61604 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 193 / Wednesday, October 6, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

SMALL BUSINESS SIZE STANDARDS BY NAICS INDUSTRY—Continued 

NAICS codes NAICS U.S. industry title 

Size standards 

in millions of 

dollars 

Size standards 

in number of 

employees 

451120 ................... Hobby, Toy and Game Stores ............................................................................................ 25.5 ........................

451130 ................... Sewing, Needlework and Piece Goods Stores ................................................................... 25.5 ........................

451140 ................... Musical Instrument and Supplies Stores ............................................................................ 10.0 ........................

451211 ................... Book Stores ......................................................................................................................... 25.5 ........................

* * * * * * * 

451220 ................... Prerecorded Tape, Compact Disc and Record Stores ....................................................... 30.0 ........................

* * * * * * * 

452111 ................... Department Stores (except Discount Department Stores) ................................................. 30.0 ........................

* * * * * * * 

452990 ................... All Other General Merchandise Stores ............................................................................... 30.0 ........................

* * * * * * * 

453210 ................... Office Supplies and Stationary Stores ................................................................................ 30.0 ........................

* * * * * * * 

453910 ................... Pet and Pet Supplies Stores ............................................................................................... 19.0 ........................

* * * * * * * 

453930 ................... Manufactured (Mobile) Home Dealers ................................................................................ 14.0 ........................

* * * * * * * 

454111 ................... Electronic Shopping ............................................................................................................ 30.0 ........................

454112 ................... Electronic Auctions .............................................................................................................. 35.5 ........................

454113 ................... Mail Order Houses .............................................................................................................. 35.5 ........................

454210 ................... Vending Machine Operators ............................................................................................... 10.0 ........................

* * * * * * * 

■ 3. In § 121.402 (b), remove the last 

sentence and add two new sentences to 

the end of the paragraph to read as 

follows: 

§ 121.402 What size standards are 

applicable to Federal Government 

Contracting programs? 

* * * * * 

(b) * * *Acquisitions for supplies 

must be classified under the appropriate 

manufacturing NAICS code, not under a 

Wholesale Trade or Retail Trade NAICS 

code. A concern that submits an offer or 

quote for a contract or subcontract 

where the NAICS code assigned to the 

contract or subcontract 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 has 500 or fewer 

employees and meets the requirements 

of 13 CFR 121.406. 

* * * * * 

Dated: September 10, 2010. 

Marie C. Johns, 

Deputy Administrator. 

[FR Doc. 2010–24855 Filed 10–5–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8025–01–P 

SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION 

13 CFR Part 121 

RIN: 3245–AF71 

Small Business Size Standards; 

Accommodation and Food Services 

Industries 

AGENCY: Small Business Administration 

(SBA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The United States Small 

Business Administration (SBA) is 

increasing small business size standards 

for five industries in North American 

Industry Classification System (NAICS) 

Sector 72, Accommodation and Food 

Services—namely NAICS 721110, 

Hotels and Motels, from $7.0 million to 

$30 million; NAICS 721120, Casino 

Hotels, from $7.0 million to $30 million; 

NAICS 722211, Limited Service 

Restaurants, from $7.0 million to $10 

million; NAICS 722212, Cafeterias, from 

$7.0 million to $25.5 million; and 

NAICS 722310, Food Service 

Contractors, from $20.5 million to $35.5 

million. As part of its ongoing initiative 

to review all size standards, SBA has 

evaluated every industry in Sector 72 to 

determine whether the existing size 

standards should be retained or revised. 

DATES: This rule is effective November 

5, 2010. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Carl 

Jordan, Program Analyst, Office of Size 

Standards, (202) 205–6618 or 

sizestandards@sba.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Introduction 

To determine eligibility for Federal 

small business assistance programs, 

SBA establishes small business size 

definitions (referred to as size 

standards) for private sector industries 

in the United States. SBA’s existing size 

standards use two primary measures of 

business size—annual receipts and 

number of employees. Financial assets, 

electric output and refining capacity are 

used as size measures for a few 

specialized industries. In addition, 

SBA’s Small Business Investment 

Company (SBIC) and the Certified 

Development Company (CDC) Programs 

determine small business eligibility 

using either the industry based size 

standards or net worth and net income 

based size standards. Currently, SBA’s 

size standards consist of 45 different 

size levels, covering 1,141 NAICS 

industries and 17 sub-industry 

activities. Of these size levels, 32 are 

based on average annual receipts, eight 

WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with RULES

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 193 / Wednesday, October 6, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 61605 

are based on number of employees, and 

five are based on other measures. In 

addition, SBA has established 11 other 

size standards for its financial and 

procurement programs. 

