Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 9 / Thursday, January 14, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 2957 

VI. Severity of Violations 

* * * * * 

(b) * * * 

(1) * * * A Severity Level I violation 

would be subject to a base civil penalty of up 

to 100% of the maximum base civil penalty 

of $100,535. 

(2) * * * A Severity Level II violation 

would be subject to a base civil penalty up 

to 50% of the maximum base civil penalty 

($50,267). 

* * * * * 

IX. Enforcement Actions 

* * * * * 

Notice of Violation 

* * * * * 

(e) * * * 

(1) DOE may assess civil penalties of up to 

$100,535 per violation per day on contractors 

(and their subcontractors and suppliers) that 

are indemnified by the Price-Anderson Act, 

42 U.S.C. 2210(d). See 10 CFR 851.5(a). 

* * * * * 

PART 1013—PROGRAM FRAUD CIVIL 

REMEDIES AND PROCEDURES 

■ 24. The authority citation for part 

1013 continues to reads as follows: 

Authority: 31 U.S.C. 3801–3812; 28 U.S.C. 

2461 note. 

■ 25. Section 1013.3 is amended by 

revising paragraphs (a)(1)(iv) and 

(b)(1)(ii) to read as follows: 

§ 1013.3 Basis for civil penalties and 

assessments. 

(a) * * * 

(1) * * * 

(iv) Is for payment for the provision 

of property or services which the person 

has not provided as claimed, shall be 

subject, in addition to any other remedy 

that may be prescribed by law, to a civil 

penalty of not more than $11,803 for 

each such claim. 

* * * * * 

(b) * * * 

(1) * * * 

(ii) Contains or is accompanied by an 

express certification or affirmation of 

the truthfulness and accuracy of the 

contents of the statement, shall be 

subject, in addition to any other remedy 

that may be prescribed by law, to a civil 

penalty of not more than $11,803 for 

each such statement. 

* * * * * 

PART 1017—IDENTIFICATION AND 

PROTECTION OF UNCLASSIFIED 

CONTROLLED NUCLEAR 

INFORMATION 

■ 26. The authority citation for part 

1017 continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7101 et seq.; 50 

U.S.C. 2401 et seq.; 42 U.S.C. 2168; 28 U.S.C. 

2461 note. 

■ 27. Section 1017.29 is amended by 

revising paragraph (c) to read as follows: 

§ 1017.29 Civil penalty. 

* * * * * 

(c) Amount of penalty. The Director 

may propose imposition of a civil 

penalty for violation of a requirement of 

a regulation under paragraph (a) of this 

section or a compliance order issued 

under paragraph (b) of this section, not 

to exceed $278,786 for each violation. 

* * * * * 

PART 1050—FOREIGN GIFTS AND 

DECORATIONS 

■ 28. The authority citation for part 

1050 continues to read as follows: 

Authority: The Constitution of the United 

States, Article I, Section 9; 5 U.S.C. 7342; 22 

U.S.C. 2694; 42 U.S.C. 7254 and 7262; 28 

U.S.C. 2461 note. 

■ 29. Section 1050.303 is amended by 

revising the last sentence in paragraph 

(d) to read as follows: 

§ 1050.303 Enforcement. 

* * * * * 

(d) * * * The court in which such 

action is brought may assess a civil 

penalty against such employee in any 

amount not to exceed the retail value of 

the gift improperly solicited or received 

plus $21,135. 

[FR Doc. 2021–00439 Filed 1–13–21; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6450–01–P 

SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION 

13 CFR Part 121, 124, 125, 126, and 127 

RIN 3245–AG94 

Consolidation of Mentor-Prote ́ge ́

Programs and Other Government 

Contracting Amendments; Correction 

AGENCY: U.S. Small Business 

Administration. 

ACTION: Correcting amendments. 

SUMMARY: The U.S. Small Business 

Administration (SBA) is correcting 

regulations that published in the 

Federal Register on October 16, 2020. 

The rule merged the 8(a) Business 

Development (BD) Mentor-Prote ́ge ́

Program and the All Small MentorProte ́ge ́ Program to eliminate confusion 

and remove unnecessary duplication of 

functions within SBA. This document is 

making several technical corrections to 

the regulations. 

