You are on page 1of 7

68368 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No.

217 / Thursday, November 10, 2005 / Proposed Rules

should bear all costs associated with at POTWs expressed the view that radioactivity in the environment may
waste disposal. One commenter monitoring would limit uncertainty in increase because of human activity, and
suggested NRC’s descriptions of case model results and would facilitate the that it would be inappropriate to
studies should include a description of study of the effects of influent consider manmade contributions of
the financial costs associated with the radionuclide form and quantity on radioactivity to the environment in the
contamination and should indicate the POTW worker doses. The commenter calculation of ‘‘background’’ radiation,
party paying the remediation costs. Two also suggested licensees should be or to allow releases because they would
commenters stated that NRC licensees encouraged to provide dosimetry and be minimal in comparison to
should bear the costs of data collection, elementary radiation safety training to background radiation. The commenter
data reporting, and worker training POTW workers. One commenter also remarked that the cases of
needed to implement any new NRC expressed the opinion that contamination that had occurred in
studies or regulations needed to protect radionuclides in licensees’ effluents Washington, DC, and Cleveland, OH,
POTWs from contamination. Two should be monitored to record the indicated the potential for
commenters expressed the view that highest concentrations discharged and contamination to be significant to large
licensees should pay to have monitoring facilitate a regulator’s ability to link populations. In addition, the commenter
equipment installed at POTWs. discharges with their sources. Three asked specific questions about the
Response: NRC acknowledges the commenters suggested the radioactivity assumptions used to calculate the doses
commenter’s suggestion that NRC’s of sewage sludge should be monitored. resulting from the case studies
descriptions of case studies should One commenter expressed concern discussed in the ANPR and what
include information about the economic about the radioactivity of an engineered sources of radiation NRC included in its
aspects of the contamination and notes wetland used to treat wastewater in his calculation of ‘‘background radiation.’’
that some information about town. Response: The commenter’s concerns
remediation costs is provided in Section Response: Recommendations about the doses calculated in the case
1.2 of the ISCORS recommendations on regarding locations for monitoring a studies are no longer applicable because
management of radioactive materials in licensee’s effluent are beyond the scope more recent studies served as the
sewage sludge and ash (EPA 832–R–03– of the proposed rulemaking. technical basis for the withdrawal of the
002B). Comments regarding the costs Comment: A representative of the ANPR. NRC acknowledges the
associated with implementation of new New York State Department of commenter’s concern regarding
sewer release restrictions are moot Environmental Conservation contamination at POTWs. The
because the ANPR is being withdrawn. recommended that the Notice of commenter’s specific questions about
Comment: Six commenters expressed Proposed Rulemaking for any change to the modeling assumptions used to
opinions about NRC enforcement the regulation governing the release of calculate doses for the case studies
actions. A representative of DOE stated radioactive material into sanitary sewers discussed in the ANPR are addressed in
that it was unclear whether one or more notice, for public comment, the NUREG/CR–1548. NRC notes that its
of the incidents described in the ANPR compatibility category NRC intends to definition of ‘‘background radiation,’’
involved violations of the regulations, apply to each provision so that provided in 10 CFR 20.1003, excludes
and suggested enhanced inspections, Agreement States and other interested
contributions of radioactivity from
and not additional rulemaking, would parties can participate in decisions
source, byproduct, or special nuclear
be the most appropriate way to about compatibility requirements. The
materials regulated by NRC.
eliminate contamination of POTWs. commenter stated that, as of 1994,
Three commenters suggested NRC or Agreement States were required to For the reasons cited in this document,
POTWs should verify licensee’s develop regulations that were NRC withdraws this ANPR.
reported discharges into sanitary sewers compatible with the revised 10 CFR part Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 11th day
and one commenter suggested 20 without NRC having determined of October, 2005.
compliance with NRC regulations compatibility requirements and stated For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
should be demonstrated at the licensee’s that this type of situation must not Luis A. Reyes,
outfall into the sanitary sewer system so recur. Executive Director for Operations.
that POTWs would not be impacted and Response: NRC acknowledges the [FR Doc. 05–22432 Filed 11–9–05; 8:45 am]
would not need to implement special commenter’s recommendation that BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
controls. Two representatives of POTWs intended compatibility categories be
noted that POTWs routinely sample the included in Notices of Proposed
effluent of major industrial users as part Rulemaking. Compatibility categories
of their industrial pretreatment for the options discussed in the ANPR
programs. Another commenter are moot because the ANPR is being 13 CFR Part 121
suggested NRC should assist POTWs withdrawn.
with monitoring of licensee’s effluents Comment: One commenter expressed RIN 3245–AF28
and enforcement of the discharge limits. a number of concerns about the case
studies described in the ANPR. Small Business Size Standards;
Response: NRC notes that suggestions
Concerns raised by the commenter Security Guards and Patrol Services
about inspection and enforcement
activities are beyond the scope of this included specific exposure pathways AGENCY: U.S. Small Business
rulemaking. that may not have been included in the Administration.
Comment: Six commenters made dose analyses, the appropriateness of ACTION: Proposed rule.
specific suggestions about monitoring. NRC’s comparison of doses with
Two commenters suggested licensees’ background radiation, and the concern SUMMARY: The U.S. Small Business
outfalls and potable water intakes that calculated doses to individuals Administration (SBA) proposes to
should be monitored, and three could have been higher if the sludge to increase the size standard for the
commenters suggested monitoring also which they were exposed included Security Guards and Patrol Services
should occur at POTWs. One of the radiation from multiple sources. The Industry (North American Industry
commenters that advocated monitoring commenter expressed the view that Classification System (NAICS) 561612)