Over the years, SBA has received 

comments that its size standards have 

not kept up with changes in the 

economy and, in particular, that they do 

not reflect changes in the Federal 

contracting marketplace. The last 

overall review of size standards 

occurred during the late 1970s and early 

1980s. Since then, most reviews of size 

standards have been limited to in-depth 

analyses of specific industries in 

response to requests from the public and 

Federal agencies. SBA also makes 

periodic inflation adjustments to its 

monetary based size standards. The 

latest inflation adjustment to size 

standards was published in the Federal 

Register on July 18, 2008 (73 FR 41237). 

SBA recognizes that changes in 

industry structure and Federal 

marketplace over time have rendered 

existing size standards for some 

industries no longer supportable by 

current data. Accordingly, SBA has 

begun a comprehensive review of its 

size standards to determine whether 

existing size standards have supportable 

bases relative to the current data and, 

where necessary, to make revisions to 

existing size standards. Rather than 

review all size standards at one time, 

SBA has taken a more manageable 

approach to reviewing a group of related 

industries within an NAICS Sector. SBA 

expects to complete its review of all 

NAICS Sectors in two years. 

As part of its ongoing effort to review 

all small business size standards, SBA 

evaluated every industry in NAICS 

Sector 72, Accommodation and Food 

Services, to determine whether the 

existing size standards should be 

retained or revised, and published a 

proposed rule for public comment in the 

October 21, 2009 issue of the Federal 

Register (74 FR 53913) to increase the 

size standards for five industries in that 

Sector. The proposed rule was one of a 

series of proposals that will examine 

industries grouped by an NAICS Sector. 

SBA also published concurrently in the 

same October 21, 2009 issue of the 

Federal Register proposed rules to 

increase small business size standards 

for 47 industries in NAICS Sector 44– 

45, Retail Trade (74 FR 53924) and for 

18 industries in NAICS Sector 81, Other 

Services (74 FR 53941). Similarly, SBA 

is publishing final rules on NAICS 

Sector 44–45 and NAICS Sector 81 

elsewhere in this issue of the Federal 

Register. 

In addition, SBA established its ‘‘Size 

Standards Methodology’’ for reviewing 

small business size standards and 

modifying them, where necessary. SBA 

published in the October 21, 2009 issue 

of the Federal Register (74 FR 53940) a 

notice of its availability, for public 

comments, on its Web site at http:// 

www.sba.gov/contractingopportunities/ 

officials/size/index.html. In addition, 

SBA has placed a copy of its ‘‘Size 

Standards Methodology’’ in the 

electronic docket of the proposed rule 

and is available there as well. 

In evaluating an industry’s size 

standard, SBA examines the industry’s 

characteristics (such as average firm 

size, startup costs, industry competition 

and distribution of firms by size), 

Federal government contracting trends, 

impact on SBA financial assistance 

programs, and dominance in field of 

operations. SBA analyzed the 

characteristics of each industry in 

NAICS Sector 72 mostly using a special 

tabulation obtained from the U. S. 

Bureau of the Census from its 2002 

Economic Census (the latest available). 

SBA also evaluated Federal contracting 

trends using the data from the Federal 

Procurement Data System—Next 

Generation (FPDS—NG) for fiscal years 

2006–2008. 

To evaluate the impact of changes to 

size standards on its loan programs, 

SBA analyzed internal data on its 

guaranteed loan programs for fiscal 

years 2006–2008. 

SBA’s ‘‘Size Standards Methodology’’ 

provides a detailed description of 

analyses of various industry and 

program factors and data sources and 

derivation of size standards using the 

results. In the proposed rule itself, SBA 

detailed how it applied its ‘‘Size 

Standards Methodology’’ to review, and 

to modify where necessary, the existing 

standards for the Sector and Industries 

under analysis. 