DATES: Effective January 14, 2021. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Mark Hagedorn, U.S. Small Business 

Administration, Office of General 

Counsel, 409 Third Street SW, 

Washington, DC 20416; (202) 205–7625; 

mark.hagedorn@sba.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In 

response to the President’s directive to 

simplify regulations, on October 16, 

2020, SBA published a final rule 

revising the regulations pertaining to the 

8(a) BD and size programs in order to 

further reduce unnecessary or excessive 

burdens on small businesses and to 

eliminate confusion or more clearly 

delineate SBA’s intent in certain 

regulations. (85 FR 66146). This is the 

second set of corrections. The first set of 

corrections was published in the 

Federal Register on November 16, 2020. 

(85 FR 72916). This document augments 

those corrections. 

First, in amending § 121.404(a) to 

provide clarification as to the time at 

which size is determined for multiple 

award contracts, SBA inadvertently 

deleted the general rule that size is 

determined as of the date of the concern 

submits a written self-certification that 

it is small to the procuring activity as 

part of its initial offer or response which 

includes price. In other words, in 

amending the exception to the general 

rule for multiple award contracts, the 

final rule inadvertently deleted the 

general rule itself. That was not SBA’s 

intent and SBA did not intend to make 

any substantive changes to the general 

rule itself. This rule adds back the 

general rule language to § 121.404(a). 

Second, the final rule eliminated the 

requirement that 8(a) Participants 

seeking to be awarded a competitive 8(a) 

contract as a joint venture submit the 

joint venture agreement to SBA for 

review and approval prior to contract 

award. The preamble to the final rule 

explained that such approval is no 

longer necessary because the size 

protest process has worked well to 

ensure that small business joint venture 

partners control performance on non8(a) contracts with their large business 

mentors and could work similarly to 

monitor a joint venturing activity on 

competitive 8(a) contracts. To this end, 

where another offeror believes that a 

joint venture between a prote ́ge ́ and its 

large business mentor has not complied 

with the applicable control regulations, 

it may protest the size of the joint 

venture. The appropriate Area Office of 

SBA’s Office of Government Contracting 

would then review the joint venture 

agreement to determine whether it 

meets the requirements of SBA’s 

regulations. If that Office determines 

that the applicable regulations were not 

followed, the joint venture would lose 

its exclusion from affiliation, be found 

to be other than small, and, thus, 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
2958 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 9 / Thursday, January 14, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 

ineligible for an award as a small 

business. Because size protests are 

authorized for competitive 8(a) 

contracts, SBA reasoned that prior 

approval is no longer necessary for joint 

venture agreements seeking to be 

awarded such contracts. 

The final rule inadvertently did not 

adequately address how the Area Office 

will review certain joint venture 

agreements to perform 8(a) contracts 

formed outside the Mentor-Prote ́ge ́

Program, such as a joint venture 

between an 8(a) Participant and one or 

more other small business concerns. 

Currently, an unsuccessful offeror, SBA, 

or a contracting officer may protest the 

status of the apparent successful offeror 

for a Service-Disabled Veteran Owned 

(SDVO), Historically Underutilized 

Business Zone (HUBZone), WomenOwned Small Business (WOSB), or 

Economically-Disadvantaged WomenOwned Small Business (EDWOSB) 

contract. In determining the status 

eligibility of a joint venture apparent 

awardee, SBA will review the joint 

venture agreement to assess whether it 

complies with the formal requirements 

to receive and perform the award as a 

joint venture. If the joint venture does 

not comply with these requirements, 

SBA will sustain the protest and deem 

the joint venture ineligible for award. 

However, there is no existing regulatory 

process for an unsuccessful offeror, 

SBA, or a contracting officer to 

challenge whether a joint venture meets 

the formal requirements to receive and 

perform a competitive 8(a) contract. To 

this end, the eligibility of a Participant 

for a sole source or competitive 8(a) 

requirement may not be challenged by 

a disappointed offeror or any other party 

because SBA reviews the apparent 

successful offeror’s eligibility for award 

in connection with each 8(a) contract. In 

addition, prior to the final rule, where 

the apparent successful offeror was a 

joint venture, the joint venture had to be 

approved by SBA prior to or concurrent 

with the contract eligibility review. In 

eliminating SBA’s role to review and 

approve joint ventures formed to 

perform competitive 8(a) contracts, it 

was not SBA’s intent to allow 8(a) 

contract benefits to flow to joint 

ventures that do not meet the applicable 

regulatory requirements. To the 

contrary, as noted above, SBA 

envisioned that the size protest process 

would work to ensure compliance with 

the formal 8(a) joint venture 

requirements. However, in the context 

of a joint venture between an 8(a) 

Participant and one or more other small 

business concerns, the current size 

protest procedures are not adequate. 