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:31 Nov 09, 2005 Jkt 208001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\10NOP1.SGM 10NOP1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 217 / Thursday, November 10, 2005 / Proposed Rules 68369

from $10.5 million in average annual size standards on these programs; (3) lower than the anchor size standard may
receipts to $15.5 million. The proposed whether a size standard successfully be considered appropriate. The larger
revision is being made to better define excludes those businesses which are the differences between the specific
the size of business in this industry dominant in the industry; and (4) other industry’s characteristics and the
based on a review of industry factors if applicable. Other factors, comparison group’s characteristics, the
characteristics. including the impact on other Federal larger the difference between the
agencies’ programs, may come to the appropriate industry size standard and
DATES: Comments must be received by
attention of SBA during the public the anchor size standard. SBA will
SBA on or before December 12, 2005.
comment period or from SBA’s own consider adopting a size standard below
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, research on the industry. No formula or the anchor size standard only when (1)
identified by RIN 3245–AF28 by any of weighting has been adopted so that the all or most of the industry
the following methods: (1) Federal factors may be evaluated in the context characteristics are significantly smaller
eRulemaking Portal: http:// of a specific industry. Below is a than the average characteristics of the Follow the discussion of SBA’s analysis of the comparison group, or (2) other industry
instructions for submitting comments; economic characteristics of an industry, considerations strongly suggest that the
(2) Fax: (202) 205–6390; or (3) Mail/ the impact of a size standard on SBA anchor size standard would be an
Hand Delivery/Courier: Gary M. programs, and the evaluation of whether unreasonably high size standard for the
Jackson, Assistant Administrator for a firm at or below a size standard could industry under review.
Size Standards, 409 Third Street, SW., be considered dominant in the industry The primary evaluation factors that
Mail Code 6530, Washington, DC 20416. under review. SBA considers in analyzing the
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Carl Industry Analysis: Section 3(a)(3) of structural characteristics of an industry
Jordan or Diane Heal, Office of Size the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 632 include average firm size, distribution of
Standards, (202) 205–6618 or (a)(3)), requires that size standards vary firms by size, start-up costs, and by industry to the extent necessary to industry competition (13 CFR
reflect differing industry characteristics. 121.102(a) and (b)). SBA also examines
SBA has two ‘‘base’’ or ‘‘anchor’’ size the possible impact of a size standard
Small Business Administration (SBA)
standards that apply to most revision on SBA’s programs as an
has received requests from firms in the
industries—500 employees for evaluation factor. SBA generally
Security Guards and Patrol Services manufacturing industries and $6 million considers these five factors to be the
Industry (referred to as the Security in average annual receipts for most important evaluation factors in
Guards Industry) to review the current nonmanufacturing industries. SBA establishing or revising a size standard
$10.5 million size standard. This size established 500 employees as the anchor for an industry. However, it will also
standard was last revised in 2002 to size standard for the manufacturing consider and evaluate other information
incorporate an inflation adjustment to industries at SBA’s inception in 1953 that it believes relevant to the decision
receipt-based size standards (67 FR and shortly thereafter established a $1 on a size standard for a particular
3041, January 23, 2002). These firms million average annual receipts size industry. Public comments submitted
believe that a size standard increase is standard for the nonmanufacturing on proposed size standards are also an
warranted due to the increased costs of industries. The receipts-based anchor important source of additional
complying with Federal agency size standard for the nonmanufacturing information that SBA closely reviews
requirements for security guards, industries has been adjusted before making a final decision on a size
increased number of large security firms periodically for inflation so that, standard. Below is a brief description of
competing for Federal contracts, and the currently, the anchor size standard is $6 each of the five evaluation factors.
relative success by large firms in million. Anchor size standards are 1. ‘‘Average firm size’’ is simply total
winning Federal contracts. These firms presumed to be appropriate for an industry receipts (or number of
also believe that these industry trends industry unless its characteristics employees) divided by the number of
would shrink the pool of eligible small indicate that larger firms have a much firms in the industry. If the average firm
businesses causing Federal agencies to greater significance within that industry size of an industry is significantly
scale back their use of small business than the ‘‘typical industry.’’ higher than the average firm size of a
preferences in Federal procurement. When evaluating a size standard, the comparison industry group, this fact
Below is a discussion of the characteristics of the specific industry would be viewed as supporting a size
methodology used by SBA to review its under review are compared to the standard higher than the anchor size
size standards, and the analysis leading characteristics of a group of industries, standard. Conversely, if the industry’s
to the proposal to increase the Security referred to as a ‘‘comparison group.’’ A average firm size is similar to or
Guards Industry’s size standard to $15.5 comparison group is a large number of significantly lower than that of the
million. industries grouped together to represent comparison industry group, it would be
Size Standards Methodology: the typical industry. It can be comprised a basis to adopt the anchor size standard
Congress granted SBA discretion to of all industries, all manufacturing or, in rare cases a lower size standard.
establish detailed size standards (15 industries, all industries with receipt- 2. ‘‘Distribution of firms by size’’ is
U.S.C. 632(a)(2)). SBA’s Standard based size standards, or some other the proportion of industry receipts,
Operating Procedure (SOP) 90 01 3, logical grouping. employment, or other economic activity
‘‘Size Determination Program’’ If the characteristics of a specific accounted for by firms of different sizes
(available on SBA’s web site at industry are similar to the average in an industry. If the preponderance of characteristics of the comparison group, an industry’s economic activity
soproom.html) describes four factors for then the anchor size standard is attributed by smaller firms, this tends to
establishing and evaluating size considered appropriate for the industry. support adopting the anchor size
standards: (1) The structure of the If the specific industry’s characteristics standard. A size standard higher than
industry and its various economic are significantly different from the the anchor size standard is supported
characteristics; (2) SBA program characteristics of the comparison group, for an industry in which the distribution
objectives and the impact of different a size standard higher or, in rare cases, of firms indicates that economic activity