SBA sought comments from the 

public on a number of issues about its 

‘‘Size Standards Methodology,’’ such as 

whether there are alternative 

methodologies that SBA should 

consider; whether there are alternative 

or additional factors or data sources that 

SBA should evaluate; whether SBA’s 

approach to establishing small business 

size standards makes sense in the 

current economic environment; whether 

SBA’s definitions of anchor size 

standards are appropriate in the current 

economy; whether there are gaps in 

SBA’s methodology because of the lack 

of comprehensive data; and whether 

there are other facts or issues that SBA 

should consider in its methodology. 

SBA did not receive any comments on 

‘‘Size Standards Methodology.’’ SBA 

continues to welcome comments from 

interested parties. 

In the proposed rule, based on its 

analyses of current industry and other 

relevant data, SBA proposed to increase 

five of the 15 size standards in NAICS 

Sector 72. SBA’s analyses supported 

retaining the existing size standards for 

three industries. As noted in the 

proposed rule, SBA’s analyses would 

support reducing size standards for the 

seven of the remaining industries in the 

Sector. However, as the proposed rule 

pointed out, SBA believes that lowering 

size standards and thereby reducing the 

number of firms eligible to participate in 

Federal small business assistance 

programs would run counter to what the 

Agency is doing to help small 

businesses. Therefore, SBA proposed to 

retain the existing size standards for 

those seven industries. 

Summary of Comments 

The proposed rule sought comments 

from the public on SBA’s proposal to 

increase size standards for five 

Industries in NAICS Sector 72. SBA 

received six comments; four strongly 

supported the proposed increases in 

size standards and two did not. The four 

supporting comments stated that the 

proposed increases will help more small 

hotels participate in Federal 

procurement opportunities reserved for 

small businesses. It will also help the 

Federal government meet its hotel and 

conference accommodation needs. The 

commenters stated that there are too few 

conference hotels under the current size 

standards with little competition for 

federal business. 

Another commenter suggested that 

there should be only one maximum 

revenue based and one maximum 

employee based size standard, 

regardless of NAICS industry. While 

this would simplify size standards even 

more than what SBA had proposed, the 

Small Business Act states that ‘‘the 

[SBA] Administrator shall ensure that 

the size standard varies from industry to 

industry to the extent necessary to 

reflect the differing characteristics of the 

various industries and consider other 

factors deemed to be relevant by the 

Administrator.’’ (15 U.S.C. 632(a)(3)) 

The relevant data show significant 

differences among industries within 

each NAICS Sector, including Sector 72, 

and SBA believes that varying the size 

standard by industry not only complies 

with the Act, but it also serves the best 

interests of small businesses in that 

Sector. Therefore, SBA does not 

presently plan to reduce the number of 

receipts based size standard levels 

below eight. 

Another commenter stated that an 

increase from $7 million to $30 million 

was ‘‘too drastic,’’ but provided no 

WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with RULES

61606 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 193 / Wednesday, October 6, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

specifics to support this opinion. SBA 

agrees that such an increase might 

appear so, but based on its analysis of 

the industries in Sector 72, fully 

explained in the proposed rule (q.v.), 

SBA believes that the increases are 

appropriate. 

SBA did not receive any comments on 

whether it should lower size standards 

for the seven industries in NAICS Sector 

72 for which SBA’s analyses supported 

reducing the existing size standards. 

SBA also did not receive any comments 

on three industries for which SBA’s 

analyses supported retaining the 

existing size standards. Therefore, SBA 

is retaining the existing size standards 

for 10 of the 15 Industries in NAICS 

Sector 72. 

All comments to the proposed rule are 

available for public review at http:// 

www.regulations.gov. 

Conclusion 

Based on its analyses of relevant 

industry and program data and public 

comments it received on the proposed 

rule, SBA has decided to increase five 

small business size standards in NAICS 

Sector 72, as shown in the following 

table. 

SUMMARY OF REVISED SMALL BUSINESS SIZE STANDARDS FOR NAICS SECTOR 72 

NAICS 

Current size 

standard 

($ million) 

Revised size 

standard 

($ million) 

721110—Hotels (except Casino Hotels) & Motels .................................................................................................. $7.0 $30.0 

721120—Casino Hotels ........................................................................................................................................... 7.0 30.0 

722211—Limited Service Restaurants .................................................................................................................... 7.0 10.0 

722212—Cafeterias ................................................................................................................................................. 7.0 25.5 

722310—Food Service Contractors ........................................................................................................................ 20.5 35.5 

Compliance With Executive Orders 

12866, 12988, and 13132, the 

Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C., 

Ch. 35) and the Regulatory Flexibility 

Act (5 U.S.C. 601–612) Executive Order 

12866 

The Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) has determined that this rule is 

a ‘‘significant’’ regulatory action for 

purposes of Executive Order 12866. 