Under SBA’s size regulations, a joint 

venture is small if each of the partners 

to the joint venture individually qualify 

as small. Thus, a joint venture that does 

not comply with the applicable 

requirements set forth in § 124.513(c) 

and (d) could still qualify as small even 

though the 8(a) partner to the joint 

venture was not the lead or controlling 

partner. This rule amends 

§ 121.103(h)(1)(i) to implement SBA’s 

intent that a joint venture must meet the 

requirements of § 124.513(c) and (d) in 

order to be eligible for a competitive 8(a) 

procurement and to make joint ventures 

in the 8(a) program consistent with 

those in the HUBZone, WOSB and 

SDVO programs. Additionally, SBA 

inadvertently left out conforming 

revisions in the final rule to remove 

references to SBA’s now obsolete review 

and approval of joint ventures formed to 

receive and perform competitive 8(a) 

contracts. Specifically, the final rule did 

not make corresponding changes to 

§ 124.513(a), (f), (g), (h), and (j), leaving 

inconsistency with respect to the 

requirement for SBA approval. This rule 

corrects this inconsistency by removing 

or clarifying references to joint venture 

approval in § 124.513(a), (f), (g), (h), and 

(j). 

Third, the final rule added a new 

§ 124.501(k) to clearly make the bona 

fide office requirement applicable to 

both sole source and competitive 8(a) 

awards and better defined the 

geographical area in which an office 

needs to be in order to meet the bona 

fide place of business requirement. 

Although SBA intended to allow an 

office in the geographic area served by 

a contiguous SBA district office to meet 

the bona fide place of business 

requirement, the final regulatory 

provision did not make that clear. This 

rule corrects that ambiguity. 

Fourth, the final rule clarified a 

procuring activity’s responsibilities 

when evaluating the past performance, 

experience, business systems and 

certifications of an entity submitting an 

offer for a small business contract as a 

joint venture. Specifically, the final rule 

amended § 125.8(e) to provide that 

when evaluating such offers, the 

procuring activity should not require a 

small business prote ́ge ́ partner to the 

joint venture to individually meet any 

evaluation or responsibility criteria as 

those required of other offerors 

generally. SBA inadvertently left out 

conforming revisions in the final rule to 

§§ 124.513, 125.18, 126.616, and 

127.506 to address the evaluation of 

past performance, experience, business 

systems and certifications of a joint 

venture formed outside SBA’s MentorProte ́ge ́ Program to pursue a contract 

set-aside or reserved for 8(a) 

Participants, SDVO small business 

concerns, HUBZone small business 

concerns, WOSB concerns, or EDWOSB 

concerns. This rule corrects the 

inconsistency by revising §§ 124.513, 

125.18, 126.616, and 127.506 to 

incorporate this clarification. 

List of Subjects 

13 CFR Part 121 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Government procurement, 

Government property, Grant programs— 

business, Individuals with disabilities, 

Loan programs—business, Small 

businesses. 

13 CFR Part 124 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Government procurement, 

Government property, Small businesses. 

13 CFR Part 125 

Government contracts, Government 

procurement, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, Small 

businesses, Technical assistance. 

13 CFR Part 126 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Government procurement, 

Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Small businesses. 

13 CFR Part 127 

Government contracts, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, Small 

businesses. 

Accordingly, 13 CFR parts 121, 124, 

125, 126, and 127 are corrected by 

making the following correcting 

amendments: 

PART 121—SMALL BUSINESS SIZE 

REGULATIONS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 121 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 15 U.S.C. 632, 634(b)(6), 

636(a)(36), 662, and 694a(9); Pub. L. 116–136, 

Section 1114. 

■ 2. Amend § 121.103 by adding a 

sentence to the end of paragraph 

(h)(1)(i) to read as follows: 

§ 121.103 How does SBA determine 

affiliation? 

