Document ID: EPA-HQ-OA-2002-0001-0080
Agency: epa
Document Type: Supporting & Related Material
Title: 
Posted Date: 2005-06-17T04:00Z

1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
**************************************************

9
MEETING
MINUTES
OF
THE
10
PUBLIC
HEARING
ON
EPA'S
PROPOSED
DBE
RULE
11
HELD
ON
NOVEMBER
18,
2003
12
*************************************************

13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
REPORTER
BY:
ALMA
S.
RODRIGUEZ,
CSR
23
24
25
2
1
(
Beginning
of
proceedings.)

2
MS.
BRADFORD:
Good
morning
to
you
3
all
again.
I
hope
y'all
can
hear
me
okay.
But
my
4
name
is
Debra
Bradford.
I
am
the
regional
5
coordinator
here
for
the
Environmental
Protection
6
Agency.
And
I
thank
you
all
for
coming
to
this
7
public
hearing.

8
And
we're
going
to
be
addressing
9
some
of
the
changes
to
the
DB
program
that
EPA
10
has.
And
we'd
really
welcome
your
input
and
11
comments
concerning
the
rules.

12
I
just
want
to
give
you
some
13
logistics
before
we
get
started
and
introduce
you
14
to
the
panel
from
our
D.
C.
office
out
of
­­
EPA
15
out
of
D.
C.

16
I
think
earlier
I
told
you
all,
you
17
know,
if
you
wanted
to
get
something,
you
know,
go
18
to
5
or
B1.
The
cafeteria's
on
5,
and
a
little
19
cafeteria
on
B1.
Also,
the
restroom,
you
go
out
20
these
doors
that
you
came
in,
you're
going
to
make
21
a
­­
a
right
and
go
down
that
hallway.
And
you
22
need
the
access
code,
which
is
26351
to
get
in
and
23
out
on
this
floor.

24
Also,
the
lead
administrator
here
25
Mary
Richard
Green,
and
she
could
not
be
here,
and
3
1
I
am
in
the
management
division.

2
Okay.
And
we
just
did
a
preliminary
3
pool
that
we
just
finished
our
fourth
quarter
4
review
of
the
MBE/
WBE
activity
reported
by
our
5
grant
recipients,
and
I
just
wanted
to
give
y'all
6
some
numbers
so
you'll
know
that
this
is
a
real,

7
you
know,
vital
program.
And
that
there
are
money
8
out
there
and
there
are
requirements
that
are
put
9
into
each
of
the
grants
that
we
issue
to
our
10
recipients.
And
they
do
have
to
do
a
good
faith
11
effort
and
requirements
to
work
with
minority­
and
12
women­
owned
businesses
as
they
go
out
and
do
13
procurement.

14
For
Region
6
for
FY
2003,
our
15
recipients
reported
that
they
did
over
16
$
260,000,000
in
procurement
activities.
And
they
17
said
that
for
MBE/
WBE,
they
did
$
42,000,000
to
18
MBE.
And
then
for
WBE,
over
$
21,000,000.

19
So
the
funds
are
out
there.

20
$
250,000,000
is
a
lot
of
money
that
­­
you
know,

21
we
really
encourage
the
minority­
and
women­
owned
22
businesses
to
work
with
the
state
recipients
or
23
our
grant
recipients
on
doing
business
with
their
24
organization.

25
With
me
at
the
panel,
I
have
Dave
4
1
Sutton,
who
is
the
deputy
director
for
the
Office
2
of
Small
and
Disadvantaged
Businesses
Utilization
3
out
of
D.
C.
­­
the
EPA
headquarters
in
D.
C.
With
4
him
is
Mark
Gordon,
who's
the
attorney
for
the
5
Office
of
Small
and
Disadvantaged
Businesses.
And
6
they
are
the
ones
that
will
be
conducting
this
7
public
hearing.

8
If
you
have
any
questions
or
9
concerns,
please,
give
me
a
call.
You
know,
I'm
10
really
­­
I'm
here
to
assist.
And
what
with
that
11
I'm
going
to
turn
it
over
to
Dave.

12
MR.
SUTTON:
Thanks
very
much,

13
Debora.

14
As
Debora
mentioned,
I'm
Dave
Sutton
15
and
I'm
the
deputy
director
of
EPA's
Office
of
16
Small
and
Disadvantaged
Businesses
Utilization.

17
Jeannette
Brown
is
our
director,
but
18
unfortunately,
Jeannette
cannot
be
here
today,
so
19
you
got
me.

20
We're
doing
a
number
of
public
21
hearings
on
this
rule
around
the
country.

22
And
in
particular,
Indian
country.

23
Because,
as
we
go
through
the
rule
today,
you'll
24
find
that
there
are
going
to
be
a
number
of
25
changes
in
this
program.
And
we're
proposing
a
5
1
number
of
changes
to
this
program
that
will
have
a
2
significant
impact
on
the
way
we
do
business
with
3
tribal
governments.

4
First
of
all,
I
just
want
to
welcome
5
you
to
this
hearing.
I
want
you
to
sit
back
and
6
listen
to
our
summary
of
what
this
new
rule
making
7
is
all
about.
We
want
to
get
your
input,
if
you
8
have
comments,
if
you
have
questions.
I'm
just
9
going
to
ask
that
you
come
to
the
mic,
so
that
we
10
can
make
sure
we
get
your
questions
and
your
11
comments
accurately.

12
The
whole
purpose
of
doing
this
is
13
to
get
your
input.
So
to
make
sure
we
get
14
everything,
when
you
come
to
the
mic,
give
your
15
name,
give
your
organization,
and
then
proceed
16
with
your
questions
and
comments.

17
Okay.
Before
we
get
into
the
rule,

18
I'd
like
to
talk
a
little
bit
about
our
program.

19
Debora
gave
you
some
statistics
on
how
Region
6
is
20
­­
which
I
think
is
pretty
good,
Debora.
I'm
21
trying
to
do
the
math.
It's
maybe
what?
Thirty
22
or
40
percent?
I
mean,
it's
pretty
good.
I
think
23
that
was
about
$
40,000,000
out
of
$
200­
something
24
million
that
went
to
MBEs
and
WBEs.

25
But
for
those
of
you
who
might
may
6
1
not
know
­­
you
may
the
question,
What
is
BDE
2
Procurement
Program?

3
Basically,
it's
a
golden
program
for
4
the
participation
of
disadvantaged
businesses
in
5
procurements
funded
by
EPA
assistance
agreements.

6
Now,
that's
a
mouth
full.
Let
me
7
see
if
I
can
break
that
down
in
plain
English
for
8
you.
I'll
give
you
an
example.
Let's
say
that
9
EPA
gives
a
grant
to
the
State
of
Texas
to
10
implement
some
environmental
program.
Okay.

11
What
our
DBE
program
does
is
give
12
the
State
of
Texas
goals
for
the
participation
of
13
minority­
owned
businesses
and
women­
owned
business
14
in
any
procurement
that
Texas
does
with
EPA
funds,

15
okay.

16
And
those
are
the
numbers
Debora
was
17
giving;
not
just
for
Texas,
but
for
all
of
the
­­

18
all
the
states
in
Region
6
­­
all
of
the
­­
yeah.

19
All
of
the
states
in
Region
6.

20
Well,
you
might
ask,
"
Well,
I
hear
21
you
talk
about
a
goal
program,
what
are
the
22
goals?"

23
EPA
has
two
national
goals
for
the
24
participation
of
minority­
and
women­
owned
25
businesses
in
this
grant
program:
a
10
percent
7
1
goal,
and
an
8
percent
goal.

2
The
10
percent
goal
applies
to
any
3
research
done
under
the
Clean
Air
Amendment
of
4
1990.
The
8
percent
goal
is
for
everything
else.

5
Needless
to
say,
most
of
our
grant
6
programs
fall
in
the
8
percent
category.
How
many
7
of
you
have
heard
of
the
Supreme
Court
decision
in
8
Adarand
versus
Pena?

9
Good.
That's
why
we're
doing
this
10
rule.
We're
doing
this
rule
to
make
sure
our
11
program
meets
the
strict
scrutiny
of
the
Adarand
12
decision.

13
Before
the
Adarand
decision,
we
put
14
the
8
percent
goal
of
the
10
percent
goal,
as
15
appropriate,
in
every
EPA
grant,
okay
­­
because
16
these
were
our
national
goals.

17
Well,
then
­­
when
the
Adarand
18
decision
came
about
and
mandated
that
these
19
programs
being
narrowly
tailored
meeting
20
compelling
governmental
interests,
the
goals
in
21
each
grant
now
have
to
be
based
on
the
22
availability
of
minority­
and
women­
owned
firms
23
within
their
requisite
geographical
area.

24
May
not
be
­­
8
percent
may
not
be
25
appropriate.
You
know,
if
you're
in
an
area
like
8
1
California
with
a
lot
of
minority­
owned
2
businesses,
it's
somewhere
around
36
percent,
then
3
the
8
percent
of
the
10
percent
would
be
too
low.

4
If
you're
in
an
area
like
Vermont
5
where
you
have
a
1
percent
minority­
owned
business
6
availability,
the
goals
are
too
low
­­
or
too
7
high
­­
excuse
me.

8
So
what
we've
had
to
do
now
is
to
9
negotiate
goals
with
all
of
our
major
grant
10
recipients.

11
At
this
point,
we've
negotiated
12
goals
with
all
of
the
states.
That's
one
of
the
13
jobs
that
Debora
has
as
the
regional
MBE/
WBE
14
coordinator
for
Region
6.
She
has
to
actually
15
negotiate
those
goals.

16
So
now
what
happens
is
that
in
every
17
grant
the
goals,
you
know,
for
each
state
or
18
whatever,
a
grant
recipient
can
either
negotiate
19
their
own
goals
with
EPA,
or
they
can
choose
to
20
use
the
same
goals
if
the
bidding
practices
are
21
pretty
much
the
same.

22
Okay.
I've
talked
about
this
­­
why
23
we're
doing
the
rule
making,
and
we're
doing
it
to
24
make
sure
we
meet
the
strict
scrutiny
of
the
25
Adarand
decision.
9
1
Prior
to
promulgation
of
this
rule,

2
we,
basically,
run
this
program
with
a
number
of
3
guidance
documents,
and,
basically,
giving
4
instructions
to
our
MBE/
WBE
coordinator,
and
5
giving
instructions
to
our
grant
recipients
now
to
6
make
sure
our
program
doesn't
get
challenged
and
7
make
sure
we're
abiding
by
the
rule.

8
Okay.
What
are
the
key
elements?

9
There
are
11
key
elements
of
this
proposed
rule.

10
And
I'm
just
going
to
talk
about
them
briefly,

11
then
Mark
Gordon
will
give
you
some
more
12
specifics.

13
And
after
Mark
finishes,
we
invite
14
you
to
come
to
the
mic
and
either
give
us
comments
15
or
ask
any
questions
that
you
have
on
any
of
the
16
areas.
I'm
just
going
to
run
through
these
very
17
briefly
and
give
you
an
overview
of
the
major
18
changes.

19
The
first
major
change
is
going
to
20
be
a
name
change,
because
right
now
we
call
this
21
an
MBE/
WBE
program.
Under
the
proposed
rule
it's
22
called
a
DBE
program,
Disadvantaged
Business
23
Enterprise
program,
which
would
include
24
minorities,
women,
and
other
groups,
including
25
groups
that
aren't
necessarily,
you
know,
10
1
organizations
that
are
lead
by
members
of
what
are
2
considered
minority
groups.
It
would
just
depends
3
on
the
facts
and
circumstances
in
each
case.