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:31 Nov 09, 2005 Jkt 208001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\10NOP1.SGM 10NOP1
68370 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 217 / Thursday, November 10, 2005 / Proposed Rules

is concentrated among the largest firms industry receipts obtained by firms that groups. The first comparison group is
in an industry. are among the largest firms in an comprised of all industries with a $6
In this proposed rule, SBA examines industry. In this proposed rule, SBA million receipts-based size standard
the percent of total industry sales compares the proportion of industry referred to as the nonmanufacturing
cumulatively generated by firms up to a receipts generated by the four largest anchor group. Since SBA’s size
certain level of sales. For example, firms in the industry—generally referred standards analysis is assessing whether
assume for the industry under review to as the ‘‘four-firm concentration the Security Guards Industry’s size
that 30 percent of total industry sales ratio’’—to the average four-firm standard should be moderately higher,
are generated by firms of less than $10 concentration ratio for industries in the or much higher than the
million in sales. This statistic is comparison groups. If a significant nonmanufacturing anchor size standard,
compared to a comparison group. For proportion of economic activity within this is the most logical set of industries
the nonmanufacturer anchor the industry is concentrated among a to group together for the industry
comparison group (used in this few relatively large producers, SBA analysis. In addition, this group
proposed rule), firms of less than $10 tends to set a size standard relatively includes a sufficient number of firms to
million in sales cumulatively generated higher than the anchor size standard in afford a meaningful assessment and
49.4 percent of total industry sales. order to assist firms in a broader size comparison of industry characteristics.
Viewed in isolation, the lower figure for range to compete with firms that are The second comparison group consists
the industry under review indicates the larger and more dominant in the of the nonmanufacturing industries with
presence of larger-sized firms in this industry. In general, however, SBA does the highest receipt-based size standards
industry than firms in the industries in not consider this to be an important established by SBA. SBA refers to this
the nonmanufacturing anchor size factor in assessing a size standard if the comparison group as the
standards comparison group and, four-firm concentration ratio falls below ‘‘nonmanufacturing higher-level size
therefore, a higher size standard may be 40 percent for an industry under review. standard group.’’ This group’s size
warranted. 5. ‘‘Impact of a size standard revision standards range from $21 million to $30
3. ‘‘Start-up costs’’ affect a firm’s on SBA programs’’ refers to the possible million. If an industry’s characteristics
initial size because entrants into an impact a size standard change may have are significantly larger than those of the
industry must have sufficient capital to on the level of small business nonmanufacturing anchor group, SBA
start and maintain a viable business. To assistance. This assessment most often will compare them to the characteristics
the extent that firms entering into one focuses on the proportion or share of of the higher-level size standards group.
industry have greater financial Federal contract dollars awarded to By doing so, SBA can assess whether a
requirements than firms do in other small businesses in the industry in size standard should be among the
industries, SBA is justified in question. In general, the lower the share highest size standards or somewhere
considering a higher size standard. In of Federal contract dollars awarded to between the anchor size standard and
lieu of direct data on start-up costs, SBA small businesses in an industry which the highest size standards.
uses a proxy measure to assess the receives significant Federal contracting For its analysis, SBA examined 2002
financial burden for entry-level firms. revenues, the greater is the justification industry data prepared for SBA’s Office
For this analysis, SBA has calculated for a size standard higher than the of Advocacy by the U.S. Bureau of the
average firm assets within an industry. existing one. Census (
Data from the Risk Management Another factor to evaluate the impact research/us_rec02.txt), data from a U.S.
Association’s Annual Statement of a proposed size standard on SBA’s Bureau of the Census report
Studies, 2000–2001, provide average programs is the volume of guaranteed ‘‘Investigation and Security Services:
sales to total assets ratios. These were loans within an industry and the size of 2002’’, (Report EC02–561–06), and data
applied to the average receipts size of firms obtaining those loans. This factor from the Risk Management
firm in an industry to estimate average is sometimes examined to assess Association’s Annual Statement
firm assets. An industry with a whether the current size standard may Studies, 2000–2001. SBA also examined
significantly higher level of average firm be restricting the level of financial Federal contract award data for fiscal
assets than that of the comparison group assistance to firms in that industry. If years 2002–2004 from the U.S. General
is likely to have higher start-up costs, small businesses receive significant Service Administration’s Federal
which would tend to support a size amounts of assistance through these Procurement Data Center, and SBA’s
standard higher than the anchor size programs, or if the financial assistance internal loan database on SBA
standard. Conversely, if the industry is provided mainly to small businesses guaranteed loans during fiscal year
showed a significantly lower level of much lower than the size standard, a 2004.
average firm assets when compared to change to the size standard (especially Security Guards Industry Structure
the comparison group, the anchor size if it is already above the anchor size Considerations: Table 1 shows data on
standard would be considered the standard) may not be necessary. three evaluation factors for the Security
appropriate size standard, or in rare Evaluation of Industry Size Standard: Guards Industry and the two
cases a lower size standard. The two tables below show the industry comparison groups. These factors are
4. ‘‘Industry competition’’ is assessed structure characteristics for the Security average firm size, average firm assets,
by measuring the proportion or share of Guards Industry and for two comparison and the four-firm concentration ratio.


Average firm Average firm Four-firm con-
Industry category size receipts assets centration ratio
(millions) (millions) (percent)

Security Guards and Patrol Services .......................................................................................... $2.81 $0.43 32.7

Nonmanufacturing Anchor Group ................................................................................................ 1.29 0.60 14.4

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:31 Nov 09, 2005 Jkt 208001 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\10NOP1.SGM 10NOP1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 217 / Thursday, November 10, 2005 / Proposed Rules 68371


Average firm Average firm Four-firm con-
Industry category size receipts assets centration ratio
(millions) (millions) (percent)

Higher-level Size Standard Group ............................................................................................... 4.73 2.00 26.4

For the Security Guards Industry, its support for a change to the current size the consideration of the other evaluation
average firm size in receipts is more standard. While the factor is appreciably factors.
than twice that of the average firm size higher than the average industry in the Table 2 below examines the size
in the nonmanufacturer anchor group, two comparison groups, it is not at a distribution of firms. For this factor,
but significantly lower than the average sufficient level to suggest that larger SBA evaluates the percent of total sales
firm size in the higher-level size firms in the industry could control the cumulatively generated by firms at or
standards group. This factor indicates a industry through pricing or other forms below specific receipts sizes. For
size standard within a range of $13 to of collaboration nor that a very example, firms in the Security Guards
$15 million may be appropriate, which substantial increase to the size standard Industry with $10 million or less in
is slightly more than double the $6 should be considered. In relation to the receipts cumulatively obtained 27.1
million anchor size standard. The higher-level size standards group, the percent of total industry sales. Within
average firm assets factor is below the four-firm concentration ratio suggests a the nonmanufacturing anchor group,
nonmanufacturing anchor group and these size firms captured 49.4 percent of
standard higher than $10.5 million is
does not provide a basis for increasing total industry sales while similar firms
reasonable. The level of the size
the current size standard. The four-firm in the higher-level size standards group
concentration ratio provides some standard, however, should be based on captured 21.1 percent.
Percent of industry sales by firm of
Industry category < $1 < $5 < $10 < $50
million million million million

Security Guards ............................................................................................. 7.0% 19.4% 27.1% 43.9%

Nonmanufacturing Anchor Group .................................................................. 16.8% 39.9% 49.4% 63.7%
Higher-level Size Standard Group ................................................................. 3.8% 13.3% 21.1% 40.4%

The distribution of sales for the mixed support for a change to the large business is the top contractor for
Security Guards Industry show the current size standard. Federal security guard contracts, but
presence of larger-sized firms than in Small businesses in the Security both large and small businesses have
the nonmanufacturer anchor group, but Guards Industry received 37.2 percent many opportunities. As with the
not as large as those in the higher-level of the total dollar value of Federal assessment of the factor of industry
size standards group. The data for the contracts awarded during fiscal years concentration discussed above, the
less than $1 million and less than $5 (FY) 2003 and 2004. This share is distribution of Federal contracts
million size classes support a size moderately higher than the 28 percent suggests that a standard higher than
standard well above the anchor size of sales cumulative generated by firms $10.5 million is a reasonable change,
standard, but below the higher-level size at or below the current $10.5 million but does not provide a basis to
standards ranges. The other two size size standard. This performance significantly depart from the level
classes, less than $10 million and less indicates that small businesses as indicated by the analysis of the industry
than $50 million, support a size currently defined have not encountered evaluation factors.
standard at or near the higher-level size substantial difficulties in obtaining SBA also reviewed data on its
standards range. Considering the overall Federal contracts, and does not provide financial assistance to small businesses
distributions across size classes, an a basis for revising the size standard. in this industry. In FY 2003 and 2004,
appropriate size standard appears to be SBA also evaluated specific contract SBA guaranteed an average of 75 loans
near, but below, the higher-level size data available for FY 2002 and 2003 to for $10.8 million in the Security Guards
standards group, such as between $18 assess the concern that Federal contracts Industry. Ninety percent of these loans
million to $20 million. may be concentrated among a few firms. were made to firms less than half the
SBA Program Considerations: SBA The data revealed some degree of current size standard. It is unlikely that
also considers the potential impact of concentration may exist. Between 400 an increase to the size standard would
changing a size standard on its and 500 businesses received security have an appreciable impact on the
programs. Because SBA’s review of the guard contracts in those two years. In financial programs, and therefore, this
Security Guards Industry’s size standard FY 2002, three businesses captured two- factor is not part of the assessment of
was prompted by concerns about the thirds of the dollar value of Federal this industry’s size standard.
application of the size standard to security guard contracts. However, in SBA Proposal: Based on the analysis
Federal contracting, SBA examines the FY 2003, the top three large businesses of each evaluation factor, SBA is
pattern of Federal contract awards to obtained only 38 percent. Only one proposing a $15.5 million size
small businesses as one of the factors in large business was among the top three standard—a $5 million increase (47
evaluating whether the size standard contractors in both years. These percent) to the current size standard.
should be revised. The findings provide contracting patterns indicate that one Three of the five evaluation factors

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:31 Nov 09, 2005 Jkt 208001 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\10NOP1.SGM 10NOP1
68372 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 217 / Thursday, November 10, 2005 / Proposed Rules

support a size standard higher than the size standard at $10.5 million or programs of other agencies that use SBA
current $10.5 million size standard, establishing an employee-based size size standards. As a practical matter,
while the other two factors support no standards as discussed above, should however, SBA cannot estimate the
change. SBA believes the presence of explain why the alternative would be impact of a size standard change on
large-sized firms in the industry, as preferable to the proposed size standard. each and every Federal program that
depicted by the factors of average size uses its size standards. Immediately
Compliance With Executive Orders
firm, the distribution of firms by size, below, SBA sets forth an initial
12866, 12988, and 13132, the
and four-firm concentration ratio, is regulatory flexibility analysis (IRFA) of
Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C.
sufficiently strong to support a moderate this proposed rule on the Security
Ch. 35), and the Regulatory Flexibility
change to the current size standard. The Guards Industry addressing the
Act (5 U.S.C. 601–612)
proposed size standard represents an
The Office of Management and Budget following questions: (1) What is the
average of the lower range of potential
size standards indicated by the average (OMB) has determined that this need for and objective of the rule, (2)
firm size and size distribution factors. proposed rule is not a ‘‘significant’’ what is SBA’s description and estimate
Dominant in Field of Operation: regulatory action for purposes of of the number of small entities to which
Section 3(a) of the Small Business Act Executive Order 12866. For the purpose the rule will apply, (3) what is the
defines a small concern as one that is (1) of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 projected reporting, recordkeeping, and
independently owned and operated, (2) U.S.C. Ch. 35, SBA has determined that other compliance requirements of the
not dominant in its field of operations this rule would not impose new rule, (4) what are the relevant Federal
and (3) within detailed definitions or reporting or recordkeeping rules which may duplicate, overlap or
size standards established by the SBA requirements, other than those required conflict with the rule and (5) what
Administrator. SBA considers as part of of SBA. For purposes of Executive Order alternatives will allow the Agency to
its evaluation of a size standard whether 13132, SBA has determined that this accomplish its regulatory objectives
a business concern at or below a size rule does not have any Federalism while minimizing the impact on small
standard would be considered dominant implications warranting the preparation entities?
in its field of operation. This assessment of a federalism assessment. For
generally considers the market share of purposes of Executive Order 12988, (1) What is the need for and objective of
firms at the proposed or final size SBA has determined that this rule is the rule?
standard, or other factors that may show drafted, to the extent practicable, in
whether a firm can exercise a major accordance with the standards set forth The revision to the size standard for
controlling influence on a national basis in that Order. the Security Guards Industry more
in which significant numbers of appropriately defines the size of
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis businesses in this industry that SBA
business concerns are engaged.
SBA has determined that no firm at or Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act believes should be eligible for Federal
below the proposed size standard for the (RFA), this rule, if finalized, may have small business assistance programs.
Security Guards Industry would be of a a significant impact on a substantial SBA reviewed the structure of this
sufficient size to dominate its field of number of small entities engaged in the industry using five factors that were
operation. The largest firm at the size Security Guards Industry. As described compared with averages for two groups
standard level generates less than 0.11 above, this rule may impact small of industries. A review of the latest
percent of total industry receipts. This entities seeking SBA (7a) and 504 available data supports a change to the
level of market share effectively Guaranteed Loan Programs, its current size standard.
precludes any ability for a firm at or Economic Impact Disaster Loans, and
below the proposed size standard from SBA and other Federal small business (2) What is SBA’s description and
exerting a controlling effect on this procurement preference programs. estimate of the number of small entities
industry. Newly defined small businesses would to which the rule will apply?
Alternative Size Standards: SBA benefit from SBA’s 7(a) and 504
considered an alternative size standard Guaranteed Loan Programs. SBA SBA estimates that 50 additional
based on average number of employees estimates that one or two additional firms out of 4,853 firms in this industry
instead of average annual receipts. This loans totaling $1 million or less in new would be considered small as a result of
approach was considered in a proposed Federal loan guarantees could be made this rule, if adopted. The firms would be
rule of March 19, 2004 (69 FR 13130) as to these newly defined small businesses. eligible to seek available SBA assistance
part of restructuring of size standards. Because of the size of the loan provided that they meet other program
Because of the large proportion of part- guarantees, most loans are made to requirements. Firms becoming eligible
time employees in this industry, SBA small businesses well below the size for SBA assistance as a result of this
has decided to retain average annual standard. Thus, increasing the size rule, if finalized, cumulatively generate
receipts as the size standard measure. A standard will likely result in only a $790 million in this industry out of a
receipts-based size standard treats firms small increase in small business total of $13.6 billion in annual receipts.
more equitably because firms vary on guaranteed loans to businesses in this The small business coverage in this
the use of part-time employees and industry, and the $1 million estimate industry would increase by 5.8 percent
subcontractors. An employee size may overstate the actual impact. These of total receipts. Also, SBA estimates
standard could unintentionally additional loan guarantees, because of that approximately 100 small businesses
influence decisions of some firms to their limited magnitude, will have that are within 20 percent of the existing
alter the use of part-time employees and virtually no impact on the overall size standard could grow and retain
subcontractors to retain their status as availability of loans for SBA’s loan
their small business status if this
small businesses. programs, which have averaged about
SBA welcomes public comments on proposed rule were adopted.
88,000 loans totaling more than $17
its size standard for the Security Guards billion in fiscal year 2004.
Industry. Comments on alternatives, The size standard may also affect
including the option of retaining the small businesses participating in

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:31 Nov 09, 2005 Jkt 208001 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\10NOP1.SGM 10NOP1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 217 / Thursday, November 10, 2005 / Proposed Rules 68373

(3) What are the projected reporting, regulatory and program purposes. If SBA welcomes comments on other
recordkeeping, and other compliance such a case exists where an SBA size alternatives that minimize the impact of
requirements of the rule and an estimate standard is not appropriate, an agency this rule on small businesses and
of the classes of small entities which may establish its own size standards achieve the objectives of this rule. These
will be subject to the requirements? with the approval of the SBA comments should describe the
Administrator (see 13 CFR 121.902– alternative and explain why it is
A new size standard does not impose
903). For purposes of a regulatory preferable to this proposed rule.
any additional reporting, recordkeeping flexibility analysis, agencies must
or compliance requirements on small consult with SBA’s Office of Advocacy List of Subjects in 13 CFR Part 121
entities. Increasing size standards when developing different size Administrative practice and
expands access to SBA programs that standards for their programs (13 CFR procedure, Government procurement,
assist small businesses, but does not 121.902(b)(4)). Government property, Grant programs—
impose a regulatory burden as they
(5) What alternatives will allow the business, Individuals with disabilities,
neither regulate nor control business
Agency to accomplish its regulatory Loan programs—business, Reporting
objectives while minimizing the impact and recordkeeping requirements, Small
(4) What are the relevant Federal rules on small entities? businesses.
which may duplicate, overlap or conflict For the reasons set forth in the
with the rule? SBA considered an alternative size
standard based on average number of preamble, SBA proposes to amend part
This proposed rule overlaps with employees instead of average annual 13 CFR Part 121 as follows.
other Federal rules that use SBA’s size receipts. It also considered a range of
standards to define a small business. PART 121—SMALL BUSINESS SIZE
size standards as part of the assessment REGULATIONS
Under § 3(a)(2)(C) of the Small Business of each evaluations factor. Because of
Act, 15 U.S.C. 632(a)(2)(c), unless the large proportion of part-time 1. The authority citation for part 121
specifically authorized by statute, employees in this industry, an employee continues to read as follows:
Federal agencies must use SBA’s size size standard could unintentionally Authority: 15 U.S.C. 632(a), 634(b)(6),
standards to define a small business. In influence decisions of some firms to 636(b), 637(a), 644(c), and 662(5); and Sec.
1995, SBA published in the Federal alter the use of part-time employees and 304, Pub. L. 103–403, 108 Stat. 4175, 4188,
Register a list of statutory and subcontractors to remain as small Pub. L. 106–24, 113 Stat. 39.
regulatory size standards that identified businesses. SBA believes that a
the application of SBA’s size standards moderate increase to the size standard 2. In § 121.201, in the table ‘‘Small
as well as other size standards used by will assist businesses that should be Business Size Standards by NAICS
Federal agencies (60 FR 57988–57991, included as small businesses and small Industry,’’ under the heading
dated November 24, 1995). SBA is not businesses that are growing. In selecting ‘‘Subsector 561—Administrative and
aware of any Federal rule that would the proposed size standard, currently Support Services,’’ revise the entry for
duplicate or conflict with establishing defined small businesses will not be 561612 to read as follows:
size standards. competitively disadvantaged as § 121.201 What size standards has SBA
Other Federal agencies also may use compared to a much higher size identified by North American Industry
SBA size standards for a variety of standard. Classification System codes?


Size standards Size standards
NAICS codes NAICS U.S. industry title in millions of in number of
dollars employees

* * * * * * *

Subsector 561—Administrative and Support Services

* * * * * * *
561612 ............................................. Security Guards and Patrol Services ........................................................ $15.5

* * * * * * *

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:31 Nov 09, 2005 Jkt 208001 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\10NOP1.SGM 10NOP1
68374 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 217 / Thursday, November 10, 2005 / Proposed Rules

Dated: November 3, 2005. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of on or before the closing date for
Hector V. Barreto, this document. comments. We will consider comments
Administrator. Privacy: We will post all comments filed late if it is possible to do so
[FR Doc. 05–22430 Filed 11–9–05; 8:45 am] we receive, without change, to http:// without incurring expense or delay. We
BILLING CODE 8025–01–P, including any personal may change this proposal in light of the
information you provide. For more comments we receive.
information, see the Privacy Act If you want the FAA to acknowledge
discussion in the SUPPLEMENTARY receipt of your comments on this
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION INFORMATION section of this document. proposal, include with your comments
Federal Aviation Administration Docket: To read background a pre-addressed, stamped postcard on
documents or comments received, go to which the docket number appears. We
14 CFR Part 21 at any time or to will stamp the date on the postcard and
Room PL–401 on the plaza level of the mail it to you.
[Docket No. FAA–2003–14825; Notice No. Nassif Building, 400 Seventh Street,
05–13] SW., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. Proprietary or Confidential Business
and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, Information
RIN 2120–AH90
except Federal holidays. Do not file in the docket information
Standard Airworthiness Certification of FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dan that you consider to be proprietary or
New Aircraft Hayworth, Airworthiness Certification confidential business information. Send
Branch, AIR–230, Federal Aviation or deliver this information directly to
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence the person identified in the FOR FURTHER
Administration (FAA), DOT. Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591, INFORMATION CONTACT section of this
ACTION: Supplemental notice of telephone (202) 267–8449. document. You must mark the
proposed rulemaking. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: information that you consider
proprietary or confidential. If you send
SUMMARY: The FAA is proposing Comments Invited the information on a disk or CD ROM,
language to supplement a proposal The FAA invites interested persons to mark the outside of the disk or CD ROM
published in the Federal Register on participate in this rulemaking by and also identify electronically within
February 15, 2005. This action is submitting written comments, data, or the disk or CD ROM the specific
necessary to include in the proposal a views. We also invite comments relating information that is proprietary or
provision from the recently enacted to the economic, environmental, energy, confidential.
Safe, Accountable, Flexible, and or federalism impacts that might result
Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Under 14 CFR 11.35(b), when we are
from adopting the proposals in this aware of proprietary information filed
Legacy for Users. The supplemental document. The most helpful comments
language allows a person to with a comment, we do not place it in
reference a specific portion of the the docket. We hold it in a separate file
manufacture one new aircraft based on proposal, explain the reason for any
a type certificate without holding the to which the public does not have
recommended change, and include access, and place a note in the docket
type certificate or having a licensing supporting data. We ask that you send
agreement from the type certificate that we have received it. If we receive
us two copies of written comments. a request to examine or copy this
holder, provided the manufacturing We will file in the docket all
began before August 5, 2004. information, we treat it as any other
comments we receive, as well as a request under the Freedom of
DATE: Send your comments on or before report summarizing each substantive Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552). We
December 12, 2005. public contact with FAA personnel process such a request under the DOT
ADDRESSES: You may send comments concerning this proposed rulemaking. procedures found in 49 CFR part 7.
identified by Docket Number FAA– The docket is available for public
2003–14825 using any of the following inspection before and after the comment Availability of Rulemaking Documents
methods: closing date. If you wish to review the You can get an electronic copy using
• DOT Docket Web site: Go to docket in person, go to the address in the Internet by: and follow the the ADDRESSES section of this preamble
(1) Searching the Department of
instructions for sending your comments between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
Transportation’s electronic Docket
electronically. through Friday, except Federal holidays.
Management System (DMS) Web page
• Government-wide rulemaking Web You may also review the docket using
site: Go to the Internet at the web address in the
and follow the instructions for sending ADDRESSES section. (2) Visiting the FAA’s Regulations and
your comments electronically. Privacy Act: Using the search function Policies Web page at http://
• Mail: Docket Management Facility; of our docket Web site, anyone can find; or
U.S. Department of Transportation, 400 and read the comments received into (3) Accessing the Government
Seventh Street, SW., Nassif Building, any of our dockets, including the name Printing Office’s Web page at http://
Room PL–401, Washington, DC 20590– of the individual sending the comment
001. (or signing the comment on behalf of an You can also get a copy by sending a
• Fax: 1–202–493–2251. association, business, labor union, etc.). request to the Federal Aviation
• Hand Delivery: Room PL–401 on You may review DOT’s complete Administration, Office of Rulemaking,
the plaza level of the Nassif Building, Privacy Act Statement in the Federal ARM–1, 800 Independence Avenue
400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, Register published on April 11, 2000 SW., Washington, DC 20591, or by
DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday (65 FR 19477–78) or you may visit calling (202) 267–9680. Make sure to
through Friday, except Federal holidays. identify the docket number, notice
For more information on the Before acting on this proposal, we number, or amendment number of this
rulemaking process, see the will consider all comments we receive rulemaking.

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:31 Nov 09, 2005 Jkt 208001 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\10NOP1.SGM 10NOP1