* * * * * 

(h) * * * 

(1) * * * 

(i) * * * For a competitive 8(a) 

procurement, a joint venture between an 

8(a) Participant and one or more other 

small business concerns (including two 

firms approved by SBA to be a mentor 

and prote ́ge ́ under § 125.9 of this 

chapter) must also meet the 

requirements of § 124.513(c) and (d) of 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 9 / Thursday, January 14, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 2959 

this chapter as of the date of the final 

proposal revision for negotiated 

acquisitions and final bid for sealed 

bidding in order to be eligible for award. 

* * * * * 

■ 3. Amend § 121.404 by adding 

introductory text to paragraph (a) to 

read as follows: 

§ 121.404 When is the size status of a 

business concern determined? 

(a) Time of size. SBA determines the 

size status of a concern, including its 

affiliates, as of the date the concern 

submits a written self-certification that 

it is small to the procuring activity as 

part of its initial offer or response which 

includes price. 

* * * * * 

PART 124—8(a) BUSINESS 

DEVELOPMENT/SMALL 

DISADVANTAGED BUSINESS STATUS 

DETERMINATIONS 

■ 4. The authority citation for part 124 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 15 U.S.C. 634(b)(6), 636(j), 

637(a), 637(d), 644 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, 

Pub. L. 116–260, sec. 330, and 42 U.S.C. 

9815. 

■ 5. Amend § 124.501 by revising the 

introductory text to paragraph (k) to 

read as follows: 

§ 124.501 What general provisions apply 

to the award of 8(a) contracts? 

* * * * * 

(k) In order to be awarded a sole 

source or competitive 8(a) construction 

contract, a Participant must have a bona 

fide place of business within the 

applicable geographic location 

determined by SBA. This will generally 

be the geographic area serviced by the 

SBA district office, a Metropolitan 

Statistical Area (MSA), a contiguous 

county (whether in the same or different 

state), or the geographical area serviced 

by a contiguous SBA district office to 

where the work will be performed. SBA 

may determine that a Participant with a 

bona fide place of business anywhere 

within the state (if the state is serviced 

by more than one SBA district office), 

one or more other SBA district offices 

(in the same or another state), or another 

nearby area is eligible for the award of 

an 8(a) construction contract. 

* * * * * 

■ 6. Amend § 124.513 by revising 

paragraph (a)(1), the second sentence of 

paragraph (a)(2), and paragraphs (f), (g), 

(h), and (j) to read as follows: 

§ 124.513 Under what circumstances can a 

joint venture be awarded an 8(a) contract? 

(a) * * * 

(1) A Participant may enter into a 

joint venture agreement with one or 

more other small business concerns, 

whether or not 8(a) Participants, for the 

purpose of performing one or more 

specific 8(a) contracts. 

(2) * * * However, where SBA 

concludes that an 8(a) Participant brings 

very little to the joint venture 

relationship in terms of resources and 

expertise other than its 8(a) status, SBA 

will not approve the joint venture to 

receive an 8(a) sole source contract 

award and will find the joint venture to 

be ineligible for a competitive 8(a) 

award if it is determined to be the 

apparent successful offeror. 

* * * * * 

(f) Capabilities, past performance, 

and experience. When evaluating the 

capabilities, past performance, 

experience, business systems, and 

certifications of an entity submitting an 

offer for an 8(a) contract as a joint 

venture established pursuant to this 

section, a procuring activity must 

consider work done and qualifications 

held individually by each partner to the 

joint venture as well as any work done 

by the joint venture itself previously. A 

procuring activity may not require the 

8(a) Participant to individually meet the 

same evaluation or responsibility 

criteria as that required of other offerors 

generally. The partners to the joint 

venture in the aggregate must 

demonstrate the past performance, 

experience, business systems, and 

certifications necessary to perform the 

contract. 

(g) Contract execution. Where an 8(a) 

award will be made to a joint venture, 

the procuring activity will execute an 

8(a) contract in the name of the joint 

venture entity or the 8(a) Participant, 

but in either case will identify the 

award as one to an 8(a) joint venture or 

an 8(a) mentor-protege joint venture, as 

appropriate. 

(h) Amendments to joint venture 

agreement. Where SBA has approved a 

joint venture for a sole source 8(a) 

contract, all amendments to the joint 

venture agreement must be approved by 

SBA. 