4
But
this
will
be
a
program
for
5
disadvantaged
businesses,
not
just
minority­
owned
6
businesses
and
women­
owned
business.

7
Certification
will
now
be
required
8
under
the
proposed
rule.
As
our
program
stands
9
right
now,
if
you
come
forward
and
say,
"
Look
at
10
me,
I'm
a
minority­
owned
business."
And
if
you
11
look
like
one,
we
consider
you
one.
If
you
come
12
forward
and
say,
"
I'm
a
woman­
owned
business."

13
And
you
look
like
a
woman
and
you
own
a
business,

14
and
we
consider
you
a
woman­
owned
business.

15
So
one
of
the
changes
will
be
that
16
both
minority­
and
women­
owned
businesses
will
17
have
to
be
certified.

18
We'll
go
into
a
lot
more
detail
on
19
this.
We're
going
to
accept
other
certifications.

20
You
know,
if
you
are
registered
by
SBA
or
DOT
and
21
certain
certifications
we're
going
to
accept.

22
Mark
will
talk
to
you
a
little
bit
more
about
23
that.

24
The
rule
is
also
going
to
address
25
the
six
good
faith
efforts.
And
those
are
efforts
11
1
the
grant
recipients
and
prime
contractors
have
to
2
make
to
make
sure
they
try
to
solicit
3
disadvantaged
businesses.
It
deals
with,
you
4
know,
vendors
lists,
doing
outreach,
and
keeping
5
records.

6
These
are
the
efforts
of
the
grant
7
recipient
and
the
prime
contractors
have
to
take
8
to
show
us
that
they
make
efforts
to
get
9
disadvantaged
businesses.

10
There
are
a
number
of
contract
11
administration
provisions.
One,
for
example,

12
deals
with
prime
contractors
deciding
not
to
use
a
13
DBE,
they
have
to
make
an
effort.

14
There
are
a
number
of
contract
15
administration
provisions
that
Mark
will
talk
16
about.

17
Okay.
Determining
fair
share
goals.

18
I
gave
you
an
example
of
Vermont
and
California.

19
What's
going
to
be
key
here
­­
we've
with
already
20
done
fair
share
negotiations
with
all
our
50
21
states,
but
we
have
not
done
­­
we
haven't
22
established
fair
share
goals
with
what
we
call
23
insular
areas
­­
which
are
areas
like
Puerto
Rico,

24
Guam,
Virgin
Islands
­­
nor
with
Indian
tribes.

25
One
of
the
key
changes
in
this
rule
12
1
is
that
we're
going
to
be
bringing
the
tribes
into
2
full
compliance
with
our
program.
That
means
that
3
the
tribes
will
have
to
negotiate
goals,
the
4
tribes
will
have
to
report
their
accomplishments.

5
And
it
won't
be
that
we'll
just
consider
6
everything
going
to
tribes
as
100
percent
going
to
7
minorities.

8
That
has
been
a
problem
with
our
9
program
in
the
past.
As
our
program
is
10
implemented
right
now,
any
grants
going
to
Indian
11
tribes
or
to
groups
in
those
insular
areas
­­

12
like,
Puerto
Rico
and
Guam
and
Virgin
Islands
­­

13
are
considered
to
be
going
100
percent
to
14
minorities.
And
we're
counting
all
of
those
15
dollars
as
part
of
our
program
implementation,
and
16
it's
not
right.

17
I
can
give
you
an
example.
In
one
18
of
our
regions,
the
regional
coordinator,
Debora's
19
counterpart,
called
me
and
said,
"
You
know,
Dave,

20
it's
really
not
fair.
We've
given
a
grant
to
this
21
tribe
­­
I'll
let
the
tribe
remain
nameless
­­
to
22
implement
a
grant
in
our
program.
The
tribe
23
awarded
a
$
5,000,000
contract
to
a
24
non­
minority­
owned,
non­
women­
owned
business,
and
25
we
count
it
as
100
percent
going
to
minorities."
13
1
That's
wasn't
right.
So
that's
one
2
of
the
main
reasons
that
we're
having
a
number
of
3
these
proposals
with
the
Indian
country
because
4
based
on
this
new
proposal,
we're
going
to
be
5
treating
them
completely
different
than
the
way
6
they've
been
treated
in
the
past.

7
And
the
reason
our
director,

8
Jeannette
Brown,
is
not
here
today,
is
that
she's
9
in
Syracuse,
New
York
having
a
Tribal
hearing.

10
In
fact,
in
addition
to
these
public
11
hearings,
we're
having
nine
hearings
focused
12
primarily
on
Indian
tribes.
Primarily
because
of
13
the
changes
in
our
program
that
will
affect
them.

14
We
will
address
the
mission
of
fair
15
share
goals,
how
they're
negotiated
with
the
16
regional
director
and
how
they're
submitted.
We
17
will
also
address
race
and
gender
conscious
18
efforts.

19
These
are
efforts
that
EPA
can
20
take
­­
if
for
some
reason
a
grant
recipient
is
21
having
a
difficult
time
meeting
the
goals
by
doing
22
the
six
good
faith
efforts,
there
are
provisions
23
in
the
rule
that
we
can
implement
race
and
gender
24
specific
efforts,
and
Mark
will
talk
about
those.

25
Exemptions.
One
of
the
key
areas
is
14
1
that
sometimes
EPA
awards
a
number
of
smaller
2
grants.
And
when
we
had
our
draft
rule,
we
got
a
3
lot
of
input,
both
from
the
internal
EPA
and
4
external
EPA,
that
it's
not
practical
for
somebody
5
receiving
a
small
grant
to
have
to
go
through
all
6
of
this.
So
we've
come
up
with
an
exemption
7
level,
and
Mark
will
talk
about
that.

8
I've
already
hit
on
the
treatment
of
9
tribes
and
insular
areas.

10
Record
keeping
and
reporting.

11
Basically,
what
happens
is
grant
recipients
report
12
their
actual
accomplishments
to
us,
either
13
quarterly
or
annually.
States
reporter
quarterly
14
and
nonprofit
report
annually.
That's
done
on
a
15
form
5700­
52A.
And
also
they're
going
to
be
16
record
keeping
requirements
that
relate
to
the
six
17
good
faith
efforts.

18
And
finally,
the
last
area
that
is
a
19
change
will
be
waivers.
What
that
means
is
that
20
our
office
director
can
grant
waivers
to
portions
21
of
these
requirements
based
on
the
facts
and
22
circumstances
in
each
case.

23
Okay.
So
that's
­­
in
a
nutshell,

24
that's
an
overview
of
the
changes.
I
hope
I
have
25
stimulated
your
thoughts
process,
and
now
I'm
15
1
going
to
ask
Mark
to
go
into
a
little
more
detail
2
on
the
specifics
in
these
changes.
After
Mark
3
finishes,
I
invite
you
to
come
to
the
mic
with
any
4
questions
or
comments,
or
maybe
you
just
want
to
5
give
input
or
you
may
have
a
question.
We
welcome
6
everything
you
have
to
say.

7
When
you
come
up,
make
sure
you
give
8
us
your
name
and
your
organization
and
then
9
proceed
with
your
comment
or
question.

10
Thank
you.

11
MR.
GORDON:
Good
morning.
I'm
Mark
12
Gordon
and
I'm
not
as
agile
as
Dave.
I
didn't
get
13
here
until
10:
00
last
night
because
of
the
storm,

14
so
I'm
kind
of
tired.
If
you
don't
mind
I'm
just
15
going
to
sit
in
my
chair,
although,
Dave
was
16
delayed
also,
he's
younger
than
me.

17
Anyway,
I
recognize
in
this
audience
18
some
faces
that
I've
seen
before.
I
was
here
a
19
few
years
ago
at
a
hearing
that
we
had
on
our
20
proposed
draft
of
this
rule.
And
this
rule
21
proposal
now
is
as
a
result
of
a
number
of
22
comments
that
we've
gotten
at
hearings
all
across
23
the
country
including
the
hearing
that
we
held
24
here
in
Dallas.

25
Can
I
see
by
a
show
of
hands
the
16
1
companies
that
are
represented
here
by
folks,
how
2
many
of
you
are
already
certified
by
DOT
or
SBA?

3
Okay.
So
for
those
of
you
­­
if
4
you're
a
U.
S.
citizen,
you're
­­
we
will
accept,

5
automatically,
any
certification
that
you
already
6
have
by
DOT
or
SBA.
So
you
don't
need
to
worry
7
about
going
through
a
whole
process
just
for
EPA.

8
Are
any
of
you
certified
­­
and,

9
Debora,
correct
me,
I
don't
remember
the
exact
10
names
of
these
organizations,
but
I
believe
there
11
is
a
Houston
minority
business
counsel
or
12
something
like
that,
and
there's
also
one
here
in
13
Dallas
­­
are
any
of
you
certified
by
any
of
14
those?

15
Okay.
If
you're
only
certified
by
16
those
types
of
entities,
we
will
have
to
look
at
17
their
requirements
to
make
sure
that
they
comply
18
with
our
requirements.
We
know
that
DOT
and
SBA
19
will
automatically
meet
that
test.
I
can't
tell
20
you
yet
since
we
haven't
reviewed
the
requirements
21
that
these
locals
­­
what
is
the
name
­­
what
is
22
the
exact
name?

23
AUDIENCE
MEMBER:
Texas
Regional
24
Certification
Agency.

25
AUDIENCE
MEMBER:
What
about
the
17
1
capital?
What
about
Austin?

2
MR.
GORDON:
There
are
a
whole
3
bunch
­­

4
AUDIENCE
MEMBER:
I'm
Tom
Jordan.

5
I'm
with
the
City
of
Fort
Worth,
Contract
6
Compliance
Specialist.
The
only
agencies
that
are
7
normally
accepted
­­
that
we
accept
and
the
8
federal
agencies
­­
the
airports
­­
is
the
North
9
Central
Texas
Region
Certification
Agency.
And
10
that's
it.

11
AUDIENCE
MEMBER:
North
Central
or
12
South
Central
Texas
­­

13
AUDIENCE
MEMBER:
They're
all
under
14
the
Texas
uniform
­­

15
AUDIENCE
MEMBER:
Is
that
it
right
16
there?

17
AUDIENCE
MEMBER:
Right.

18
AUDIENCE
MEMBER:
That's
what
you're
19
talking
about?
Because
it
get's
awfully
20
confusing.
When
you
say
"
DOT,"
do
you
mean
Texas
21
DOT?

22
AUDIENCE
MEMBER:
This
is
­­
they're
23
all
certified
under
the
Texas
Uniform
24
Certification
Program.
So
if
you're
certified
25
under
North
Central
Texas,
South
Central
Texas,
18
1
even
some
of
the
cities,
City
of
Houston
­­
if
2
they
do
a
DBE
certification,
only
a
DBE
3
certification,
not
HUB,
but
DBE
certification,
it
4
goes
into
the
state
data
base
or
and
that's
the
5
way
it
­­

6
AUDIENCE
MEMBER:
And
it
gets
7
awfully
confusing.
I've
been
in
business
almost
8
12
years,
whether
I
get
HUB,
DB,
SBA,
SB­
this
and
9
that,
and
it
gets
so
very
confusing,
you
know.