Accordingly, the next section contains 

SBA’s Regulatory Impact Analysis. This 

is not a major rule, however, under the 

Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 800. 

Regulatory Impact Analysis 

1. Is there a need for the regulatory 

action? 

SBA believes that adjustments to 

certain size standards in Sector 72, 

Accommodation and Food Services, are 

needed to better reflect the economic 

characteristics of small businesses in 

those industries. SBA provides aid and 

assistance to small businesses through a 

variety of financial, procurement, 

business development and advocacy 

programs. To assist effectively the 

intended beneficiaries of these 

programs, SBA must establish distinct 

definitions of which businesses are 

deemed small businesses. The Small 

Business Act (15 U.S.C. 632(a)) 

delegates to SBA’s Administrator the 

responsibility for establishing small 

business definitions. The Act also 

requires that small business definitions 

vary to reflect industry differences. The 

supplementary information section of 

this rule explains SBA’s methodology 

for analyzing a size standard for a 

particular industry. 

2. What are the potential benefits and 

costs of this regulatory action? 

The most significant benefit to 

businesses obtaining small business 

status as a result of this rule is eligibility 

for Federal small business assistance 

programs, including SBA’s financial 

assistance programs, economic injury 

disaster loans, and Federal procurement 

preference programs for small 

businesses. Federal procurement 

regulations provide opportunities for 

small businesses under SBA’s business 

development programs, such as 8(a), 

Small Disadvantaged Businesses (SDB), 

small businesses located in Historically 

Underutilized Business Zones 

(HUBZone), women owned small 

businesses and service disabled veteran 

owned small businesses (SDVOSB). 

Other Federal agencies also may use 

SBA size standards for a variety of 

regulatory and program purposes. 

Through the assistance of these 

programs, small businesses become 

more knowledgeable, stable and 

competitive businesses. In five 

industries under Sector 72 for which 

SBA had proposed to increase size 

standards, about 2,050 additional firms 

are estimated to obtain small business 

status and become eligible for these 

programs. 

In the seven industries for which 

SBA’s analyses indicated a lower size 

standard as appropriate, there are about 

450 firms that might have lost their 

small business status, had SBA 

proposed lowering them. That number 

is less than 0.6 percent of the total 

number of firms in those industries 

defined as small under the current 

standards. Thus, the net impact for the 

Sector as whole is about 2,050 

additional firms gaining and none losing 

small business status under this rule. 

This will increase the small business 

share of total industry receipts for the 

Sector from about 46 percent under the 

current size standards to nearly 50 

percent under the revised standards. 

The benefits of increasing certain size 

standards to a more appropriate level 

would accrue to three groups: (1) 

Businesses that benefit by gaining small 

business status from the higher size 

standard that also use small business 

assistance programs; (2) growing small 

businesses that may exceed the current 

size standards in the near future and 

that will retain their small business 

status from the higher size standards; 

and (3) Federal agencies that award 

contracts under procurement programs 

that require small business status. 

Nearly 90 percent of Federal 

contracting dollars spent in Sector 72 

during fiscal years 2006–2008 was 

accounted for by two of five industries 

for which size standards have been 

increased in this rule. SBA estimates 

that additional firms gaining small 

business status in those two industries 

under the new size standards could 

potentially obtain Federal contracts 

totaling up to $75 million per year 

under the small business set-aside 

program, the 8(a), HUBZone, and 

SDVOSB Programs, or unrestricted 

procurements. This represents about 5.5 

percent of the $1.13 billion in average 

Federal contract dollars awarded in the 

Accommodation and Food Services 

Sector during fiscal years 2006–2008. 

The added competition for many of 

these procurements will also likely 

result in a lower price to the 

Government for procurements reserved 

WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with RULES

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 193 / Wednesday, October 6, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 61607 

for small businesses, but SBA is not able 

to quantify this benefit. 