* * * * * 

(j) Certification of compliance. Prior 

to the performance of any 8(a) contract 

by a joint venture, the 8(a) BD 

Participant to the joint venture must 

submit a written certification to the 

contracting officer and SBA, signed by 

an authorized official of each partner to 

the joint venture, stating as follows: 

(1) The parties have entered into a 

joint venture agreement that fully 

complies with paragraph (c) of this 

section; and 

(2) The parties will perform the 

contract in compliance with the joint 

venture agreement and with the 

performance of work requirements set 

forth in paragraph (d) of this section. 

(3) For a sole source 8(a) contract, the 

parties have obtained SBA’s approval of 

the joint venture agreement and any 

addendum to that agreement and that 

there have been no modifications to the 

agreement that SBA has not approved. 

* * * * * 

PART 125—GOVERNMENT 

CONTRACTING PROGRAMS 

■ 7. The authority citation for part 125 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 15 U.S.C. 632(p), (q), 634(b)(6), 

637, 644, 657f, 657q, 657r, and 657s; 38 

U.S.C. 501 and 8127. 

■ 8. Revise § 125.18(b)(5) to read as 

follows: 

§ 125.18 What requirements must an 

SDVO SBC meet to submit an offer on a 

contract? 

* * * * * 

(b) * * * 

(5) Capabilities, past performance, 

and experience. When evaluating the 

capabilities, past performance, 

experience, business systems, and 

certifications of an entity submitting an 

offer for an SDVO contract as a joint 

venture established pursuant to this 

section, a procuring activity must 

consider work done and qualifications 

held individually by each partner to the 

joint venture as well as any work done 

by the joint venture itself previously. A 

procuring activity may not require the 

SDVO SBC to individually meet the 

same evaluation or responsibility 

criteria as that required of other offerors 

generally. The partners to the joint 

venture in the aggregate must 

demonstrate the past performance, 

experience, business systems, and 

certifications necessary to perform the 

contract. 

* * * * * 

PART 126—HUBZONE PROGRAM 

■ 9. The authority citation for part 126 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 15 U.S.C. 632(a), 632(j), 632(p), 

644 and 657a; Pub. L. 111–240, 24 Stat. 2504. 

■ 10. Revise § 126.616(f) to read as 

follows: 

§ 126.616 What requirements must a joint 

venture satisfy to submit an offer and be 

eligible to perform on a HUBZone contract? 

* * * * * 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
2960 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 9 / Thursday, January 14, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 

(f) Capabilities, past performance, 

and experience. When evaluating the 

capabilities, past performance, 

experience, business systems, and 

certifications of an entity submitting an 

offer for a HUBZone contract as a joint 

venture established pursuant to this 

section, a procuring activity must 

consider work done and qualifications 

held individually by each partner to the 

joint venture as well as any work done 

by the joint venture itself previously. A 

procuring activity may not require the 

HUBZone small business concern to 

individually meet the same evaluation 

or responsibility criteria as that required 

of other offerors generally. The partners 

to the joint venture in the aggregate 

must demonstrate the past performance, 

experience, business systems, and 

certifications necessary to perform the 

contract. 

* * * * * 

PART 127—WOMEN–OWNED SMALL 

BUSINESS FEDERAL CONTRACT 

PROGRAM 

■ 11. The authority citation for part 127 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 15 U.S.C. 632, 634(b)(6), 

637(m), 644 and 657r. 

■ 12. Amend § 127.506 by revising 

paragraph (f) to read as follows: 

§ 127.506 May a joint venture submit an 

offer on an EDWOSB or WOSB 

requirement? 

* * * * * 

(f) Capabilities, past performance, 

and experience. When evaluating the 

capabilities, past performance, 

experience, business systems, and 

certifications of an entity submitting an 

offer for an EDWOSB or WOSB contract 

as a joint venture established pursuant 

to this section, a procuring activity must 

consider work done and qualifications 

held individually by each partner to the 

joint venture as well as any work done 

by the joint venture itself previously. A 

procuring activity may not require the 

EDWOSB or WOSB small business 

concern to individually meet the same 

evaluation or responsibility criteria as 

that required of other offerors generally. 

The partners to the joint venture in the 

aggregate must demonstrate the past 

performance, experience, business 

systems, and certifications necessary to 

perform the contract. 

* * * * * 

Francis C. Spampinato, 

Associate Administrator, Government 

Contracting and Business Development. 