10
And
Texas
DOT,
does
not
do
inspections
to
see
if
11
you
do
run
the
company
or
not.

12
AUDIENCE
MEMBER:
Well,
they're
13
supposed
to.

14
MS.
RAMSEY:
Could
I
ask
both
of
you
15
to
state
your
names?

16
AUDIENCE
MEMBER:
I'm
Cathy
with
17
Desert
Shield
International,
Inc.

18
AUDIENCE
MEMBER:
I'm
Tom
Jordan
19
with
the
City
of
Fort
Worth,
Contract
Compliance
20
Specialist.

21
MR.
SUTTON:
Okay.
And
let
me
22
remind
you,
when
you
want
to
speak,
please
use
the
23
mic
because
we
want
to
make
sure
we
know
who's
24
making
the
comment
and
asking
the
questions.

25
AUDIENCE
MEMBER:
Sorry.
It
just
19
1
gets
awfully
confusing.
It
really
does.

2
MR.
GORDON:
Well,
again,
for
those
3
of
you
that
are
certified
by
SBA,
you
will
not
4
have
to
be
certified
by
EPA
again.
If
you're
5
certified
by
DOT,
if
you're
a
U.
S.
citizen,
you
6
will
not
have
to
be
certified
again
by
EPA.

7
Now,
if
any
of
you
are
wondering
8
about
why
that
is,
under
SBA's
requirements,
you
9
have
to
be
a
U.
S.
citizen
in
order
to
get
10
certified
by
SBA.
Under
DOT
requirements,
you
do
11
not.

12
You
have
to
be
a
legally
admitted
­­

13
permanent
residence,
and
that's
been
somewhat
14
controversial
in
some
parts
of
the
country,
but
15
given
our
resources
and
our
close
ties
to
SBA
16
requirements
under
our
own
statutes,
the
proposal
17
as
it
stands
now
will
only
recognize
DOT
18
certifications
for
U.
S.
citizen­
owned
companies.

19
Well,
I
think
Dave
gave
a
very
good
20
introduction
to
this.
I'll
go
into
some
more
21
details
at
the
risk
of
repeating
what
he
said.

22
We
are
changing
the
name.
The
term
23
DB
­­
we
have
a
question
already?

24
AUDIENCE
MEMBER:
Mary
Necessary,

25
and
I
just
wanted
to
make
sure
I
understood
you
20
1
correctly.
If
you
would
look
at
other
2
certifications
if
they're
similar
to
the
SBA
or
3
the
North
Central
Texas
Regional
Certification
4
Agency,
if
they
also
required
that
you're
a
U.
S.

5
citizen,
would
you
also
consider
that
6
certification?

7
MR.
GORDON:
We
will
accept
other
8
certifications
on
an
individual
­­
on
a
9
case­
by­
case
­­
not
an
individual
company
basis,

10
but
an
individual
examination
of
that
11
certification,
so
that
when
the
first
time
a
12
company
comes
in
and
says,
We're
certified
by
­­

13
let's
say,
North
Central
Texas,
then
we
would
have
14
to
look
at
that
certification
to
make
sure
that
15
that
complies
with
our
requirements.

16
And
once
we
determine
that
it
does,

17
and
everybody
else
who
came
in
with
that,
we
would
18
accept
that
right
away.
But
we
have
to
look
at
19
each
one
of
these
because
there's
a
lot
of
other
20
certifications.
And
we're
not
certain
that
all
21
these
meet
our
requirements
without
looking
at
22
them;
not
on
an
individual
company
basis,
but
on
a
23
case­
by­
case
basis
of
the
certification
entity
24
itself.

25
AUDIENCE
MEMBER:
I
want
to
say
21
1
something
about
the
North
Central
Texas
2
certification.
There
are
two
types
of
3
certifications
that
the
North
Central
does
and
4
they're
based
on
­­
if
you
are
applying
for
a
DBE
5
certification
or
a
M/
WBE
certification,
they
do
6
both.
The
difference
is
if
you
submit
your
7
personal
net
worth
statement
and
approved,
then
8
you
will
get
a
DBE
certification.

9
If
you
don't
submit
that
form,
you
10
cannot
be
considered
a
DBE.
You
will
receive
a
11
certificate
as
certified
by
the
North
Central
12
Texas,
but
it
will
only
be
for
an
M/
WBE
13
certification.

14
So
that's
very
important.
If
you
15
have
your
certification
certificate,
look
at
it
to
16
see
if
it
says
DBE
or
M/
WBE.
Because
if
it's
17
M/
WBE,
you
have
not
met
all
of
the
federal
18
requirements,
and
that
is
the
personal
net
worth
19
statement
that
is
required.

20
MR.
GORDON:
Okay.
Are
there
any
21
other
questions
relating
to
this
issue?

22
AUDIENCE
MEMBER:
Yes,
I'm
Cathy,

23
Desert
Shield
International.
And
I'm
with
the
24
South
Texas
Regional,
and
I
was
with
HUB,
and
I'm
25
with
Austin,
which
also
was
with
a
Part
26
on
22
1
their
DB
certification,
but
they
handed
it
over
to
2
the
South
Texas
Central
Certification
Agency.

3
When
you
say
"
SBA,"
though,
do
you
4
mean
8A?
Or
when
you
say
"
SBA,"
do
you
know
that
5
you
can
go
to
SBA's
website
and
become
6
self­
certified
as
a
woman­
owned
company
through
7
the
internet.
I've
had
Bowing
Company,
Lockhead
8
Martin
say,
Well,
if
you
are
not
certified
by
SBA,

9
we
can't
do
business
with
you.

10
And
I
thought
SBA
­­
I
know
who
SBA
11
is,
but
I
was
thinking,
Do
I
need
to
become
8A
12
certified
with
them?

13
MR.
SUTTON:
No.
In
terms
of
­­

14
AUDIENCE
MEMBER:
I
was
told
it
was
15
self­
certification
through
the
internet.

16
MR.
SUTTON:
Yeah.
In
terms
of
SBA
17
certification,
the
only
certification
that
SBA
18
does
is
for
8A,
SDB,
and
HUB.
SBA
does
not
19
certify
women­
owned
small
businesses.
It's
still
20
a
self­
certification
program.
What
Mark
is
saying
21
is
if
you've
already
met
the
8A
certification
by
22
SBA
or
the
SDB,
then
you've
met
our
requirements.

23
AUDIENCE
MEMBER:
Not
HUB?

24
MR.
SUTTON:
No.
Not
HUB.
That's
25
based
on
certain
census
tracks
and
employment
and
23
1
there's
no
net
worth
for
HUB.

2
AUDIENCE
MEMBER:
And
our
belief
­­

3
or
our
understanding
is
that
South
Texas
and
the
4
North
Texas
that
does
conform
to
the
regulations
5
with
the
SBA.

6
AUDIENCE
MEMBER:
So
in
order
to
be
7
part
of
the
DE
program
with
the
EPA,
we
have
to
go
8
further
with
SBA?

9
MR.
SUTTON:
Not
necessarily
SBA,

10
but
you
would
either
have
to
have
a
DOT
11
certification,
an
SBA
certification,
or
some
other
12
entity
that
meets
our
requirements.

13
And,
Mark,
you
may
want
to
tell
her
14
what
our
requirements
are
in
terms
of
net
worth
15
and
socially
and
economically
disadvantaged.
I
16
could
do
it,
but
I'll
let
Mark
do
it.

17
MR.
GORDON:
Okay.
Well,
I'm
skip
18
to
that
right
now.

19
Well,
under
the
proposed
rule,
you
20
would
first
have
to
try
to
get
certified
by
DOT
or
21
SBA
or
some
other
certifying
entity
before
you
22
could
come
to
EPA,
so
we
would
not
only
be
a
last
23
resort
situation
to
meet
our
requirements.
So
24
that's
the
first
thing.

25
You
would
­­
we
have
requirements
24
1
that
you
have
to
have
a
net
worth
less
than
2
$
750,000
in
order
to
be
eligible.
And
if
you
have
3
a
net
worth
greater
than
or
equal
to
$
750,000,

4
then
you
would
be
precluded
from
continued
5
eligibility.

6
So
the
$
750,000
level
is
both
for
7
initial
eligibility
and
for
continued
eligibility.

8
MR.
SUTTON:
And
one
other
thing
is
9
the
$
750,000
excludes
your
interest
in
the
10
business
and
in
your
personal
residence.
Those
11
come
off
the
table.
It's
what's
left.

12
AUDIENCE
MEMBER:
If
you
go
to
the
13
CCR
registration,
you
can
see
my
net
worth
for
14
three
years,
which
is
­­
Debora,
if
you're
here,

15
you
know
me.
I
have
a
contract
with
the
United
16
States
Government,
and
that's
general
services
17
administration,
and
they've
accepted
me
as
a
WBE
18
and
a
DBE,
as
a
small
woman­
owned
business.
And
19
that's
a
federal
agency,
as
well.

20
MR
SUTTON:
Okay.

21
MR.
GORDON:
Ma'am,
would
you
care
22
to
give
us
your
last
name.
I
think
you've
only
23
give
us
your
first
name.

24
AUDIENCE
MEMBER:
Chriske.
Cathy
25
Chriske,
C­
H­
R­
I­
S­
K­
E.
25
1
MR.
GORDON:
Okay.
Thank
you.

2
We
have
a
court
reporter
here
and
so
3
just
so
the
record
shows.

4
MR
SUTTON:
I'd
just
like
to
make
5
one
comment,
Mark.
I
think
one
thing
I
want
to
6
make
sure
everyone
understands
is
to
participate
7
in
this
program,
you
have
to
be
a
DBE,
a
8
disadvantaged
enterprise.

9
Now,
you
can
be
a
woman­
owned
10
business
and
not
be
disadvantaged.
And
that's
the
11
main
reason
that
we're
having
this
certification
12
requirement.
You
have
to
be
a
disadvantaged
13
business
enterprise.

14
MR.
GORDON:
Right
now
­­
this
is
15
just
a
proposed
rule.
Right
now,
none
of
these
16
requirements
apply.
Let's
be
very
clear
about
17
that.
We
don't
require
anybody
to
be
certified
18
right
now.
So
if
you're
sitting
in
the
audience
19
and
you're
not
certified,
you
don't
have
to
go
out
20
and
get
certified
tomorrow.

21
Once
this
rule
becomes
effective,

22
once
it's
promulgated
and
in
final
form
­­
if
it's
23
promulgated
in
as
the
proposal
reads,
you
would
24
have
to
get
certified.
But
right
now,
you
don't.

25
We
accept
­­
in
case
any
of
you
were
26
1
wondering,
Well,
I
have
a
certification;
I'm
a
2
minority­
owned
business
and
I
have
a
certification
3
from
North
Central
Texas,
South
Central
Texas,
we
4
accept
those.

5
We
currently
don't
have
anything
6
that
requires
women­
owned
businesses
to
be
7
certified.
And
to
be
very
frank
about
it,
I
think
8
the
reason
for
that
came
out
of
a
number
of
9
hearings
that
we
held
across
the
country
a
few
10
years
ago.

11
Some
of
regions
we
were
at,
people
12
were
up
in
arms
because
we
were
going
to
be
13
requiring
minority­
owned
businesses
to
be
14
certified
and
not
women­
own
businesses
to
be
15
certified.
Because
that
was
part
of
the
initial
16
draft,
but
we
changed
that
in
response
to
the
17
comments
that
we
got
from
the
audience.

18
So,
please,
just
understand,
we
do
19
listen
to
people's
comments.
And
with
that
note,

20
let
me
go
on
­­

21
AUDIENCE
MEMBER:
I'm
Patricia
22
Loving
with
the
Texas
Water
Development
Board.

23
The
question
I
have
for
you,
Mark,
is:
When
24
you're
saying
that
EPA
is
going
to
be
looking
at
25
the
certifications
to
see
if
they're
valid
or
not,
27
1
in
reality,
who's
is
really
going
to
be
looking
at
2
and
determining
what
North
Central
Texas
has
is
3
correct
or
not?
Is
it
going
down
to
the
state
4
level
and
we're
going
to
have
to
assume
that
5
responsibility?

6
MR.
GORDON:
Under
the
current
7
proposal,
it
would
be
EPA
headquarters
that
would
8
have
to
do
that.

9
AUDIENCE
MEMBER:
So
we
won't
be
10
able
to
then
at
the
state,
because
we
do
accept
11
self­
certifications
right
now
from
people,
we
12
would
not
be
able
to
count
those
people
until
13
everything
has
gone
through
EPA
headquarters
or
14
EPA
region.

15
MR
GORDON:
You
won't
be
able
to
16
count
anybody
who's
self­
certified.

17
AUDIENCE
MEMBER:
Well,
no.
But
I
18
mean,
once
­­
if
they're
saying
they're
certified
19
by
North
Central
and
we're
accepting
that
now.

20
Does
that
mean
that
we
can
no
longer
count
them
21
until
they
either
get
SBA
or
some
kind
of
22
certification
or
EPA
says
that
North
Central
23
certification
is
correct?

24
MR.
GORDON:
No.
Now
you
can
keep
25
counting
them.
28
1
AUDIENCE
MEMBER:
I
know,
but
I'm
2
talking
about
the
new
rules.

3
MR.
GORDON:
No.
You
wouldn't
be
4
able
to
count
anybody
unless
we
had
determined
5
that
they
met
our
requirements.

6
AUDIENCE
MEMBER:
Okay.
It's
really
7
feeling
to
me
that
it's
becoming
a
bureaucratic
8
kind
of
thing
right
here,
so
that's
why
I
just
got
9
a
little
concerned
about
that.

10
MR.
GORDON:
Well,
I
think
it
would
11
be
very
helpful
and
we'll
be
talking,
I'm
sure,
to
12
our
regional
coordinators,
for
us
to
get
a
listing
13
from
them
of
all
the
different
certifying
entities
14
in
their
region,
because
as
far
as
I
know,
anyway,

15
we
don't
have
such
a
list
at
EPA
headquarters.

16
I've
never
seen
one
if
it
exists.

17
I
am
aware
of
a
large
number
of
18
certifying
entities
in
this
region
in
particular
19
and
a
few
other
regions,
but
I
don't
know
all
20
their
names.
We
have
looked
at
the
state's
21
certifications
to
see
if
they
comply
with
our
22
requirements,
but
I
­­
we
didn't
have
a
full
list
23
so
we
haven't
looked
them
over
­­
the
non­
state
24
agencies.

25
And
by
the
way,
I
believe
that
there
29
1
are
also
local
governments
that
certify
people.

2
Particularly
in
Florida,
I'm
aware
of.

3
MR.
SUTTON:
I
think
the
key
is
4
going
to
be
in
any
certification
done
by
anybody
5
else,
as
long
as
it
meets
our
criteria,
which
is
6
the
$
750,000
net
worth
and
the
social
or
economic
7
disadvantage
will
be
accepted.

8
AUDIENCE
MEMBER:
But
who
­­
is
EPA
9
going
to
tell
me
that
it's
okay?
That
we
10
can
(
indiscernable)
­­

11
MR.
SUTTON:
EPA
will
be
doing
the
12
certifications.

13
AUDIENCE
MEMBER:
Can
we
show
you
14
our
tax
documents
that
we
are
not
doing
­­

15
MR.
SUTTON:
We
don't
have
a
16
process,
yet.
This
is
I
proposed
rule.
The
17
earliest
that
this
rule
will
become
final
after
we
18
get
all
your
comments,
finish
our
public
hearings,

19
evaluate
the
comments,
get
them
into
the
rule,

20
we're
talking
at
least
two
years
from
now.

21
So
we
don't
have
a
process
yet
in
22
terms
of
how
we'll
make
the
evaluations,
but
23
that's
something
we
would
have
to
do.

24
AUDIENCE
MEMBER:
I'm
Debora
25
Bradford,
the
regional
small
disadvantaged
30
1
coordinator
for
EPA
in
Dallas.

2
Are
you
saying
that
all
the
3
certification
agencies
that
are
in
the
state,
that
4
we're
going
to
forward
them
to
the
EPA
5
headquarters,
you­
all
are
going
to
evaluate
their
6
certification
process,
and
then
determine
if
they
7
meet
our
requirements?
If
they
meet
our
8
requirements,
we're
going
to
post
it
and
say,
If
9
you've
been
certified
by
any
of
these
programs,

10
and
then
if
they
don't
meet,
then
they're
going
11
have
to
come
to
EPA
headquarters
and
get
a
12
certification
to
participate
in
the
EPA
programs?

13
MR.
GORDON:
Okay.
I
don't
think
14
we've
made
a
final
decision
about
who
is
going
to
15
be
doing
all
the
certifications.
As
it
stands
16
now,
EPA
­­
we
are
envisioning
that
EPA
will
be
17
making
all
these
decisions,
but
I
think
it
would
18
be
a
good
idea,
Debora
­­
I'm
going
to
ask
you
to
19
do
some
work
­­
to
get
a
list
of
all
of
the
20
different
certifying
agencies
in
your
region,
so
21
that
we
could
start
taking
a
look
at
those
and
22
what
their
requirements
are.

23
As
I
said,
we
did
look
at
the
state
24
ones,
but
we
haven't
looked,
as
far
as
I
know,
all
25
of
the
different
non­
state
entities.
31
1
There
is
a
big
issue
about
this,
and
2
what's
going
to
happen
is
we
do
decides
to
certify
3
non­
U.
S.
citizens,
so
I
don't
really
know.

4
There's
been
no
final
decisions
reached
on
these
5
issues
yet.
All
I
can
talk
to
you
about
is
under
6
the
current
process
how
we
are
envisioning
it
now.

7
A
lot
of
this
could
change
when
the
8
decision
is
ultimately
reached
that
we're
going
to
9
be
certifying
non­
U.
S.
citizen­
owned
companies.

10
And
if
it
turns
out
that
the
number
is
very
high,

11
then
we
may
just
not
be
able
to
do
it
all
in
12
headquarters
and
the
regions
may
have
to
jump
into
13
the
picture.

14
Well,
while
we're
talking
about
15
certification,
let
me
go
on.
Under
the
proposal,

16
remember
as
I
said
now,
we
don't
require
any
17
certification
­­
under
the
proposal
there
would
be
18
three
changes
in
order
to
meet
the
strict
scrutiny
19
of
Adarand.

20
We
would
no
lodger
accept
MBE
21
self­
certification.
Now,
that
is
a
major
change
22
because
right
now
the
minority­
owned
business
23
says,
It's
minority­
owned.
Unless
there's
some
24
reason
for
us
to
question
it,
we
just
accept
it.

25
Period.
32
1
We
would
recognize
MBE
certification
2
by
a
state,
local,
and
tribal
government,
and
3
private
certifiers,
which
is
what
we've
been
4
talking
about
here
­­
so
long
as
they're
criteria
5
matched
those
under
885
and
6
of
the
small
6
business
act
and
SBA's
8A
business
development
7
program
regulation.

8
I
know
this
is
sort
of
a
key
here,

9
as
we
currently
accept
state
certification
without
10
their
having
to
adhere
to
these
criteria.
And
11
preliminary
review
of
state
certifications,
we
12
have
determined
that
not
all
of
the
state
13
certification
programs
meet
these
criteria.
So
14
that
could
pose
a
problem
­­
in
fact,
Debora,
I
15
believe
you
mentioned
to
me
there
was
one
state
16
right
here
in
this
region
­­
it's
not
Texas,
but
I
17
believe
there's
one
state
in
this
region
that
does
18
not
meet
these
criteria.

19
In
fact,
there
may
be
two.
I'm
20
going
to
wait
for
her
to
come
back.
That
will
21
pose
some
serious
issues
for
EPA
if
under
­­
if
no
22
changes
are
made
to
how
this
is
going
to
work.

23
Then
we
will
clarify
that
EPA
will
accept
DOT/
DBE
24
certifications
as
valid
if
the
EPA
citizenship
25
requirements
are
met.
33
1
Are
there
any
more
questions
about
2
certification
before
I
go
onto
other
issues.

3
AUDIENCE
MEMBER:
Hello,
my
name's
4
Rudolph
Hernandez.
My
company's
51
percent
owned
5
by
me.
I'm
certified
with
the
State
of
Texas
6
(
indiscernible.)
My
question
is:
I
never
really
7
did
hear
you
say
if
that
qualifies
or
not?

8
MR.
GORDON:
No,
it
would
not.

9
AUDIENCE
MEMBER:
I'm
Kathy
10
Dougherty
with
Dougherty
Sprague
Environmental,

11
and
is
this
only
­­
you
said
only
grants
­­
the
12
only
grant
side
of
the
EPA?

13
MR.
GORDON:
At
this
proposal
only
14
relates
to
financial
assistance
agreements
that
15
will
apply
to
a
grants
and
loans
of
under
the
SRF
16
program
and
Brownfield's
Clean
Water
and
Drinking
17
Water
State
Revolving
Funds.
This
does
not
affect
18
your
procurement
­­

19
AUDIENCE
MEMBER:
It
already
20
requires
that
you
either
­­
be
SBA
certified
is
21
the
only
thing
that's
accepted.

22
MR.
GORDON:
But
we
won't
­­
this
is
23
a
different
­­

24
AUDIENCE
MEMBER:
But
this
is
just
25
grant
side?
34
1
MR.
SUTTON:
You're
correct.

2
MR.
GORDON:
Now,
when
we
go
out
and
3
talk
to
groups
like
this,
we
usually
get
­­
I'm
4
surprised
so
far
we
haven't
gotten
this
question
5
­­
but
why
are
the
requirements
different
for
6
direct
procurements
by
EPA
versus
grants
that
we
7
give
to
state
and
local
governments,
and
loans?

8
Why
are
the
requirements
so
different?

9
Well,
for
one
thing,
Congress
passed
10
laws
that
mandate
a
lot
of
differences.
And
then
11
the
other,
there
are
other
legal
issues
about
once
12
you
give
money
to
state
and
local
governments
how
13
much
control
you
can
keep
on
how
they
spend
the
14
money,
and
the
different
requirements.

15
It's
very
different
once
you
have
16
money
leaving
EPA
and
going
to
someone
else,
in
17
terms
of
the
holds
that
we
have
on
people
versus
18
what
we're
spending
the
money
ourselves.
As
I
19
said
earlier,
we
would
require
a
business
entity
20
to
first
become
certified
as
an
MBE
or
WBE,
by
21
SBA,
DOT,
under
their
respective
programs,
or
by
22
tribe,
state
governments,
local
governments,
or
23
independent
private
organizations
consistent
with
24
our
requirements,
and
you
can
only
be
able
to
come
25
to
us
if
you
first
tried
to
get
certified
by
one
35
1
of
them
and
you
could
not.

2
Now,
there
five
categories
of
3
categories
that
would
not
qualify
for
MBE
or
WBE
4
certification
by
SBA
or
DOT
due
to
the
differences
5
in
our
statutes
and
our
programs
versus
theirs.