Under SBA’s 7(a) Guaranteed Loan 

Program and 504 Certified Development 

Company (CDC) Program, SBA estimates 

only a few additional loans totaling $1 

million to $2 million in Federal loan 

guarantees could be made to these 

newly defined small businesses. 

Because of the size of the loan 

guarantees, however, most loans are 

made to small businesses well below the 

size standard. Moreover, under the 

Recovery Act, effective February 17, 

2009, SBA temporarily raised 

guarantees on its SBA’s 7(a) loan 

program and also temporarily 

eliminated fees for borrowers on SBA 

7(a) loans and for both borrowers and 

lenders on 504 CDC loans, through 

calendar year 2009, or until the funds 

are exhausted. The fee elimination is 

retroactive to February 17, 2009, the day 

the Recovery Act was signed. In 

addition, since SBA has applied its CDC 

alternative size standard to its 7(a) 

Business Loan Program, more capital is 

available to small businesses. Thus, 

increasing the size standards will likely 

result in an increase in guaranteed loans 

to businesses in these industries, but it 

would be impractical to try to estimate 

the extent of their number and the total 

amount loaned. 

The newly defined small businesses 

will also benefit from SBA’s Economic 

Injury Disaster Loan (EIDL) Program. 

Since this program is contingent on the 

occurrence and severity disasters, no 

meaningful estimate of benefits can be 

projected for future disasters. 

To the extent that 2,050 additional 

firms could become active in Federal 

procurement programs, this may entail 

some additional administrative costs to 

the Federal Government associated with 

additional bidders for Federal small 

business procurement opportunities, 

additional firms seeking SBA 

guaranteed lending programs, additional 

firms eligible for enrollment in the 

Central Contractor Registration’s 

Dynamic Small Business Search 

database and additional firms seeking 

certification as 8(a) or HUBZone firms 

or qualifying for SDB status. Among 

businesses in this group seeking SBA 

assistance, there could be some 

additional costs associated with 

compliance and verification of small 

business status and protests of small 

business status. These additional costs 

are likely to be minimal because 

mechanisms are already in place to 

handle these additional administrative 

requirements. 

The costs to the Federal Government 

may be higher on some Federal 

contracts. With a greater number of 

businesses defined as small, Federal 

agencies may choose to set aside more 

contracts for competition among small 

businesses rather than using full and 

open competition. The movement from 

unrestricted to set-aside contracting is 

likely to result in competition among 

fewer bidders. In addition, higher costs 

may result from additional full and 

open contracts awarded to HUBZone 

and SDB businesses because of price 

evaluation preferences. The additional 

costs associated with fewer bidders, 

however, are likely to be minor since, as 

a matter of law, procurements may be 

set aside for small businesses or 

reserved for the 8(a), SDB or HUBZone 

Programs only if awards are expected to 

be made at fair and reasonable prices. 

The increased size standards may 

have distributional effects among large 

and small businesses. Although the 

actual outcome of the gains and losses 

among small and large businesses 

cannot be estimated with certainty, 

several likely impacts can be identified. 

There will likely be a transfer of some 

Federal contracts to small businesses 

from large businesses. Large businesses 

may have fewer Federal contract 

opportunities as Federal agencies decide 

to set aside more Federal contracts for 

small businesses. Also, some Federal 

contracts may be awarded to HUBZone 

or SDB concerns instead of large 

businesses since those two categories of 

small businesses may be eligible for an 

evaluation adjustment for contracts 

competed on a full and open basis. 

Similarly, currently defined small 

businesses may obtain fewer Federal 

contracts due to the increased 

competition from more businesses 

defined as small. This transfer may be 

offset by a greater number of Federal 

procurements set aside for all small 

businesses. The number of newly 

defined and expanding small businesses 

that are willing and able to sell to the 

Federal Government will limit the 

potential transfer of contracts away from 

large and currently defined small 

businesses. The potential distributional 

impacts of these transfers may not be 

estimated with any degree of precision 

because the data on the size of business 

receiving a Federal contract are limited 

to identifying small or other than small 

businesses, without regard to the exact 

size of the business. 

The revisions to the existing size 

standards for Accommodation and Food 

Services industries is consistent with 

SBA’s statutory mandate to assist small 

business. This regulatory action 

promotes the Administration’s 

objectives. One of SBA’s goals in 

support of the Administration’s 

objectives is to help individual small 

businesses succeed through fair and 

equitable access to capital and credit, 

Government contracts, and management 

and technical assistance. Reviewing and 

modifying size standards, when 

appropriate, ensures that intended 

beneficiaries have access to small 

business programs designed to assist 

them. 

Executive Order 12988 

For purposes of Executive Order 

12988, SBA has determined that this 

rule is drafted, to the extent practicable, 

in accordance with the standards set 

forth in that Order. 

Executive Order 13132 

For purposes of Executive Order 

13132, SBA has determined that this 

rule does not have any Federalism 

implications warranting the preparation 

of a federalism assessment. 

Paperwork Reduction Act 

For the purpose of the Paperwork 

Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. Ch. 35, SBA 

has determined that this rule would not 

impose new reporting or recordkeeping 

requirements, other than those required 

of SBA. 

Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act 

(RFA), this rule may have a significant 

impact on a substantial number of small 

entities in Sector 72, Accommodation 

and Food Services. As described above, 

this rule may affect small entities 

seeking Federal contracts, SBA 7(a) and 

504 Guaranteed Loan Programs, SBA 

Economic Injury Disaster Loans, and 

other Federal small business programs. 

Immediately below, SBA sets forth a 

final regulatory flexibility analysis of 

this proposed rule addressing the 

following questions: (1) What is the 

need for and objective of the rule? (2) 

what is SBA’s description and estimate 

of the number of small entities to which 

the rule will apply? (3) what are the 

projected reporting, record keeping, and 

other compliance requirements of the 

rule? (4) what are the relevant Federal 

rules which may duplicate, overlap or 

conflict with the rule? and (5) what 

alternatives will allow the Agency to 

accomplish its regulatory objectives 

while minimizing the impact on small 

entities? 

(1) What is the need for and objective of 

the rule? 

Most of SBA’s size standards for 

Accommodation and Food Services 

industries have not been reviewed since 

the early 1980s. Technology, 

productivity growth, international 

competition, mergers and acquisitions, 

WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with RULES

61608 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 193 / Wednesday, October 6, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

and updated industry definitions may 

have changed the structure of many 

industries. Such changes can be 

sufficient to support a revision to size 

standards for some industries. Based on 

an analysis of the latest data available to 

the Agency, SBA believes that the 

revised standards in this proposed rule 

more appropriately reflect the size of 

businesses in those industries that need 

Federal assistance. 

(2) What is SBA’s description and 

estimate of the number of small entities 

to which the rule will apply? 

SBA estimates that approximately 

2,050 additional firms will become 

small because of increases in size 

standard in five industries. That 

represents 1.1 percent of total firms in 

those industries. This will result in an 

increase in the small business share of 

total industry receipts for this Sector 

from about 46 percent under the current 

size standard to nearly 50 percent under 

the revised standards. 

(3) What are the projected reporting, 

recordkeeping, and other compliance 

requirements of the rule and an estimate 

of the classes of small entities which 

will be subject to the requirements? 

A new size standard does not impose 

any additional reporting or 

recordkeeping requirements on small 

entities. However, qualifying for Federal 

procurement and a number of other 

programs requires that entities register 

in the Central Contractor Registration 

(CCR) database and certify at least 

annually that they are small in the 

Online Representations and 

Certifications Application (ORCA). 

Therefore, businesses opting to 

participate in those programs must 

comply with CCR and ORCA 

requirements. There are no costs 

associated with either CCR registration 

or ORCA certification. Revising size 

standards alters the access to SBA 

programs that assist small businesses, 

but does not impose a regulatory burden 

as they neither regulate nor control 

business behavior. 

(4) What are the relevant Federal rules 

which may duplicate, overlap or conflict 

with the rule? 

This rule overlaps with other Federal 

rules that use SBA’s size standards to 

define a small business. Under 

§ 3(a)(2)(C) of the Small Business Act, 

15 USC 632(a)(2)(C), Federal agencies 

must use SBA’s size standards to define 

a small business, unless specifically 

authorized by statute. In 1995, SBA 

published in the Federal Register a list 

of statutory and regulatory size 

standards that identified the application 

of SBA’s size standards as well as other 

size standards used by Federal agencies 

(60 FR 57988, November 24, 1995). SBA 

is not aware of any Federal rule that 

would duplicate or conflict with 

establishing size standards. 

However, the Small Business Act and 

SBA’s regulations allow Federal 

agencies to develop different size 

standards if they believe that SBA’s size 

standards are not appropriate for their 

programs, with the approval of SBA’s 

Administrator (13 CFR 121.903). The 

Regulatory Flexibility Act authorizes an 

Agency to establish an alternative small 

business definition, after consultation 

with the Office of Advocacy of the U.S. 

Small Business Administration (5 U.S.C. 

601(3)). Thus, there may be instances 

where this rule conflicts with other 

rules. 

(5) What alternatives will allow the 

Agency to accomplish its regulatory 

objectives while minimizing the impact 

on small entities? 

SBA is required to develop numerical 

size standards for identifying businesses 

eligible for Federal small business 

programs. Other than varying the size 

standards, no alternative exists to the 

systems of numerical size standards. 

List of Subjects in 13 CFR Part 121 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Government procurement, 

Government property, Grant programs— 

business, Individuals with disabilities, 

Loan programs—business, Reporting 

and recordkeeping requirements, Small 

businesses. 

■ For reasons set forth in the preamble, 

SBA amends 13 CFR part 121 as 

follows: 

PART 121—SMALL BUSINESS SIZE 

REGULATIONS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 121 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 15 U.S.C. 632, 634(b)(6), 636(b), 

637(a), 644, 657(a), 657(f), and 662(5); and 

Pub. L. 105–135, Sec. 401, et seq., 111 Stat, 

2592. 

Subpart A—Size Eligibility Provisions 

and Standards 

■ 2. In § 121.201, in the table, revise the 

entries for ‘‘721110’’, ‘‘721120’’, 

‘‘722211’’,‘‘722212’’, and ‘‘722310’’ to 

read as follows: 

§ 121.201 What size standards has SBA 

identified by North American Industry 

Classification System codes? 

* * * * * 

SMALL BUSINESS SIZE STANDARDS BY NAICS INDUSTRY

NAICS codes NAICS U.S. industry title 

Size 

standards in 

millions of 

dollars 

Size 

standards in 

number of 

employees 

*******

721110 ................... Hotels (except Casino Hotels) and Motels ......................................................................... $30.0 ........................

721120 ................... Casino Hotels ...................................................................................................................... 30.0 ........................

* * * * * * * 

722211 ................... Limited-Service Restaurants ............................................................................................... 10.0 ........................

722212 ................... Cafeterias, Grill Buffets, and Buffets .................................................................................. 25.5 ........................

* * * * * * * 

722310 ................... Food Service Contractors ................................................................................................... 35.5 ........................

*******

WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with RULES

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 193 / Wednesday, October 6, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 61609 

Dated: September 10, 2010. 

Marie C. Johns, 

Deputy Administrator. 

[FR Doc. 2010–24857 Filed 10–5–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8025–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 71 

[Docket No. FAA–2009–1136; Airspace 

Docket No. 09–ANM–26] 

Establishment and Modification of 

Class E Airspace; Deer Park, WA 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: This action will establish and 

amend existing Class E airspace at Deer 

Park, WA, to accommodate aircraft 

using the existing Area Navigation 

(RNAV) Global Positioning System 

(GPS) Standard Instrument Approach 

Procedures (SIAPs) at Deer Park, WA. 

This will improve the safety and 

management of Instrument Flight Rules 

(IFR) operations at the airport. 

DATES: Effective date, 0901 UTC, 

January 13, 2011. The Director of the 

Federal Register approves this 

incorporation by reference action under 

1 CFR Part 51, subject to the annual 

revision of FAA Order 7400.9 and 

publication of conforming amendments. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Eldon Taylor, Federal Aviation 

Administration, Operations Support 

Group, Western Service Center, 1601 

Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, WA 98057; 

telephone (425) 203–4537. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

History 

On July 19, 2010, the FAA published 

in the Federal Register a notice of 

proposed rulemaking to amend 

controlled airspace at Deer Park, WA (75 

FR 41774). Interested parties were 

invited to participate in this rulemaking 

effort by submitting written comments 

on the proposal to the FAA. No 

comments were received. 

Class E airspace designations are 

published in paragraph 6002 and 6005, 

respectively, of FAA Order 7400.9U 

dated August 18, 2010, and effective 

September 15, 2010, which is 

incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 

Part 71.1. The Class E airspace 

designations listed in this document 

will be published subsequently in that 

Order. 

The Rule 

This action amends Title 14 Code of 

Federal Regulations (14 CFR) Part 71 by 

establishing Class E surface airspace, 

and adding additional Class E airspace 

extending upward from 700 feet above 

the surface, at Deer Park Airport, to 

accommodate IFR aircraft executing 

new RNAV (GPS) SIAPs at the airport. 

This action is necessary for the safety 

and management of IFR operations. 

The FAA has determined this 

regulation only involves an established 

body of technical regulations for which 

frequent and routine amendments are 

necessary to keep them operationally 

current. Therefore, this regulation: (1) Is 

not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ 

under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not 

a ‘‘significant rule’’ under DOT 

Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 

FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and (3) 

does not warrant preparation of a 

regulatory evaluation as the anticipated 

impact is so minimal. Since this is a 

routine matter that will only affect air 

traffic procedures and air navigation, it 

is certified this rule, when promulgated, 

will not have a significant economic 

impact on a substantial number of small 

entities under the criteria of the 

Regulatory Flexibility Act. The FAA’s 

authority to issue rules regarding 

aviation safety is found in Title 49 of the 

U.S. Code. Subtitle 1, Section 106 

discusses the authority of the FAA 

Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation 

Programs, describes in more detail the 

scope of the agency’s authority. This 

rulemaking is promulgated under the 

authority described in Subtitle VII, Part 

A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that 

section, the FAA is charged with 

prescribing regulations to assign the use 

of airspace necessary to ensure the 

safety of aircraft and the efficient use of 

airspace. This regulation is within the 

scope of that authority as it establishes 

amends controlled airspace at Deer Park 

Airport, Deer Park, WA. 

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71 

Airspace, Incorporation by reference, 

Navigation (air). 

Adoption of the Amendment 

■ In consideration of the foregoing, the 

Federal Aviation Administration 

amends 14 CFR Part 71 as follows: 

PART 71—DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, 

B, C, D AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR 

TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND 

REPORTING POINTS 

■ 1. The authority citation for 14 CFR 

Part 71 continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40103, 40113, 

40120; E.O. 10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959– 

1963 Comp., p. 389. 

§ 71.1 [Amended] 

■ 2. The incorporation by reference in 

14 CFR Part 71.1 of the Federal Aviation 

Administration Order 7400.9U, 

Airspace Designations and Reporting 

Points, dated August 18, 2010, and 

effective September 15, 2010 is 

amended as follows: 

Paragraph 6002 Class E airspace designated 

as surface areas. 

* * * * * 

ANM WA E2 Deer Park, WA [New] 

Deer Park Airport, WA 

(Lat. 47°58′01′′ N., long. 117°25′43′′ W.) 

Within a 4.1-mile radius of Deer Park 

Airport. This Class E airspace area is effective 

during the specific dates and times 

established in advance by a Notice to 

Airmen. The effective date and time will 

thereafter be continuously published in the 

Airport/Facility Directory. 

Paragraph 6005 Class E airspace areas 

extending upward from 700 feet or more 

above the surface of the earth. 

* * * * * 

ANM WA, E5 Deer Park, WA [Modified] 

Deer Park Airport, WA 

(Lat. 47°58′01′′ N., long. 117°25′43′′ W.) 

That airspace extending upward from 700 

feet above the surface within a 7-mile radius 

of the Deer Park Airport, excluding the 

Spokane, WA, Class E airspace area. 

Issued in Seattle, Washington, on 

September 23, 2010. 

Lori Andriesen, 

Acting Manager, Operations Support Group, 

Western Service Center. 

[FR Doc. 2010–24804 Filed 10–5–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 71 

[Docket No. FAA–2010–0616; Airspace 

Docket No. 10–ANM–6] 

Modification of Class E Airspace; 

Pendleton, OR 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: This action will amend Class 

E airspace at Pendleton, OR. 

Decommissioning of the Foris NonDirectional Radio Beacon (NDB) at 

Eastern Oregon Regional Airport at 

Pendleton has made this necessary for 

the safety and management of 

Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) operations 

WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with RULES