[FR Doc. 2021–00270 Filed 1–13–21; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8026–03–P 

SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION 

13 CFR Part 127 

RIN 3245–AG75 

Women-Owned Small Business and 

Economically Disadvantaged WomenOwned Small Business Certification; 

Correction 

AGENCY: U.S. Small Business 

Administration. 

ACTION: Correcting amendment. 

SUMMARY: The U.S. Small Business 

Administration (SBA or Agency) is 

correcting regulations that published in 

the Federal Register on May 11, 2020. 

The final rule amended SBA’s 

regulations to implement a statutory 

requirement to certify Women-Owned 

Small Business Concerns (WOSBs) and 

Economically-Disadvantaged WomenOwned Small Business Concerns 

(EDWOSBs), as well as to clarify 

existing regulations. This document 

makes corrections to the final 

regulations. 

DATES: Effective January 14, 2021. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Brenda Fernandez, Office of Policy, 

Planning and Liaison, 409 Third Street 

SW, Washington, DC 20416; (202) 205– 

7337; brenda.fernandez@sba.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a 

correction to a final rule published in 

the Federal Register on May 11, 2020 

(85 FR 27650). SBA is correcting dates 

that were inadvertently transposed in 

one of the examples to 13 CFR 127.400. 

Additionally, SBA is correcting the 

language in two of the examples to 13 

CFR 127.400 to ensure the examples 

accurately illustrate the application of 

the new regulatory provisions. 

List of Subjects in 13 CFR Part 127 

Government contracts, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, Small 

businesses. 

Accordingly, 13 CFR part 127 is 

corrected by making the following 

correcting amendments: 

PART 127—WOMEN-OWNED SMALL 

BUSINESS FEDERAL CONTRACT 

PROGRAM 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 127 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 15 U.S.C. 632, 634(b)(6), 

637(m), 644 and 657r. 

■ 2. Amend § 127.400 by revising 

paragraph (b)(1) to read as follows: 

§ 127.400 How does a concern maintain its 

WOSB or EDWOSB certification? 

* * * * * 

(b) * * * 

(1) SBA or a third-party certifier will 

conduct a program examination three 

years after the concern’s initial WOSB 

or EDWOSB certification (whether by 

SBA or a third-party certifier) or three 

years after the date of the concern’s last 

program examination, whichever date is 

later. 

Example 1 to paragraph (b)(1). 

Concern A is certified by SBA to be 

eligible for the WOSB program on July 

20, 2021. Concern A will be considered 

a certified WOSB that is eligible to 

receive WOSB contracts (as long as it is 

small for the size standard 

corresponding to the NAICS code 

assigned to the contract) through July 

19, 2022. To participate in the WOSB 

Program the following year, Concern A 

must recertify its eligibility to SBA 

between June 20, 2022, and July 19, 

2022. Concern A will be considered a 

certified WOSB that is eligible to receive 

WOSB contracts (as long as it is small 

for the size standard corresponding to 

the NAICS code assigned to the 

contract) through July 19, 2023. To 

participate in the WOSB Program the 

following year, Concern A must 

recertify its eligibility to SBA between 

June 20, 2023, and July 19, 2023. 

Concern A will be considered a certified 

WOSB that is eligible to receive WOSB 

contracts (as long as it is small for the 

size standard corresponding to the 

NAICS code assigned to the contract) 

through July 19, 2024. To participate in 

the WOSB Program the following year, 

Concern A must recertify its eligibility 

to SBA between June 20, 2024, and July 

19, 2024. Because three years will have 

elapsed since its application and 

original certification, SBA will conduct 

a program examination of Concern A at 

that time. In addition to its 

representation that it continues to be an 

eligible WOSB, Concern A must provide 

additional information as requested by 

SBA to demonstrate that it continues to 

meet all the eligibility requirements of 

the WOSB Program. 

Example 2 to paragraph (b)(1). 

Concern B is certified by a third-party 

certifier to be eligible for the WOSB 

program on September 27, 2021. 

Concern B will be considered a certified 

WOSB that is eligible to receive WOSB 

contracts (as long as it is small for the 

size standard corresponding to the 

NAICS code assigned to the contract) 

through September 26, 2022. To 

participate in the WOSB Program the 

following year, Concern B must recertify 

its eligibility to SBA between August 28, 

2022, and September 26, 2022. Concern 

B will be considered a certified WOSB 

that is eligible to receive WOSB 

contracts (as long as it is small for the 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES