMINATIONS

SBA Small Business Compliance Guide

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION

SUMMARY

AUTHORITY

AFFILIATION

JOINT VENTURES

Example 1

Example 2

Example 3

Unpopulated

Populated

CLASSIFICATION OF A PROCUREMENT FOR SUPPLIES

APPLICATION OF THE NON-MANUFACTURER RULE

Nonmanufacturers

Example 1

Example 2

REQUEST FOR FORMAL SIZE DETERMINATION

COMPLETION OF PROGRAM TERM

Ways a Business May Leave the 8(a) BD Program

Graduation Versus Early Graduation

Criteria for Determining Whether a Participant Has Met Its Goals and Objectives

Exceeding the Size Standard Corresponding to the Primary NAICS Code

DEFINITIONAL CHANGES

NAICS code

Regularly maintains an office

Primary industry classification

Same or similar line of business

FEES FOR APPLICANT AND PARTICIPANT REPRESENTATIVES

SIZE FOR PRIMARY NAICS CODE

ECONOMIC DISADVANTAGE

CHANGES TO OWNERSHIP REQUIREMENTS

Ownership of Another Participant in the Same or Similar Line of Business

CHANGES TO CONTROL REQUIREMENTS

BENCHMARKS

CHANGES APPLYING SPECIFICALLY TO

TRIBALLY-OWNED FIRMS

Potential for Success

EXCESSIVE WITHDRAWALS

Change in Primary Industry Classification

APPLICATIONS TO THE 8(a) BD PROGRAM

§ 124.202

§ 124.203

§ 124.204

§ 124.205

GRADUATION

§ 124.301

§ 124.302

Exceeding the Size Standard Corresponding to the Primary NAICS Code

TERMINATION

EFFECT OF EARLY GRADUATION OR TERMINATION

SUSPENSIONS FOR CALL-UPS TO ACTIVE DUTY

Effect of Suspension

TASK AND DELIVERY ORDER CONTRACTS

BARRIERS TO ACCEPTANCE & RELEASE FROM THE

8(a) BD PROGRAM

COMPETITIVE THRESHOLD AMOUNTS

Competitive Thresholds

Example

Exemption From Competitive Thresholds for Participants Owned by Indian Tribes, ANCs and NHOs

BONA FIDE PLACE OF BUSINESS

Award To Firms Whose Program Terms Have Expired

Example

COMPETITIVE BUSINESS MIX

§ 124.509(a)(1) - Non-8(a) Business Activity Targets

§ 124.509(e) - Waiver Of Sole Source Prohibition

ADMINISTRATION OF 8(A) CONTRACTS

CHANGES TO JOINT VENTURE REQUIREMENTS

Size Of Concerns To an 8(a) Joint Venture

Contents Of Joint Venture Agreement

Performance of Work

Contract Execution

Amendments to Joint Venture Agreement

Inspection of Records

Performance of Work Report

SOLE SOURCE LIMITS FOR NHO-OWNED CONCERNS

CHANGES TO MENTOR/PROTÉGÉ PROGRAM

Mentors

Protégés

Benefits

Written Agreement

Decision to Decline Mentor/Protégé Relationship

Evaluating the Mentor/Protege Relationship

Consequences of Not Providing Assistance Set Forth in the Mentor/Protégé Agreement ... 47

REPORTING REQUIREMENT AND SUBMISSION OF

FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

SMALL DISADVANTAGED BUSINESS CERTIFICATION RULES

Additional Eligibility Criteria

Full-Time Requirement for SDB Purposes

INTRODUCTION

This Guide is prepared in accordance with the requirements of Section 212 of the Small Business

Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996. It is intended to help small entities—small businesses, small organizations (non-profits), and small governmental jurisdictions—comply with the new rules adopted in the above referenced rulemaking. This Guide is not intended to replace the rules and, therefore, final authority rests solely with the rules. SBA retains the discretion to adopt approaches on a case-by-case basis that may differ from this Guide, where appropriate. Any decisions regarding a particular small entity will be based on the statute and regulations.

In any civil or administrative action against a small entity for a violation of rules, the content of the Small Entity Compliance Guide may be considered as evidence of the reasonableness or appropriateness of proposed fines, penalties or damages.

Interested parties are free to file comments regarding this Guide and the appropriateness of its application to a particular situation; the SBA will consider whether the recommendations or interpretations in the Guide are appropriate in that situation. The SBA may decide to revise this Guide without public notice to reflect changes in the SBA‘s approach to implementing a rule, or to clarify or update the text of the Guide. Direct your comments and recommendations, or calls for further assistance, to the Office of Business Development, LaTanya Wright; telephone: (202) 205-5852; fax: (202) 481-

2076; LaTanya.Wright@SBA.gov.

CONTACT INFORMATION:

United States Small Business Administration

Office of Business Development

409 3 rd

Street, SW

Washington, DC 20416

OFFICE INFORMATION:

Darryl Hairston, Associate Administrator for Business Development

LeAnn Delaney, Deputy Associate Administrator for Business Development

Robert Watkins, Director, Office of Certification and Eligibility

SUMMARY

On [INSERT DATE OF PUBLICATION IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER] the U.S.

Small Business Administration (SBA or Agency) published in the Federal Register a final rule making changes to the regulations governing the section 8(a) Business Development (8(a) BD) program, SBA‘s size regulations, and the regulations affecting Small Disadvantaged Businesses

(SDBs). It is the first comprehensive revision to the 8(a) BD program in more than ten years.

Some of the changes involved technical issues such as changing the term ―SIC code‖ to ―NAICS code‖ to reflect the national conversion to the North American Industry Classification System

(NAICS). Other changes were more substantive and the result of SBA‘s experience in implementing the current regulations. In addition, SBA made changes in response to comments received to its notice of proposed rulemaking 74 Fed. Reg. 55694. SBA has learned through experience that certain of its rules governing the 8(a) BD program are too restrictive and serve to unfairly preclude firms from being admitted to the program. In other cases, SBA determined that a rule is too expansive or indefinite and sought to restrict or clarify those rules. In one case, SBA made wording changes to correct past public or agency misinterpretation. Additionally, this rule makes changes to address situations that were not contemplated when the previous revisions to the 8(a) BD program were made.

DATES: Effective Date: This rule is effective [INSERT DATE 30 DAYS AFTER DATE OF

PUBLICATION IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER].

AUTHORITY

Part 121 – Small Business Size Regulations; Subpart A – Size Eligibility Provisions and

Standards Authority: 15 U.S.C. 632, 634(b)(6), 636(b), 637(a), 644 and 662(5); and, Pub. L. 105-

135, sec. 401 et seq., 111 Stat. 2592.

Part 124--8(A) Business Development/Small Disadvantaged Business Status Determinations;

Subpart A – 8(a) Business Development Authority: 15 U.S.C. 634(B)(6), 636(J), 637(A), 637(D) And Pub. L. 99-661, Pub. L. 100-656, Sec. 1207, Pub. L. 101-37, Pub. L. 101-574, Section 8021, Pub. L. 108-87, And 42 U.S.C. 9815.

AFFILIATION

CURRENT RULE: § 121.103(b)(3) and (b)(6)

Business concerns which are part of an SBA approved pool of concerns for a joint program of research and development as authorized by the Small Business Act are not affiliates of one another because of the pool.

A protégé firm is not an affiliate of a mentor firm solely because the protégé firm receives assistance from the mentor firm under Federal Mentor-Protégé programs. Affiliation may be found for other reasons.

PROPOSED RULE:

§ 121.103(b) was not entirely consistent with the statutory authority regarding exclusions from affiliation for certain types of small business pools. Words ―or for defense production‖ were inadvertently omitted after the words ―joint program of research and development.‖

Clarified when SBA would consider a protégé firm not to be affiliated with its mentor based on assistance received from the mentor through a mentor/protégé agreement. In practice, the former regulation was at times misconstrued by other Federal agencies which believed that they could establish mentor/protégé programs and exempt protégés from SBA‘s size affiliation rules on their own. That was never SBA‘s intent.

Clarified that an exception to affiliation for protégés in other Federal mentor/protégé programs will be recognized by SBA only where specifically authorized by statue or where the agency asks for and SBA grants such an exclusion.

FINAL:

In determining affiliation SBA considers business concerns which are part of an SBA approved pool of concerns for a joint program of research and development or for defense production as authorized by the Small Business Act are not to be affiliates of one another because of the pool.

An 8(a) BD Participant that has an SBA-approved mentor/protégé agreement is not affiliated with a mentor firm solely because the protégé firm receives assistance from the mentor under the agreement. Similarly, a protégé firm is not affiliated with its mentor solely because the protégé firm receives assistance from the mentor under a Federal Mentor-Protégé program where an exception to affiliation is specifically authorized by statute or by SBA under the procedures set forth in § 121.903. Affiliation may be found in either case for other reasons.

JOINT VENTURES

CURRENT RULE: § 121.103(h)

Current regulation limits a specific joint venture to submitting no more than three offers over a two year period.

Changed requirement to allow a specific joint venture to be awarded three contracts over a two year period. Clarified that the partners to a joint venture could form a second joint venture and be awarded three additional contracts, and a third joint venture to be awarded three more.

A joint venture is an association of individuals and/or concerns with interests in any degree or proportion consorting to engage in and carry out no more than three specific or limited-purpose business ventures for joint profit over a two year period, for which purpose they combine their efforts, property, money, skill, or knowledge, but not on a continuing or permanent basis for conducting business generally. This means that a specific joint venture entity generally may not be awarded more than three contracts over a two year period, starting from the date of the award of the first contract, without the partners to the joint venture being deemed affiliated for all purposes.

Once a joint venture receives one contract, SBA will determine compliance with the three awards in two years rule for future awards as of the date of initial offer including price. As such, an individual joint venture may be awarded more than three contracts without SBA finding general affiliation between the joint venture partners where the joint venture had received two or fewer contracts as of the date it submitted one or more additional offers which thereafter result in one or more additional contract awards. The same two (or more) entities may create additional joint ventures, and each new joint venture entity may be awarded up to three contracts in accordance with this section. At some point, however, such a longstanding inter-relationship or contractual dependence between the same joint venture partners will lead to a finding of general affiliation between and among them. For purposes of this provision and in order to facilitate tracking of the number of contract awards made to a joint venture, a joint venture must be in writing and must do business under its own name, and it may (but need not) be in the form of a separate legal entity, and if it is a separate legal entity it may (but need not) be populated (i.e., have its own separate employees). SBA may also determine that the relationship between a prime contractor and its subcontractor is a joint venture, and that affiliation between the two exists.

Example 1

Joint Venture AB has received two contracts. On April 2, Joint Venture AB submits an offer for

Solicitation 1. On June 6, Joint Venture AB submits an offer for Solicitation 2. On July 13, Joint Venture AB submits an offer for Solicitation 3. In September, Joint Venture AB is found to be the apparent successful offeror for all three solicitations. Even though the award of the three contracts would give Joint Venture AB a total of five contract awards, it could receive those awards without causing general affiliation between its joint venture partners because Joint

Venture AB had not yet received three contract awards as of the dates of the offers for each of three solicitations at issue.

Example 2

Joint Venture XY receives a contract on December 19, year 1. It may receive two additional contracts through December 19, year 3. On August 6, year 2, XY receives a second contract. It receives no other contract awards through December 19, year 3 and has submitted no additional offers prior to December 19, year 3. Because two years have passed since the date of the first contract award, after December 19, year 3, XY cannot receive an additional contract award. The individual parties to XY must form a new joint venture if they want to seek and be awarded additional contracts as a joint venture.

Example 3

Joint Venture XY receives a contract on December 19, year 1. On August 6, year 2, XY receives a second contract. On December 15, year 3, XY submits an offer for Solicitation 1. In January, Joint Venture XY is found to be the apparent successful offeror for Solicitation 1. Because XY submitted its offer prior to December 19, year 3, it is eligible for the contract award, since compliance with the three awards in two years rule is determined as of the date of the initial offer including price.

Two firms approved by SBA to be a mentor and protégé under §124.520 may joint venture as a small business for any Federal government prime contract or subcontract, provided the protégé qualifies as small for the size standard corresponding to the NAICS code assigned to the procurement and, for purposes of 8(a) sole source requirements, has not reached the dollar limit set forth in § 124.519.

If the procurement is to be awarded through the 8(a) BD program, SBA must approve the joint venture pursuant to § 124.513.

If the procurement is to be awarded other than through the 8(a) BD program (e.g., small business set aside, HUBZone set aside), SBA need not approve the joint venture prior to award, but if the size status of the joint venture is protested, the provisions of §§ 124.513(c) and (d) will apply.

This means that the joint venture must meet the requirements of §§ 124.513(c) and (d) in order to receive the exception to affiliation authorized by this paragraph.

In either case, after contract performance is complete, the 8(a) partner to the joint venture must submit a report to its servicing SBA district office explaining how the applicable performance of work requirements were met for the contract.

CURRENT RULE: §§ 121.103 & 124.513

Clarified SBA‘s longstanding policy that a joint venture may or may not be populated (i.e., have its own separate employees). If a joint venture is a separate legal entity, SBA thought that it must have its own employees. If a joint venture merely exists through a written agreement between two or more individual business entities, then SBA felt that it need not have its own separate employees and employees of each of the individual business entities may perform work for the joint venture.

Clarifies that a populated joint venture is joint venture formed as a separate legal entity that has its own separate employees and clarifies the requirements contained in § 124.513(d). Also, provides for separate regulatory requirements for populated and unpopulated joint venture.

Unpopulated

The joint venture must designate an employee of the 8(a) managing venturer as the project manager responsible for performance of the contract.

Populated

A populated joint venture is joint venture formed as a separate legal entity that has its own separate employees and must demonstrate that performance of the contract is controlled by the

8(a) managing venture.

CLASSIFICATION OF A PROCUREMENT FOR SUPPLIES

CURRENT RULE: § 121.402

Clarify that a procurement for supplies must be classified under the appropriate manufacturing

NAICS code, not under a wholesale trade NAICS code or a retail trade code.

Acquisitions for supplies must be classified under the appropriate manufacturing or supply

NAICS code, not under a wholesale trade or retail trade NAICS code. A concern that submits an offer or quote for a contract where the NAICS code assigned to the contract is one for supplies, and furnishes a product it did not itself manufacture or produce, is categorized as a nonmanufacturer and deemed small if it meets the requirements set forth in § 121.406(b).

APPLICATION OF THE NON-MANUFACTURER RULE

CURRENT RULE: § 121.406

Clarify the nonmanufacturer rule applies only where the procuring agency has classified a procurement as a manufacturing procurement by assigning the procurement a NAICS code under

Sectors 31-33 (e.g., it does not apply to agricultural commodities where there is no processing involved).

A small business concern is qualified to provide manufactured products or other supply items under a small business set-aside, service-disabled veteran-owned small business set-aside, WOSB or EDWOSB set-aside, or 8(a) contract when it is the manufacturer or producer of the end item being procured (and the end item must be manufactured or produced in the United

States).

Nonmanufacturers

A firm may qualify as a small business concern for a requirement to provide manufactured products or other supply items as a nonmanufacturer if it 1) takes ownership or possession of the item(s) with its personnel, equipment or facilities in a manner consistent with industry practice;

and 2) will supply the end item of a small business manufacturer, processor or producer made in the United States, or obtains a waiver of such requirement.

The nonmanufacturer rule applies only to procurements that have been assigned a manufacturing or supply NAICS code. The nonmanufacturer rule does not apply to contracts that have been assigned a service, construction, or specialty trade construction NAICS code.

The nonmanufacturer rule applies only to the supply component of a requirement classified as a manufacturing or supply contract. If a requirement is classified as a service contract, but also has a supply component, the nonmanufacturer rule does not apply to the supply component of the requirement.

Example 1

A procuring agency seeks to acquire computer integration and maintenance services. Included within that requirement, the agency also seeks to acquire some computer hardware. If the procuring agency determines that the principal nature of the procurement is services and classifies the procurement as a services procurement, the nonmanufacturer rule does not apply to the computer hardware portion of the requirement. This means that while a contractor must meet the applicable performance of work requirement set forth in § 125.6 for the services portion of the contract, the contractor does not have to supply the computer hardware of a small business manufacturer.

Example 2

A procuring agency seeks to acquire computer hardware, as well as computer integration and maintenance services. If the procuring agency determines that the principal nature of the procurement is for supplies and classifies the procurement as a supply procurement, the nonmanufacturer rule applies to the computer hardware portion of the requirement. A firm seeking to qualify as a small business nonmanufacturer must supply the computer hardware manufactured by a small business. Because the requirement is classified as a supply contract, the contractor does not have to meet the performance of work requirement set forth in § 125.6 for the services portion of the contract.

The two waiver possibilities identified in paragraph (b)(5) are called ―individual‖ and ―class‖ waivers respectively, and the procedures for requesting and granting them are contained in

§ 121.1204.

The ownership or possession requirement provides a necessary safeguard to abuse, this provision is not changed in the final rule.

REQUEST FOR FORMAL SIZE DETERMINATION

CURRENT RULE:§ 121.1001(b)

Amend regulation to give the SBA‘s Inspector General the authority to ask for a formal size determination in connection with investigations and other programmatic reviews.

OIG specifically asked for this change. Currently, OIG has to go through the head of the relevant program office to get such a size determination.

The SBA Inspector General may request a formal size determination with respect to any of the programs identified in paragraph (b) of § 121.1001.

COMPLETION OF PROGRAM TERM

CURRENT RULE: §§ 124.2, 124.301 & 124.302

Amend current rule to specify that a firm that merely completes its program term is not deemed to ―graduate‖ from the 8(a) program, and use the terms ―early graduation‖ and ―graduation‖ in a way that matches the statutory meaning of those terms.

A Participant receives a program term of nine years from the date of SBA‘s approval letter certifying the concern‘s admission to the program. The Participant must maintain its program eligibility during its tenure in the program and must inform SBA of any changes that would adversely affect its program eligibility. The nine year program term may be shortened only by termination, early graduation (including voluntary early graduation) or voluntary withdrawal.

Ways a Business May Leave the 8(a) BD Program

A concern participating in the 8(a) BD program may leave the program by any of the following means:

1) Expiration of the program term established pursuant to § 124.2;

2) Voluntary withdrawal or voluntary early graduation;

3) Graduation pursuant to § 124.302;

4) Early graduation pursuant to the provisions of §§ 124.302 and 124.304; or

5) Termination pursuant to the provisions of §§ 124.303 and 124.304.

Graduation Versus Early Graduation

SBA may graduate a firm from the 8(a) BD program at the expiration of its program term

(graduation) or prior to the expiration of its program term (early graduation) where SBA determines that:

1) The concern has successfully completed the 8(a) BD program by substantially achieving the targets, objectives, and goals set forth in its business plan, and has demonstrated the ability to compete in the marketplace without assistance under the

8(a) BD program; or

2) One or more of the disadvantaged owners upon whom the Participant's eligibility is based are no longer economically disadvantaged.

Criteria for Determining Whether a Participant Has Met Its Goals and Objectives

In determining whether a Participant has substantially achieved the targets, objectives and goals of its business plan and in assessing the overall competitive strength and viability of a

Participant, SBA considers the totality of circumstances, including the following factors:

1) Degree of sustained profitability;

2) Sales trends, including improved ratio of non-8(a) sales to 8(a) sales since program entry;

3) Business net worth, financial ratios, working capital, capitalization, and access to credit and capital;

4) Current ability to obtain bonding;

5) A comparison of the Participant's business and financial profiles with profiles of non-

8(a) BD businesses having the same primary four-digit SIC code as the Participant;

6) Strength of management experience, capability, and expertise; and

7) Ability to operate successfully without 8(a) contracts.

Exceeding the Size Standard Corresponding to the Primary NAICS Code

SBA may graduate a Participant prior to the expiration of its program term where the firm exceeds the size standard corresponding to its primary NAICS code, as adjusted during the program, for three successive program years unless the firm is able to demonstrate that it has made attempts and further attempts to move forward in a secondary NAICS code (identified in its business plan) and will change its primary NAICS code accordingly.

DEFINITIONAL CHANGES

CURRENT RULE: § 124.3

PROPOSED DEFINITION CHANGES:

Add a definition of NAICS code, and Change the term ―SIC code‖ to ―NAICS code‖ everywhere it appears in part 124, to take into account the replacement of the Standard Industry

Classification (SIC) code system with the North American Industry Classification System.

Amend the definition of ―primary industry classification‖ to specifically recognize that a

Participant may change its primary industry classification over time.

Add a definition of the term ―regularly maintains an office.‖

NAICS code means North American Industry Classification System code.

Regularly maintains an office means conducting business activities as an on-going business concern from a fixed location on a daily basis. The best evidence of the regular maintenance of an office is documentation that shows that third parties routinely transact business with a

Participant at a location within a particular geographical area. Such evidence includes lease agreements, payroll records, advertisements, bills, correspondence, and evidence that the

Participant has complied with all local requirements concerning registering, licensing, or filing with the State or County where the place of business is located. Although a firm would generally be required to have a license to do business in a particular location in order to ―regularly maintain an office‖ there, the firm would not be required to have an additional construction license or other specific type of license in order to regularly maintain an office.

Primary industry classification means the six digit North American Industry Classification

System (NAICS) code designation which best describes the primary business activity of the 8(a)

BD applicant or Participant. The NAICS code designations are described in the North American

Industry Classification System book published by the U.S. Office of Management and Budget.

SBA utilizes § 121.107 of this chapter in determining a firm‘s primary industry classification. A

Participant may change its primary industry classification where it can demonstrate to SBA that the majority of its total revenues during a two-year period have evolved from one NAICS code to another.

Where a firm demonstrates that it has changed its primary NAICS code, SBA would consider early graduation only where the Participant exceeds the size standard corresponding to its new primary NAICS code for three successive program years and was unable to demonstrate that it has attempted and is attempting to move to a secondary NAICS code identified in its business plan.

Same or similar line of business means business activities within the same four-digit ―Industry

Group‖ of the NAICS Manual as the primary industry classification of the applicant or

Participant. The phrase ―same business area‖ is synonymous with this definition.

FEES FOR APPLICANT AND PARTICIPANT REPRESENTATIVES

SBA added a new section § 124.4 to address certain restrictions which apply to fees for applicant and Participant representatives.

The compensation received by any agent or representative of an 8(a) applicant or Participant for assisting the applicant in obtaining 8(a) certification or for assisting the Participant in obtaining

8(a) contracts, or any other assistance to support program participation, must be reasonable in light of the service(s) performed by the agent or representative.

In assisting a Participant obtain one or more 8(a) contracts, an agent or representative cannot receive a fee that is a percentage of the gross contract value.

For good cause, the AA/BD may initiate proceedings to suspend or revoke an agent‘s or representative‘s privilege to assist applicants obtain 8(a) certification, assist Participants obtain

8(a) contracts, or any other assistance to support program participation. Good cause is defined in

§ 103.4 of these regulations.

The AA/BD may send a show cause letter requesting the agent or representative to demonstrate why the agent or representative should not be suspended or proposed for revocation, or may immediately send a written notice suspending or proposing revocation, depending upon the evidence in the administrative record. The notice will include a discussion of the relevant facts and the reason(s) why the AA/BD believes that good cause exists. Unless the AA/BD specifies a different time in the notice, the agent or representative must respond to the notice within 30 days of the date of the notice with any facts or arguments showing why good cause does not exist.

The agent or representative may request additional time to respond, which the AA/BD may grant in his or her discretion. After considering the agent‘s or representative‘s response, the AA/BD will issue a final determination, setting forth the reasons for this decision and, if a suspension continues to be effective or a revocation is implemented, the term of the suspension or revocation.

SIZE FOR PRIMARY NAICS CODE

CURRENT RULE: § 124.102(a)

Amend regulation to generally require that a firm remain small for its primary NAICS code during its term of participation in the 8(a) BD program, and permit SBA to graduate a Participant prior to the expiration of its program term where the firm exceeds the size standard corresponding to its primary NAICS code for two successive program years.

Currently, as long as a Participant remains small for any NACIS code for which it performs work, it can remain in the 8(a) program and attempt to win 8(a) contracts in that NAICS code.

The 8(a) program is a business development program designed to assist Participant firms advance toward competitive viability. Where a firm has grown to be other than small in its primary NAICS code, SBA believes that the program has been successful and it is reasonable to conclude that the firm has achieved the goals and objectives of its business plan. Because the

Small Business Act authorizes early graduation where a firm has met the targets, goals and objectives set forth in its business plan, SBA believes that growing to other than small in a firm‘s primary industry classification similarly warrants consideration of early graduation. The program would resemble a contracting program more than a business development program where a firm is permitted to remain in the program after it has grown to be other than small in its primary NAICS code and be able to shop for contracting opportunities in NAICS codes having accompanying larger size standards. A firm that is other than small in its primary NAICS code is, and has always been, ineligible to be admitted to the 8(a) BD program. That being the case, SBA believes that it follows that a firm that grows to exceed its primary NAICS code once in the

8(a) BD program no longer needs and should be early graduated from the program. SBA recognizes, however, that it would be unfair to early graduate a firm from the 8(a) BD program where it has one very successful program year that may not again be repeated. In response to the comments received, the final rule changes the number of years that a Participant must exceed its primary NAICS code before SBA will consider early graduation from two years (as proposed) to three years. Additionally, in response to the many comments received regarding this provision, the rule allows a firm to demonstrate that it has made attempts and continues to move to one of the secondary NAICS codes identified in its business plan and that it will change the primary

NAICS code accordingly. This will more closely align to the way SBA determines size under

§ 121.104.

In order to remain eligible to participate in the 8(a) BD program after certification, a firm must generally remain small for its primary industry classification, as adjusted during the program.

SBA may graduate a Participant prior to the expiration of its program term where the firm exceeds the size standard corresponding to its primary NAICS code, as adjusted, for three successive program years, unless the firm is able to demonstrate that it has made attempts and further attempts to move forward in a secondary NAICS code (identified in its business plan) and will change its primary NAICS code accordingly.

ECONOMIC DISADVANTAGE

CURRENT RULE: § 124.104(b)(2)

Proposed to add language to clarify that SBA does not take community property laws into account when determining economic disadvantage.

FINAL: Property that is legally in the name of one spouse would be considered wholly that spouse‘s property, whether or not the couple lived in a community property state. This policy also results in equal treatment for applicants in community and non-community property states.

CURRENT RULE: § 124.104(b)(2)

Clarified that SBA may consider a spouse‘s financial situation in determining an individual‘s access to capital and credit.

SBA will consider a spouse‘s financial condition only when the spouse has a role in the business or has lent money to, provided credit support to, or guaranteed a loan of the business.

CURRENT RULE: § 124.104(c)(2)(ii) & (iii)

Amend economic disadvantage requirement to exempt funds in Individual Retirement Accounts

(IRAs) and other official retirement accounts from the calculation of net worth provided that the funds cannot currently be withdrawn from the account prior to retirement age without a significant penalty.

Clarify economic disadvantage requirement to exempt income from an S Corporation from the calculation of both income and net worth to the extent such income is reinvested in the firm or used to pay corporate taxes.

In considering diminished capital and credit opportunities, SBA will examine factors relating to the personal financial condition of any individual claiming disadvantaged status, including;

1) income for the past three years (including bonuses and the value of company stock received in lieu of cash);

2) personal net worth, and

3) the fair market value of all assets, whether encumbered or not.

An individual who exceeds any one of the thresholds set forth in this paragraph for personal income, net worth or total assets will generally be deemed to have access to credit and capital and not economically disadvantaged.

Funds invested in an Individual Retirement Account (IRA) or other official retirement account that are unavailable to an individual until retirement age without a significant penalty will not be considered in determining an individual's net worth. In order to properly assess whether funds invested in a retirement account may be excluded from an individual‘s net worth, the individual must provide information about the terms and restrictions of the account to SBA and certify that the retirement account is legitimate.

Income received from an applicant or Participant that is an S corporation, limited liability company (LLC) or partnership will be excluded from an individual‘s net worth where the applicant or Participant provides documentary evidence demonstrating that the income was reinvested in the firm or used to pay taxes arising in the normal course of operations of the firm.

Losses from the S corporation, LLC or partnership, however, are losses to the company only, not losses to the individual, and cannot be used to reduce an individual‘s net worth.

CURRENT RULE: § 124.104(c)(3)

Amend economic disadvantage requirement to provide that SBA may presume an individual is not economically disadvantaged if his or her adjusted gross income averaged over the past two years exceeds $200,000 for initial eligibility and $300,000 for continued eligibility.

Current rules require SBA to consider net worth, income and total assets in determining an individual‘s economic disadvantage. But, unlike the objective standard set forth in the regulations for net worth, there is no objective standard for income or total assets.

OHA precedent supported income in top 2% (approximately $200,000) as not economically disadvantaged.

OIG has long supported objective standards for income and total assets.

The final rule adopts a personal income threshold amount of $250,000 for initial eligibility and

$350,000 for continued eligibility (average over three years).

Firms that have applied to the 8(a) BD program prior to the date of publication of this final rule may elect to have their applications continued to be processed based on two years personal income data instead of three years.

CURRENT RULE: § 124.104(c)(4)

Amend economic disadvantage requirement to establish an objective standard by which an individual can qualify as economically disadvantaged based on his or her total assets.

Under the proposed rule, an individual would generally not be considered economically disadvantaged if the fair market value of all his or her assets exceeds $3 million at the time of

8(a) application and $4 million for purposes of continued 8(a) BD program participation.

FINAL: Adopts and adjusts set threshold for total assets of a disadvantaged individual. A fair market value of all his or her assets that exceeds $4 million at the time of 8(a) application and $6 million for purposes of continued 8(a) BD program participation is indicative of lack of economic disadvantage.

CHANGES TO OWNERSHIP REQUIREMENTS

CURRENT RULE: § 124.105(g)

Amend ownership requirements to provide more flexibility in determining whether to admit to the 8(a) program companies owned by individuals where such individuals have immediate family members who are owners of current or former 8(a) concerns.

Disadvantaged individuals/firms have strongly opposed the current rule which prohibits disadvantaged individuals in one family from owning more than 1 8(a) firm – e.g., an individual living in CA who owns a construction firm could not be admitted to the 8(a) program if his brother owned an engineering company (or any other company) in VA (or any other state).

While we are cognizant of the potential for abuse (i.e., where one individual attempts to prolong his/her participation in the 8(a) program through another family member), we think the flexibility is needed and have provided safeguards to eliminate the abuse.

Ownership of Another Participant in the Same or Similar Line of Business

An individual may not use his or her disadvantaged status to qualify a concern if that individual has an immediate family member who is using or has used his or her disadvantaged status to qualify another concern for the 8(a) BD program. The AA/BD may waive this prohibition if the two concerns have no connections, either in the form of ownership, control or contractual relationships, and provided the individual seeking to qualify the second concern has management and technical experience in the industry. Where the concern seeking a waiver is in the same or similar line of business as the current or former 8(a) concern, there is a presumption against granting the waiver. The applicant must provide clear and compelling evidence that no connection exists between the two firms.

If the AA/BD grants a waiver, SBA will, as part of its annual review, assess whether the firm continues to operate independently of the other current or former 8(a) concern of an immediate family member. SBA may initiate proceedings to terminate a firm for which a waiver was granted from further participation in the 8(a) BD program if it is apparent that there are connections between the two firms that were not disclosed to the AA/BD when the waiver was granted or that came into existence after the waiver was granted. SBA may also initiate termination proceedings if the firm begins to operate in the same or similar line of business as the current or former 8(a) concern of the immediate family member and the firm did not operate in the same or similar line of business at the time the waiver was granted.

CURRENT RULE: § 124.105(h)(2)

Adds the phrase ―or a principal of such firms‖ that was inadvertently omitted from the current rule.

The current rule prohibits only concerns in the same or a similar line of business as an 8(a) concern from owning more than 10 percent interest in an 8(a) concern in the developmental stage of program participation or more than a 20 percent interest in a Participant in the transitional stage of the program.

A non-Participant concern in the same or similar line of business or a principal of such concern may not own more than a 10 percent interest in a Participant that is in the developmental stage or more than a 20 percent interest in a Participant in a transitional stage of the program, except that a former Participant or a principal of a former Participant (except those that have been terminated from 8(a) BD program participation pursuant to §§124.303 and 124.304) may have an equity ownership interest of up to 20 percent in a current Participant in the developmental stage of the program or up to 30 percent in a transitional stage Participant, in the same or similar line of business.

CHANGES TO CONTROL REQUIREMENTS

CURRENT RULE: § 124.106(a)(2)

Amend to require that the disadvantaged manager of an 8(a) applicant or Participant must reside in the United States and generally spend part of every month physically present at the primary offices of the applicant or Participant.

This is in response to an OHA decision which found that an individual living in Paris, France controlled her company in New York without ever physically going to New York.

After considering the comments, the final rule retains the requirement that the disadvantaged manager of an 8(a) applicant or Participant must reside in the United States, but eliminates the added requirement that he or she must also spend part of every month physically present at the primary offices of the applicant or Participant.

CURRENT RULE: § 124.106(e)

Clarified that control restrictions applying to non-disadvantaged managers, officers and directors applied to all non-disadvantaged individuals in an applicant or Participant firm.

Non-disadvantaged individuals may be involved in the management of an applicant or

Participant, and may be stockholders, partners, limited liability members, officers, and/or directors of the applicant or Participant. However, no non-disadvantaged individual or immediate family member may:

1) Exercise actual control or have the power to control the applicant or Participant;

2) Be a former employer or a principal of a former employer of any disadvantaged owner of the applicant or Participant, unless it is determined by the AA/BD that the relationship between the former employer or principal and the disadvantaged individual or applicant concern does not give the former employer actual control or the potential to control the applicant or Participant and such relationship is in the best interests of the 8(a) BD firm; or

3) Receive compensation from the applicant or Participant in any form as directors, officers or employees, including dividends, that exceeds the compensation to be received by the highest officer (usually CEO or President). The highest ranking officer may elect to take a lower salary than a non-disadvantaged individual only upon demonstrating that it helps the applicant or Participant. In the case of a

Participant, the Participant must also obtain the prior written consent of the AA/BD or designee before changing the compensation paid to the highest ranking officer to be below that paid to a non-disadvantaged individual.

Added a section to address control of an 8(a) Participant where a disadvantaged individual upon whom eligibility is based is called up to active duty in the United States military.

FINAL: New § 124.106(h)

Notwithstanding the provisions of this section requiring a disadvantaged owner to control the daily business operations and long-term strategic planning of an 8(a) BD Participant, where a disadvantaged individual upon whom eligibility is based is a reserve component member in the

United States military who has been called to active duty, the Participant may elect to designate one or more individuals to control the Participant on behalf of the disadvantaged individual during the active duty call-up period. If such an election is made, the Participant will continue to be treated as an eligible 8(a) Participant and no additional time will be added to its program term.

Alternatively, the Participant may elect to suspend its 8(a) BD participation during the active duty call-up period pursuant to §§ 124.305(h)(1)(ii) and 124.305(h)(4).

BENCHMARKS

CURRENT RULE: § 124.108(f), §§ 124.302(d), 124.403(d), & 124.504.

Remove § 124.108(f), as well as other references to the achievement of benchmarks contained in

§§ 124.302(d), 124.403(d), and 124.504. When these regulations were first implemented, the

Department of Commerce was supposed to update industry codes every few years to determine those industries which minority contractors were underrepresented in the federal market. These industry categories have never been revised since the initial publications and references to them are outdated and should be removed.

Adopts proposed eliminations

CHANGES APPLYING SPECIFICALLY TO

TRIBALLY-OWNED FIRMS

CURRENT RULE: § 124.109, General

Proposed changes:

1) How best to determine whether a tribe is economically disadvantaged;

2) Prohibiting work in a secondary NAICS code that is (or was within the last two years) the primary NAICS code of another 8(a) firm owned by the same tribe or ANC;

3) Clarifying the potential for success requirement as it is applied to tribes and ANCs;

4) Making it clear that any tribal member may participate in the management of a tribally-owned firm and need not individually qualify as economically disadvantaged;

and

5) Requiring 8(a) firms owned by tribes and ANCs to submit information identifying how its 8(a) participation has benefited the tribal or native members and/or the tribal, native or other community as part of its annual review submission.

CURRENT RULE: § 124.109(b)

Request comments (in the Supplementary Information) on how SBA should best determine whether an Indian tribe qualifies as ―economically disadvantaged.‖

SBA agrees that an asset or net worth test could be misleading, and will not change how it will determine economic disadvantage for tribes.

Clarifies that a tribe does not need to demonstrate economic disadvantage as part of every tribally-owned 8(a) application for certification.

Authorizes a tribe to request a meeting with SBA prior to submitting an application for 8(a) BD participation for its first applicant firm to better understand what SBA requires.

CURRENT RULE: § 124.109(c)(3)(ii)

Amend the rules pertaining to tribal and ANC-owned firms to prohibit a new tribally or ANC-owned firm from performing any contracts in a NAICS code that is the primary NAICS code of another firm owned by the same tribe or ANC (or was the primary NAICS code of a firm that recently left the 8(a) program) for a period of two years after admission into the program.

Currently, a tribally-owned applicant cannot have the same primary NAICS code as another firm in the 8(a) BD program owned by the same tribe or one that has left the program within the last two years. It could perform secondary work in such a NAICS code, but it could not duplicate the primary NAICS code of another or recently former tribally-owned 8(a) Participant.

Removes the strict limitation contained in the proposed rule.

The final rule adds a provision that a firm owned by a tribe or ANC may not receive an 8(a) contract that is a follow-on contract to an 8(a) contract performed by another Participant (or former Participant that has left the program within two years of the date of application) owned by the tribe or ANC for a period of two years from the date of admission to the program.

For purposes of consistency the final rule makes the provisions pertaining to tribes, ANCs, NHOs and CDCs consistent.

In response to requests for clarification the final rule makes clear that the same primary NAICS code means the six digit NAICS code having the same corresponding size standard.

CURRENT RULE: § 124.109(c)(4)

Amend the rules pertaining to tribally-owned concerns to eliminate the requirement that a tribally-owned firm must be controlled by a ―disadvantaged‖ tribal member.

This change will make clear that any tribal member may participate in the management of a tribally-owned firm and need not individually qualify as economically disadvantaged (thus eliminating the need that every member of a tribally-owned concern‘s Board of Directors must provide tax returns and other financial information).

Tribal representatives emphasized the need for this change to enable them to attract the most qualified tribal members to assist in running tribal businesses and further allow them to assist economic and community development through their tribally-owned concerns.

The management and daily business operations of a tribally-owned concern must be controlled by the tribe. The tribally-owned concern may be controlled by the tribe through one or more individuals who possess sufficient management experience of an extent and complexity needed to run the concern, or through management as follows:

1) Management may be provided by committees, teams, or Boards of Directors which are controlled by one or more members of an economically disadvantaged tribe, or

2) Management may be provided by non-tribal members if the concern can demonstrate that the tribe can hire and fire those individuals, that it will retain control of all management decisions common to boards of directors, including strategic planning, budget approval, and the employment and compensation of officers, and that a written management development plan exists which shows how tribal members will develop managerial skills sufficient to manage the concern or similar tribally-owned concerns in the future.

a. Members of the management team, business committee members, officers, and directors are precluded from engaging in any outside employment or other business interests which conflict with the management of the concern or prevent the concern from achieving the objectives set forth in its business development plan. This is not intended to preclude participation in tribal or other activities which do not interfere with such individual's responsibilities in the operation of the applicant concern.

CURRENT RULE: § 124.109(c)(6)

The proposed rule clarified the potential for success requirement for tribally-owned applicants contained in § 124.109(c)(6). The proposed rule authorized SBA to find potential for success where a tribe has made a firm written commitment to support the operations of the…