6
The
first
one
which
may
be
of
some
7
concern
to
some
of
you
ladies
in
the
audience
is
8
women­
owned
businesses
that
do
not
meet
the
9
SBA/
DOT
size
standard.
We
don't
have
any
size
10
standards
for
our
DBE
program
period.
We
have
net
11
worth
requirements
under
this
proposal,
but
there
12
are
no
size
standards
about
how
many
folks
you
can
13
employ.

14
For
example,
how
much
your
sales
are
15
per
quarter
or
per
year.
So
if
­­
that's
one
16
issue.

17
Another
group
would
be
disabled
18
American­
owned
businesses
under
our
10
percent
19
statute,
which
is
the
requirement
for
the
Clean
20
Air
Act
Research
Grant
that
their
Congress
did
not
21
include
such
a
group
in
the
8
percent
statute.

22
Our
third
category,
private
and
23
voluntary
organizations
controlled
by
individuals
24
who
are
socially
and
economically
disadvantaged.

25
In
that
group
I
think
we
probably
36
1
would
consider
groups
like
the
NAACP,
and
other
2
similar
groups.

3
And
then
the
next
category
are
4
entities
which
are
certified
under
criteria
which
5
are
inconsistent
with
EPA's
DBE
program
criteria.

6
Then
there
is
another
group
­­
I
7
don't
know
whether
this
would
affect
anybody
in
8
this
audience,
but
it
is
a
real
issue.

9
There
are
any
entity
claiming
that
10
is
owned
or
controlled
by
socially
and
11
economically
disadvantaged
individuals
under
our
8
12
percent
statute.
If
you
claim
you
own
a
business,

13
but
you
don't
control
it,
under
our
8
percent
14
statute,
you
are
entitled
to
try
to
get
certified.

15
But
SBA
and
DOT
both
require
that
you
have
to
show
16
ownership
and
control.

17
AUDIENCE
MEMBER:
I'm
Mary
Sullivan,

18
Associated
Records
and
Information
Services.
And
19
I
think
that
perhaps
the
reason
that
law
came
20
about,
from
what
I've
heard
in
other
discussions,

21
people
are
very
upset
about
companies
saying
­­

22
I've
run
into
it
myself.
They
claim
to
be
a
23
minority­
owned
or
disadvantaged
entity
and
they're
24
really
being
owned
by
people
­­
it
may
be
25
registered
by
that
minority
or
my
a
women,
but
in
37
1
reality,
it's
run
by
other
people,
and
the
woman
2
never
has
anything
to
do
other
than
show
up
and
3
smile.
She
never
has
a
word
in
the
business
and,

4
as
I
understand
it,
a
women­
owned
business,
you
5
have
to
have
at
least
51
percent
ownership
in
6
something.

7
AUDIENCE
MEMBER:
And
control.

8
MR.
GORDON:
What
I'm
saying
is
that
9
Congress,
for
whatever
reason,
under
our
8
percent
10
statute
did
not
impose
that
requirement,
so
we
11
cannot
on
our
own
impose
it,
given
the
wording
of
12
that
statute.

13
WBE's
would
have
to
become
certified
14
as
such.
And
then
I
talked
about
the
practical
15
effect
if
these
provisions
are
adopted
is
that
the
16
individuals
with
a
net
worth
greater
than
or
equal
17
to
$
750,000
would
be
precluded
from
initial
18
eligibility
and
individuals
with
a
net
worth
19
greater
than
or
equal
to
$
750,000
would
be
20
precluded
from
continued
eligibility
including
the
21
value
of
your
house
and
your
business.

22
We
currently
have
what
we
generally
23
call
the
six
affirmative
steps,
those
are
in
40
24
CFR
Part
31.
And
then
for
nonprofit
organizations
25
we
have
something
we
call
positive
efforts.
Those
38
1
are
the
things
like
including
MBEs
and
WBEs,
and
2
the
solicitations
lists,
and
breaking
down
3
solicitation
into
smaller
components,
so
that
4
minority­
and
women­
owned
businesses
will
have
a
5
better
chance
of
competing
for
them.

6
All
those
requirements
would
be
7
combined
into
one.
It
doesn't
really
change
the
8
substance
of
that.

9
The
contract
administration
10
provisions
that
Dave
referred
to
earlier
would
be
11
quite
significant
changes
to
the
way
it
is
now.

12
First
of
all,
a
recipient
will
have
13
to
be
notified
in
writing
by
it's
prime
contractor
14
prior
to
any
termination
of
a
DBE
subcontractor.

15
We
do
not
have
such
a
requirement
now.

16
When
a
DBE
subcontractor
fails
to
17
complete
its
work
under
the
subcontract
for
any
18
reason,
the
recipient
would
have
to
require
the
19
prime
contractor
to
make
good
faith
efforts
in
20
hiring
another
subcontractor.
We
do
not
have
that
21
requirement
now.

22
Another
requirement
which
we
have
23
made
specific,
but
I
believe
that
has
always
been
24
our
policy:
A
recipient
must
require
its
prime
25
contractor
to
make
good
faith
efforts
even
if
the
39
1
fair
share
objectives
are
met.

2
We
get
this
question
often
posed
to
3
us,
Well,
we've
already
met
our
goals
of
­­
say,

4
their
like
12
percent
­­
and
we've
already
reached
5
our
13
percent.
Can't
we
just
stop?

6
And
the
answer
is
no.
Because
you
7
would
have
a
chance
to
increase
your
8
participation.
It's
not
a
quota
system.

9
In
other
words,
once
a
contractor
10
state
meets
a
certain
percentage,
if
we
operated
11
it
like
that,
that
would
effectively
turn
this
12
into
a
quota
program,
so
we
can't
do
that.
That
13
would
not
be
legal.

14
A
recipient
must
require
its
prime
15
contractor
to
pay
its
subcontractor
for
16
satisfactory
performance
within
a
specific
number
17
of
days
from
the
prime
receipt
of
payment
from
the
18
recipient.

19
Again,
we
do
not
have
such
an
20
existing
requirement.

21
A
recipient
must
require
the
22
completion
of
a
few
new
forms
to
prevent
"
bait
and
23
switch"
tactics
at
the
subcontract
level
by
prime
24
contractors
which
could
circumvent
the
spirit
of
25
this
program.
The
forms
would
be
completed
either
40
1
by
prime
contractors
or
DBE
subcontractors,

2
depending
on
the
applicable
form.

3
I
think
there's
some
folks
here
from
4
state,
so
I
will
mention
this
maybe
a
little
bit
5
more
than
otherwise,
if
there
weren't
any
state
6
representatives
­­
the
rule
would
require
a
7
recipient
to
submit
its
proposed
fair
share
8
objectives
and
supporting
documentation
to
­­
in
9
other
words,
that
would
be
like
to
Debora
­­
no
10
later
than
90
days
after
its
acceptance
of
the
11
assistance
award.

12
This
is
new,
and
now
we
have
these
13
kinds
of
requirements
in
our
grant
award
14
conditions,
but
it
would
codified
in
the
15
regulation.

16
Debora,
now
that
you're
back,
I
17
mentioned
something
­­
I
believe
that
you
called
18
to
our
attention
that
one
of
your
states
or
19
possibly
two,
do
not
meet
the
certification
20
requirements.
I
don't
want
to
misrepresent
which
21
state
or
states
they
are.
If
you
want
to
tell
the
22
audience,
if
not,
we
could
keep
it
a
secret
from
23
them.
I
leave
it
up
to
you.

24
AUDIENCE
MEMBER:
Arkansas
and
25
Louisiana.
41
1
MR.
GORDON:
I
wanted
you
to
say
it.

2
If
anybody
is
here
from
Arkansas
or
Louisiana,

3
you're
going
­­
under
this
proposed
rule
­­
you'll
4
have
to
do
some
work
to
get
certified,
because
we
5
couldn't
accept
the
certifications
from
your
6
state.
In
one
case
­­
if
I
remember
correctly
­­

7
they
don't
certify
minority­
owned
businesses
only
8
women­
owned
businesses
or
whatever
­­

9
But
remember,
as
Dave
pointed
out,

10
this
rule
is
not
likely
to
finalized
for
a
couple
11
years.

12
Well,
let
me
just
touch
base
here.

13
I'm
sure
some
of
you
are
wondering,
Well,
why
does
14
it
take
so
long?

15
Well,
first
of
all,
like
a
lot
of
16
other
things
in
the
government,
it's
a
17
bureaucratic
issue,
but
realistically
speaking,

18
the
comment
period
for
this
rule
ends
in
the
19
middle
of
January.
Then
we
would
have
to
review
20
all
the
comments.
And
from
my
past
experience,

21
most
of
the
comments
tend
to
come
in
at
the
end.

22
We
have
a
six­
month
comment
period,

23
but
that's
just
the
way
it
is
­­
the
written
24
comments.
We
read
all
these
comments,
not
the
25
questions
so
much,
but
the
comments
that
you
make
42
1
on
the
rule.
We
will
have
to
answer
those
2
comments
and
we'll
have
to
answer
the
comments
3
that
are
submitted
to
us
in
writing.

4
Then
after
that,
we
have
a
work
5
room,
which
is
composed
of
representatives
from
a
6
number
of
offices
within
EPA,
for
example,

7
representatives
from
Brownfield
and
the
Clean
8
Water
and
Drinking
Water
State
Revolving
Loan
9
Funds,
we
have
representatives
from
a
number
of
10
regions,
and
then
there
are
other
offices
that
are
11
also
involved
in
this
work.

12
Everybody
brings
a
slightly
13
different
perspective
to
what
they
think
the
rule
14
should
be
based
on
their
own
programs.
To
say
15
nothing
about
the
regional
differences
the
way
16
programs
run
across
the
country,
and
it
just
takes
17
time.
And
because
this
rule
is
Adarand
related,

18
in
the
past
we've
had
to
have
the
Justice
19
Department
take
a
look
at
this,
and
I
have
every
20
reason
to
believe
that
probably
will
still
be
the
21
case;
although,
I
cannot
inform
you
of
that
today,

22
because
I
don't
know.

23
But
it's
likely
they
probably
will
24
take
a
look
at
it,
and
so
it
just
takes
time.

25
This
is
more
of
interest
perhaps
to
43
1
the
states
­­
a
recipient
­­

2
AUDIENCE
MEMBER:
I'm
Alton
DeLarge,

3
Jr.,
I'm
from
Louisiana
in
New
Orleans.
And
our
4
program
was
one
of
the
programs
that
Debora
5
Bradford
was
talking
about.
I
did
plan
to
make
6
comments
on
that.
If
it's
appropriate,
I'll
wait
7
until
the
comment
period.
If
not,
I
can
comment
8
now.
Whatever
you
desire.

9
MR.
SUTTON:
Let's
just
wait.

10
AUDIENCE
MEMBER:
First
of
all,
we
11
operate
a
DBE
program
in
New
Orleans.
That
12
program
came
about
I'm
assuming
as
a
result
of
the
13
Adarand
decision
and
we're
under
strict
court
14
order
now
to
operate
a
DBE
program.
It's
not
15
based
on
race
or
gender,
but
it's
strictly
on
16
social
and
economic
disadvantages.
We
have
been
17
doing
that
in
the
past
and
the
EPA
has
allowed
us
18
to
operate
our
program
in
that
manner
and
still
19
report
as
to
who
our
MBEs
and
DBEs
when
we
report
20
for
those
purposes,
but
we
are
under
a
court
order
21
to
operate
a
DBE
program.

22
Now,
with
specific
regard
to
some
of
23
the
information
the
summary,
the
name
change.

24
DBE,
as
you're
proposing,
is
defined
as
an
entity
25
owned
or
controlled
by
an
individual
who's
44
1
socially
and
economically
disadvantaged.

2
The
Sewage
and
Water
Board's
3
disadvantaged
business
program
defines
a
DBE
as
an
4
entity
that
is
51
percent
owned
and
controlled
by
5
an
individual
or
individuals
who
are
socially
and
6
economically
disadvantaged.

7
We
wouldn't
like
to
see
that
8
definition
change,
because
the
requirement
of
both
9
ownership
and
control
by
socially
and
economically
10
disadvantaged
individuals
is
a
safeguard
that
was
11
put
in
place
to
make
sure
that
the
program
is
12
benefitting
those
individuals
whom
it
was
intended
13
to
serve.

14
And
second,
I
want
to
touch
on
some
15
points
about
certification.
The
EPA
envisions
16
certain
individuals
or
groups
who
would
not
17
qualify
for
MBE
or
WBE
certification
programs
from
18
SBE
­­
SBA
or
DOT
due
to
differences
in
those
19
agencies
respected
programs.
These
categories
20
include
disabled
American
owned
businesses
and
21
individuals
with
a
net
worth
greater
than
or
equal
22
to
$
750,000.
They
would
be
precluded
from
initial
23
eligibility.
And
individuals
with
a
net
worth
24
greater
than
or
equal
to
$
750,000
would
be
25
precluded
from
continued
eligibility.
45
1
The
way
our
program
operates
is
2
that
rather
than
make
determinations
on
3
eligibility
based
on
income,
gross
receipts,
or
4
net
worth,
applicants
submitted
to
the
Sewage
and
5
Water
Board
for
Social
and
Disadvantaged
Business
6
Program
are
reviewed
as
a
whole
on
a
case­
by­
case
7
basis.
And
they're
reviewed
by
independent
8
certifications
panel.

9
This
includes
historical,
social
10
disadvantages,
present
social
disadvantages,

11
economic
disadvantages
for
the
individuals,
and
12
economic
disadvantages
faced
by
the
business.

13
The
DBE
program
has
been
extremely
14
successful.
We've
been
honored
in
the
past
by
EPA
15
for
doing
so,
and
we
wouldn't
want
to
depart
from
16
the
eligibility
requirements
that
we
now
use.

17
MR.
GORDON:
Okay.
Thank
you.

18
AUDIENCE
MEMBER:
Tom
Jordan
from
19
the
City
of
Fort
Worth.
I
have
two
things
that
I
20
want
to
address
­­
comment
on.
There
are
some
21
provisions
that
I
wish
the
EPA
would
consider.

22
One,
is
the
payment
of
retaining.
That
it
is
a
23
very
important
factor
in
contracting
nowadays.

24
When
contractors
­­
prime
contractors
hold
the
25
money
­­
retain
the
money,
when
the
subcontractors
46
1
have
finished
months
and
months
and
months
before
2
the
contract
is
completed,
presently
in
our
3
program,
we
pay
­­
we
demanded
that
the
retaining
4
be
paid
should
be
paid
after
the
contract
has
5
completed
­­
that
subcontractor
has
completed.

6
And
that's
one
thing
I
think
that
EPA
should
7
consider.

8
The
next
thing
is
to
develop
some
9
type
of
provision
­­
and
I
notice
you
don't
have
10
­­
you
didn't
say
it
­­
discrimination
clause
11
should
be
added
to
that
policy.

12
MR.
GORDON:
I
believe
that's
13
already
in
our
requirements.

14
AUDIENCE
MEMBER:
Yes.
Good
15
morning.
My
name
is
Gerard
Victor
and
I'm
an
16
attorney
with
the
Sewerage
and
Water
Board,
the
17
agency
that
Mr.
DeLarge
represents.
Most
of
the
18
time
I
think
I'm
on
retainment
from
Mr.
DeLarge.

19
I
wanted
to
piggyback
on
one
of
the
things
he
20
said,
and
I
hope
that
would
it
would
be
a
21
consideration,
and
I'm
not
sure
when
Ms.
Bradford
22
refers
to
Louisiana
has
being
one
of
those
that
23
may
not
meet
the
requirements,
if
that
includes
24
Sewerage
and
Water
Board,
but
my
concern
is
that
25
those
particular
recipients
who
have
programs
and
47
1
those
programs
and
local
governments
that
may
have
2
requirements
that
may
be
a
little
bit
more
in
3
depth
or
strict
than
what
the
more
general
4
requirements
that
appears
in
this
summary,
I
would
5
hope
that
would
be
considered
by
the
EPA
as
a
good
6
thing
and
not
a
bad
thing.
Because
as
7
Mr.
DeLarge
pointed
out
one
of
the
constant
8
problems
we
have
is
making
sure
that
the
persons
9
who
were
entitled
to
the
preference
given
by
these
10
programs
are
actually
the
persons
who
are
being
11
certified.

12
And
when
the
requirements
are
very
13
loosely
construe,
then
you
open
the
door
to
14
situations
where
there's
criticism
from
companies
15
that
may
not
necessarily
qualify.

16
The
other
question
that
I
had
was
a
17
comment
that
you
had
made
with
regard
D3
in
your
18
summary
on
Page
4
when
you
stated
a
recipient
must
19
require
its
prime
contractor
to
make
good
faith
20
efforts
even
if
the
fair
share
objectives
are
met.

21
The
only
concern
I
have
from
a
legal
22
stand
point
is
I
know
when
we
do
business
with
a
23
prime
contract,
it's
the
result
from
a
publically
24
advertised
bid.
And
then
in
that
publically
25
advertised
bid,
we
generally
will
put
a
goal
that
48
1
we
want
that
prime
contractor
to
meet,
in
terms
of
2
utilizing
certain
DBEs.

3
If
a
prime
contractor
submits
and
in
4
his
bid,
he
meets
that
goal
or
has
a
goal
that
­­

5
or
indicates
something
that
someone
higher,
we're
6
not
in
a
position
on
a
publically
bid
contract
to
7
go
back
to
him
and
say,
We
want
you
to
go
back
out
8
there
and
do
something
more.

9
Generally,
whatever
is
advertised
10
and
required,
if
it's
10
percent
or
20
percent
or
11
30
percent,
if
they
submit
the
lowest
bid
and
they
12
indicate
that
they're
meeting
that
percentage
13
through
the
use
of
certified
DBEs,
we're
not
in
a
14
position
to
go
back
and
tell
them,
Well,
I
think
15
you
could
have
done
better.
We
won't
accept
your
16
bid
until
you
come
back
with
35
percent.

17
MR.
GORDON:
That's
not
­­
I
think
18
make
there's
a
miscommunication
here.
What
we're
19
talking
about
is
where
a
prime
contractor
divides
20
up
a
contract
into,
let's
say,
six
or
seven
21
segments,
and
it
has
an
overall
goal
on
the
whole
22
contract,
and
then
on,
let's
say,
one
segment,

23
they
meet
whatever
the
goals
are
for
the
whole
six
24
or
seven
segments,
we've
had
people
come
to
us
and
25
say,
Do
we
have
to
do
anything
else?
49
1
And
the
answer
is
no.
They
just
2
have
to
keep
going
through
the
good
faith
efforts
3
with
each
of
the
segments
and
not
just
stop.

4
That's
what
that's
referring
to.

5
Are
there
any
other
questions
before
6
I
go
on
to
something
else?
Okay.

7
I
was
talking
about
submission
of
8
the
fair
share
goals,
and
I
think
what
I
was
9
saying
is
that
the
goals
would
have
to
be
10
submitted
to,
let's
say,
to
Debora
no
later
than
11
the
90
days
after
a
recipient's
acceptance
of
the
12
of
the
assistance
award.
That
would
be
codified
13
in
the
regulations.

14
A
recipient
could
not
spend
any
of
15
its
financial
assistance
award
for
procurement
16
until
the
fair
share
objective
negotiation
process
17
has
been
completed.
Costs
of
preparing
an
18
availability
analysis
or
disparity
study
may
be
19
grant
eligible
depending
on
the
specific
fact
20
situation.
.

21
I
think
most
of
this
audience
is
22
composed
of
business
owners,
so
I
will
just
say
23
this
and
those
local
governments
that
want
to
24
negotiate
their
own
goals
with
the
EPA,
that
those
25
goals
have
to
be
based
on
availability,
as
Dave
50
1
pointed
out
earlier,
of
qualified
minority­
and
2
women­
owned
businesses
to
do
the
work.
And
our
3
four
specific
categories
are
construction,

4
services,
supplies,
and
equipment.

5
So
the
cost
of
preparing
one
of
6
these
studies
may
be
grant
eligible
depending
on
7
the
on
the
specific
paths
involved.

8
We
envision
that
the
fair
share
9
goals
would
remain
in
effect
for
three
fiscal
10
years.
If
significant
changes
occur
during
that
11
time
period
rendering
the
data
obsolete,
then
the
12
recipient
and
EPA
will
renegotiate
the
goals.

13
Another
significant
change
from
14
current
requirement
is
that
a
non­
State
agency
15
recipient
could
only
use
the
State
agency's
MBE
16
and
WBE
fair
share
objectives.
If
it
uses
the
17
same
or
substantially
similar
relevant
geographic
18
for
its
procurement
for
those
four
categories
that
19
I
talked
about.

20
I'm
not
sure
I
want
to
dwell
on
that
21
so
much
here
today,
because
it
seems
that
this
22
audience
is
mostly
composed
of
business
owners,

23
but
for
those
of
you
who
are
here
representing
­­

24
if
any
of
you
are
­­
locality,
that
could
25
potentially
affect
how
you
negotiate
with
Debora.
51
1
And
race
and
gender
conscious
2
efforts
­­
to
the
extend
good
faith
efforts
­­

3
remember,
the
good
faith
efforts
are
what
we
call
4
the
six
affirmative
steps.
Those
are
what
I
5
talked
about
a
little
while
ago
about
­­
for
6
example,
requiring
a
prime
contractor
­­
if
it
7
awards
to
a
subcontract
­­
to
try
to
solicit
8
minority­
and
women­
owned
businesses.

9
By
such
methods
as
dividing
10
contracts
into
smaller
portions
so
that
minority­

11
and
women­
owned
businesses
will
have
a
greater
12
share
­­
a
greater
possibility
of
getting
those
13
contracts.

14
Sorry.
I
didn't
get
to
my
room
15
until
very
late
last
night
due
to
the
16
thunderstorm,
so
I'm
a
little
bit
under
the
17
weather
here.

18
Okay.
We
talked
about
race
and
19
gender
conscious
efforts.
If
a
state,
for
20
example,
negotiated
MBE
and
WBE
goals
with
Debora,

21
let's
say
12
percent
for
MBE
and
6
percent
for
22
WBE.
And
then
year
after
year,
they
come
in
with
23
3
percent
and
1
percent,
then
there
seems
to
be,

24
on
its
face,
something
wrong.
Either
analysis
25
whereby
the
goals
were
determined
might
be
faulty
52
1
or
there's
something
else
that's
just
not
working
2
properly.
So
we
would
encourage
a
recipient
or
3
prime
contractor
to
take
reasonable
rates
under
4
gender
conscious
actions
in
those
types
of
5
situations
to
the
extent
necessary
to
more
closely
6
achieve
the
fair
share
goals.

7
Those
can
include
price
incentives
8
and
technical
evaluation
credit.
Prior
9
notification
of
the
contemplated
action
to.
EPA
10
is
required.

11
As
Dave
pointed
out
before,
there
12
are
some
exemptions
in
this
rule.
We
would
13
propose
that
to
exempt
recipients
of
an
EPA
14
financial
assistance
agreement
in
the
amount
of
15
$
250.000
or
less
for
any
single
assistance
16
agreement,
or
of
more
than
one
with
a
combined
17
total
of
$
250,000
or
less
in
any
one
fiscal
year.

18
Now,
the
fair
share
requirements,

19
again,
I
know
it's
hard
to
follow
sometimes
all
of
20
this.
Those
are
the
requirements
that
the
state
21
and
sometimes
local
governments
if
they
want
to
22
have
their
own
goals
negotiated
with
Debora,
those
23
are
the
issues
that
had
to
do
with
this
$
250,000
24
exemption.

25
Theres'
some
specific
requirements
53
1
that
are
related
to
the
Clean
Water
SRF,
the
2
Drinking
SRF,
and
Brownfields.
Is
there
anybody
3
here
from
the
state
that
work
to
on
those
4
programs?
Okay.

5
We
would
propose
that
recipients
6
not
be
requires
to
apply
the
fair
share
objective
7
requirements
to
an
entity
receiving
an
identified
8
loan
in
the
amount
of
$
250,000
or
less
or
to
an
9
entity
receiving
more
than
one
identified
loan
10
with
a
combined
total
of
$
250,000
or
less
in
any
11
one
fiscal
year.

12
Recipients
of
identified
loan
13
projects
could
use
State
negotiated
MBE/
WBE
goals
14
if
they
used
a
substantially
similar
relevant
15
geographic
market.

16
Well,
what
does
that
mean?
Let's
17
say
Texas
­­
and
I
don't
know
whether
this
is
the
18
case
or
not
­­
but
in
some
states
the
relevant
19
geographic
market
may
be
the
whole
state.
If
a
20
state
has
state­
wide
procurement
­­
if
a
project
21
is
awarded
to
Dallas
­­
let's
say
the
City
of
22
Dallas
­­
they
would
have
to
use
the
same
23
procurement
that
the
(
indiscernible.)
So
they
24
would
have
to
solicit
state
wide.

25
If
they're
not
doing
that
now,
they
54
1
would
have
to
change
the
way
they
implement
their
2
program.

3
Otherwise,
they
would
have
to
4
negotiate
separately
with
Debora,
which
is
often
5
done
anyway.
We
have
a
lit
of
examples
of
local
6
governments
that
do
not
want
to
use
state
7
negotiated
goals.
I
can
think
of
a
number
of
8
places
­­
Chicago,
for
example,
Detroit,
which
9
have
large
minority
population,
and
they've
10
decided
that
they
want
to
have
higher
goals
for
11
their
states,
so
they
negotiate
separately.

12
We're
getting
back
to
the
SRF
13
programs
and
Brownfield.
If
procurements
will
14
occur
over
more
than
one
year,
the
recipients
can
15
choose
to
apply
the
fair
share
objective
in
place
16
either
for
the
year
in
which
the
identified
loan
17
is
awarded
or
for
the
year
in
which
the
18
procurement
action
occurs.
And
the
recipient
must
19
specify
this
choice
in
the
financial
assistance
20
agreement
or
incorporate
it
by
reference.

21
Other
exemptions.
Grants
to
tribes
22
and
intertribal
consortia
that
are
eligible
to
be
23
included
in
Performance
Partnership
Grants
are
24
exempt
fro
fair
share
negotiations.

25
Is
there
anyone
in
this
group
from
55
1
an
Indian
tribe?
Okay.

2
Well,
let's
go
on.
TAG
grants.

3
Those
are
super
fund
grants
to
community
entities
4
to
advise
citizens
about
how
they
can
get
involved
5
in
the
negotiation
process
for
cleaning
up
super
6
fund
sites
are
also
exempted
from
the
fair
share
7
negotiations
requirements.

8
The
rule
will
propose
a
three­
year
9
phase
in
period
for
insular
areas.
Insular
areas
10
are
Puerto
Rico,
Virgin
Islands,
and
the
various
11
trust
territories
of
the
country
and,
I
think,

12
South
East
Asia.
There
would
be
a
three­
year
13
phase
in
period
to
allow
them
time
to
adjust
to
14
the
change.
The
interim,
they
would
have
to
15
comply
with
the
rule's
other
requirements.
We
are
16
in
the
process
of
trying
to
identify
what
specific
17
factors
should
be
taken
into
account
in
18
determining
the
phase­
in
period
for
these
19
recipients.

20
A
number
of
new
terms,
like,

21
disparity
and
study.

22
Record
keeping
and
reporting
­­
this
23
is
a
change.
A
recipient
of
a
Continuing
24
Environmental
Program
Grant
or
other
annual
grant
25
would
be
required
to
create
and
maintain
a
bidders
56
1
list.

2
Does
Texas
have
such
a
list
now?

3
AUDIENCE
MEMBER:
No.
We
have
refer
4
everyone
to
state
lists.
I've
heard
that
the
5
Water
Board
has
lists
for
our
financial
advisors
6
and
engineers,
but
those
are
the
only
lists
that
7
we
maintain
at
the
Water
Board.

8
MR.
GORDON:
Okay.
Such
a
list
9
would
have
to
be
kept
until
the
grant
project
10
period
has
expired
and
the
recipient
is
no
longer
11
receiving
funding
under
the
grant.

12
Same
requirement
would
apply
for
13
recipients
of
identified
loans
under
the
Drinking
14
Water
and
Clean
Water
Act
Programs.
If
the
loan
15
recipient
is
subject
to
or
wishes
to
follow
a
16
competitive
biding
requirements.
Only
under
those
17
circumstances.

18
The
purpose
for
the
bidders
list
is
19
to
provide
the
recipient
and
entities
receiving
20
identified
loans
who
conduct
competitive
21
bidding
­­
remember
now
we're
not
requiring
them
22
to
do
competitive
bidding.
What
we're
saying
is
23
if
they
are
subject
to
under
their
own
state
laws
24
or
they
choose
to
follow
competitive
bidding
25
requirements,
then
they
would
have
to
keep
this
57
1
list.

2
The
list
would
only
be
kept
until
3
the
project
period
for
the
identified
loan
has
4
ended.

5
Waivers
­­
the
OSDBU
director
can
6
grant
waivers
from
any
requirements
of
this
7
proposal
that
are
not
based
on
a
statute
or
8
Executive
Order.

9
We
are
the
process
of
conducting
10
public
hearings.
As
Dave
pointed
out,
Jeannette
11
Brown
and
my
colleague
­­
my
fellow
attorney,

12
Kimberly
Patrick,
are
in
Syracuse,
New
York
this
13
week
for
hearings
there.
And
we
will
be
14
continuing
hearings
through
the
end
of
the
comment
15
period,
which
is
January
20th.

16
Are
there
any
more
questions?

17
AUDIENCE
MEMBER:
Mary
Sullivan.

18
Since
my
job
as
an
information
and
records
manager
19
involves
helping
agencies
write
retention
20
schedules,
one
of
the
requirements,
at
least
on
21
state
levels,
so
I
don't
know
if
it's
federal
22
level,
too
­­
is
that
if
you
receive
a
grant,
you
23
keep
all
your
financial
records
­­
everything
­­

24
documents
of
those
financial
records,
which
I
25
think
the
bidders
list
would
be
documentation,
58
1
for
­­
depending
on
the
initial
statement
of
the
2
length
of
the
grant
for
three,
five,
seven,
years
3
after
the
grant
has
been
completed
and
the
project
4
closed,
and
you're
saying
that
you
destroy
the
end
5
at
the
end
of
the
project?

6
MR.
GORDON:
Well,
no.
We
didn't
­­

7
we
didn't
say
destroy
it.
We're
were
just
saying
8
you
have
to
keep
it
for
a
certain
period
of
time.

9
AUDIENCE
MEMBER:
But
isn't
that
the
10
logical
sequence,
that
if
you
weren't
required
to
11
keep
it,
that
the
company
would
just
let
it
go?

12
Would
they
know
they
needed
to
keep
that
list
13
documentation
if
it
wasn't
stated.

14
MR.
GORDON:
Well,
it's
possible
15
that
under
state
laws
or
local
laws
that
these
16
retention
periods
could
be
much
higher
than
EPA.

17
We
were
just
proposing
a
standard
for
EPA.
The
18
states
can
always
have
more
stringent
­­
and
local
19
governments
can
always
have
more
stringent
20
requirements.

21
AUDIENCE
MEMBER:
Right.
But
what
22
I'm
saying
is
if
that
if
you're
saying
that
you
23
just
keep
that
bidders
list
until
the
end
­­
or
24
within
three
years,
that's
not
the
length
of
the
25
grant,
is
it,
unless
it's
stated
initially?
Are
59
1
you
just
saying
that
when
the
grant
is
finished,

2
everything
goes
away?
That
there
is
no
retention
3
period
or
subsequent
history
to
the
grant?

4
MR.
GORDON:
Hold
on.
I
don't
think
5
that's
right.
I
think
we
said
three
years
after
6
the
project
is
completed.

7
Yeah.
Look
on
M1,
the
list
has
to
8
be
kept
until
the
grant
project
period
has
expired
9
and
the
recipient
is
no
longer
receiving
funding
10
under
the
grant.

11
AUDIENCE
MEMBER:
Right.
But
12
there's
no
post
grant
period
that
you
keep
the
13
list
or
the
paperwork.

14
I'm
sorry.
I
may
be
dwelling
on
15
something,
but
it
is
significant,
at
least
on
16
state
level
with
grants,
so
I
thought
it
would
be
17
significant
on
the
federal
level
that
you
would
18
keep
your
paperwork
for
a
certain
period
of
time
19
after
the
grant
is
completed,
I
think.

20
MR.
GORDON:
Well,
we're
talking
21
about
maintaining
a
bidders
list.
Is
that
­­

22
AUDIENCE
MEMBER:
And
documentation.

23
To
me
it's
part
of
the
financial
package.

24
MR.
GORDON:
Okay.
Well,
we'll
take
25
your
comment
into
consideration.
60
1
AUDIENCE
MEMBER:
Thank
you.

2
AUDIENCE
MEMBER:
Patricia
Loving,

3
State
of
Texas.
I
need
some
clarification,
Mark,

4
because
certain
people
within
our
board
thought
5
that
the
$
250,000
exemption
meant
that
entities
6
which
received
loans
under
$
250,000
would
not
have
7
to
follow
the
six
affirmative
steps.
And
so
I
8
just
want
to
come
back
from
this
to
say,
that
is
9
incorrect
because
that's
when
I
had
a
couple
10
people
reading
this
and
they
said,
Oh,
they're
11
exempt.
And
I
said,
No,
they're
not.

12
MR.
GORDON:
No,
they're
not
exempt
13
under
the
proposal.
They're
exempt
from
the
fair
14
share
negotiations.

15
AUDIENCE
MEMBER:
Correct.
Correct.

16
The
other
question
that
I
had
was
in
regarding
17
reporting
requirements.
When
will
there
be
the
18
forms
available
to
look
at
on
the
EPA
site
for
19
review?

20
MR.
GORDON:
They're
available
on
21
our
website
now.

22
AUDIENCE
MEMBER:
Oh,
they
are?

23
Because
when
I
looked
a
couple
weeks
ago,
they
24
weren't.

25
MR.
GORDON:
Well,
I
asked
that
they
61
1
be
posted
a
couple
weeks
ago.

2
AUDIENCE
MEMBER:
Maybe
I
looked
3
before
they
were
available
because
I
had
concerns
4
with
those
to
see
because
that's
going
to
require
5
us
to
do
a
lot
of
revising
and
changing
on
the
6
people
who
write
our
contracts
to
make
sure
we
7
have
all
the
new
stuff
in.

8
And
I
hope
we
have
an
opportunity
to
9
review
those
forms,
because
I
think
it's
very
10
important
that
the
states
have
an
opportunity
to
11
review
them
to
insure
that
they're
going
to
work
12
into
the
contract.
Because
I
know
when
you
13
revised
your
form,
we
have
to
do
quarterly
to
14
Debora,
it
would
have
been
a
little
more
helpful
15
for
those
of
us
who
have
large
programs
that
have
16
had
that
Page
Number
2
done
a
little
differently
17
to
keep
track
of
our
large
volume.

18
MR.
GORDON:
Well,
I'm
not
sure
19
whether
they're
on
our
website
or
whether
they're
20
on
the
docket,
but
they
are
definitely
in
the
21
docket
for
this
rule
making,
and
you
can
get
22
access
to
the
docket
on
the
website.

23
AUDIENCE
MEMBER:
Okay.
So
if
I
24
have
trouble,
I
can
e­
mail
somebody?

25
MR.
GORDON:
Yes.
62
1
MR.
SUTTON:
One
comment
about
the
2
forms.
Mark,
you
and
Debora
can
probably
help
me
3
out
on
this.
The
revised
(
indiscernible,)
that's
4
already
been
approved,
correct?

5
MR.
GORDON:
Yes.

6
MR.
SUTTON:
And
I
do
believe
from
7
input
primarily
from
people
like
Debora,
I
think
8
the
forms
are
better.
I
think
they're
more
9
explanatory.
That
Page
2
has
a
lot
more
details
10
in
terms
of
how
to
fill
them
out.
Correct,

11
Debora?

12
AUDIENCE
MEMBER:
Correct.

13
AUDIENCE
MEMBER:
You
could
have
14
done
it
a
little
easier
for
those
of
us
who
are
on
15
computerized
systems.
That
was
my
only
comment.

16
But
I
hope
the
next
person
will
the
opportunity
to
17
review
that
when
you
change
the
forms
again.

18
MR.
SUTTON:
I
suggest
you
e­
mail
19
Debora
or
contact
me,
and
I'll
make
sure
you
get
20
the
forms
and
take
a
look
and
we'll
appreciate
any
21
comments
you
have
on
them.

22
AUDIENCE
MEMBER:
Thank
you
so
much.

23
And
the
other
concern
I
have
­­
and
I
don't
know
24
where
it
comes
from
­­
the
issue
35.503F
MBE/
WBE
25
truckers
and
haulers.
So
are
you
the
prime
63
1
contracts
are
going
to
have
to
look
at
all
this
2
information
to
approve
the
truckers
and
haulers?

3
MR.
GORDON:
Check
our
guidance,
our
4
current
guidance
and
it
talks
about
truckers
and
5
haulers.
It
comes
from
that.

6
AUDIENCE
MEMBER:
Okay.
I
must
have
7
missed
that.

8
MR.
GORDON:
Well,
because
the
9
theory
is
that
there
should
be
a
legitimate
10
business.
And
if
you're
not
actually
engaged
in
11
business,
it
shouldn't
be
counted
as
­­

12
AUDIENCE
MEMBER:
Right.
The
only
13
comment
that
I
would
like
to
make
here,
because
we
14
will
be
submitting
written
comments
on
more
15
specific
­­
is
that
the
issue
of
persons
who
are
16
legally
in
the
United
States
but
who
may
not
be
17
United
States
citizens
be
looked
at,
because
I
18
have
­­
particular
in
our
program
in
the
border
19
areas
­­
we
accept
lots
and
lots
of
20
self­
certifications
for
individuals.
Because
21
everyone
knows
them
in
town,
so
that's
one
of
the
22
issues
I
would
at
some
point
look
at
that.

23
Thank
you.

24
MR.
GORDON:
Well,
we
will
look
at
25
it.
Just
to
say,
we
don't
have
any
idea
of
how
64
1
many
companies
this
involves.
And
this
could
turn
2
into,
basically,
be
a
resource
issue.
And
we
3
don't
know
how
many
people
the
agency
will
have
to
4
deal
with
these
certifications
and
if
we're
5
talking
about
huge
numbers
of
companies
to
be
6
added
to
the
numbers
that
we
would
otherwise
have
7
to
certify,
I'm
not
sure
whether
headquarters
8
would
be
able
to
do
this.
We
have
had
discussions
9
with
the
regions
and
it
becomes
a
resource
issue.

10
That's
all
I
can
say
at
this
time.

11
DOT,
by
the
way,
has
a
much
larger
12
staff
for
its
program
than
we
could
possibly
13
imagine
having
for
ours.

14
AUDIENCE
MEMBER:
My
name's
Keith
15
Sanders
with
the
Arkansas
Soil
and
Water
16
Conservation.
The
question
I
have
is
on
Page
9
of
17
the
summary
where
it
requires
­­
Number
1,
where
18
it
requires
a
state
to
maintain
­­
or
create
and
19
maintain
a
bidders
list.

20
Does
this
mean
that
the
DOT
and
the
21
SBA
and
the
ADED
­­
Arkansas
Department
of
22
Economic
Development,
which
has
been
approved
by
23
EPA
for
us
in
the
past
­­
are
these
no
longer
good
24
enough?
Is
that
what
we
this
is
saying,
that
we
25
have
to
create
another
bidders
list
of
some
sort?
65
1
MR.
GORDON:
Well,
you
would
have
to
2
create
a
bidders
list
of
all
companies
that
bid
on
3
your
project.

4
AUDIENCE
MEMBER:
Historically?
Is
5
that
what
we're
talking
about?

6
MR.
GORDON:
Well,
that's
a
good
7
point.
I
don't
think
we
got
into
that
8
specifically.
Certainly
from
here
on
in
you
would
9
have
to
creat
such
a
list
of
all
companies
that
10
put
in
a
bid
on
your
project.
We
have
to
think
11
about
how
far
back
that
should
go,
if
at
all.

12
AUDIENCE
MEMBER:
Thank
you.
And
13
the
next
one.
In
Number
2,
I
believe,
now
we're
14
required
­­
cities
or
entities
that
borrow
this
15
money
from
us,
we
already
require
them,
like,
11
16
months
worth
of
paperwork.
And
we're
sympathetic,

17
and
Arkansas
is
proactive
in
our
contracts
hiring
18
minority
businesses
and
disadvantaged
enterprises,

19
but
another
demand
on
the
entity
in
requiring
them
20
to
keep
a
list
when
­­
I
don't
know
if
that's
to
21
meet
the
narrowly
tailored
language
of
Adarand
­­

22
I'm
curious.
Is
that
the
reason
for
that?
Or
do
23
you
know?

24
MR.
GORDON:
Well,
it's
designed
25
among
other
things
to
get
at
this
comment
that
we
66
1
hear
all
the
time,
that
people
say
that
they
can't
2
find
any
in
MBEs
and
WBEs
in
their
specific
3
geographic
location.
And
when
they
go
out
for
4
bids
they
don't
get
anybody
who
is
a
minority­
or
5
woman­
owned
business
to
compete,
for
example.

6
So
we're
asking
them
to
keep
the
7
bidders
list
so
that
in
the
future
when
they
go
8
out
and
bid
contracts
that
they
certainly
try
to
9
solicit
all
the
companies
that
have
submitted
bids
10
to
begin
with.

11
AUDIENCE
MEMBER:
And
these
lists
12
that
the
entities
would
keep,
these
would
be
DBEs
13
that
are
certified
through
the
same
kind
of
lists
14
that
we
already
provide
the
prime
contractors
with
15
as
the
lending
agency
­­

16
MR.
GORDON:
I
can't
comment
on
that
17
because
I
don't
know
whether
your
requirements
18
really
conform
with
ours,
but
if
assuming
for
the
19
moment
that
they
did,
that
would
be
the
list.
But
20
I'm
not
sure
your
certification
requirements
meet
21
EPA
requirements.

22
AUDIENCE
MEMBER:
I
think
my
23
question
is:
It
looks
like
an
additional
list.

24
MR.
GORDON:
It
is
an
additional
25
list
for
the
SRF
loan
recipients
because
their
67
1
programs
operate
very
differently
than
agencies.

2
AUDIENCE
MEMBER:
Okay.
Thank
you.

3
AUDIENCE
MEMBER:
My
name
is
Dan
4
Dominguez
with
the
Texas
Commission
on
5
Environmental
Quality.
And
I
just
wanted
to
6
follow
up
on
the
bidders
list
specifically.
Will
7
every
agency
have
to
maintain
this
bidders
list
8
which
I
assume
is
potential
bidders,
not
actual
9
bidders
that
have
bid
in
the
past
for
similar
10
types
of
contracts
or
work?

11
MR.
GORDON:
No.
It
is
a
list
of
12
companies
who
have
submitted
bids.

13
AUDIENCE
MEMBER:
That
have
14
submitted
bids
in
the
past?

15
MR.
GORDON:
Well,
that's
something
16
we'll
have
to
look
at
and
find
how
far
back
the
17
list
is
going
to
go.

18
AUDIENCE
MEMBER:
The
state
19
currently
has
a
centralized
master's
bidders
list
20
that
includes
HUB;
however,
my
understanding,
sir,

21
is
that
these
HUBs
aren't
won't
be
recognized
in
22
the
new
rules
because
they're
not
SBA
recognized
23
(
indiscernible.
So
we're
just
a
little
unsure
as
24
how
we
would
have
the
­­

25
MR.
GORDON:
Now,
wait.
HUB
Zones
68
1
­­
you
still
have
to
make
good
faith
efforts
to
2
utilize
HUB
Zones.
That's
different
from
the
3
goals.
We
don't
count
­­
we
only
have
two
types
4
of
goals.
We
have
minority­
owned
businesses
and
5
women­
owned
businesses.

6
The
goals
for
them,
but
for
purposes
7
of
trying
to
have
more
entities
get
into
the
8
solicitation
process,
you
have
to
do
outreach
9
efforts
to
HUB
Zones,
as
well.

10
AUDIENCE
MEMBER:
Mark,
I
just
want
11
to
make
a
clarification.
I
don't
think
he's
12
talking
about
the
federal
HUB
Zone
Program.
In
13
the
state
of
Texas,
they
call
their
DBE
program
14
"
HUB."
It's
not
the
federal
HUB
Zone
program
15
that's
done
by
SBA.
But
in
the
state
of
Texas,

16
they
have
­­
what
their
program
is
called
is
the
17
HUB
program.

18
MR.
GORDON:
Okay.
Would
you
19
restate
your
question
again?

20
AUDIENCE
MEMBER:
I
just
wanted
to
21
clarify
that
on
the
new
proposed
rule
that
every
22
agency
would
have
to
maintain
their
own
list
of
23
potential
HUB
bidders,
that
I
assume
we
would
get
24
from
the
SBA
or
DOT
and
maintain
this
list
so
when
25
we
solicit
bids,
we
would
send
these
­­
to
69
1
these
­­

2
MR.
GORDON:
Why
would
you
be
3
limiting
yourself
to
lists
that
you
get
from
SBA
4
or
DOT?

5
AUDIENCE
MEMBER:
Well,
how
would
6
you
determine
these
HUB
or
these
minority
7
businesses
­­

8
MR.
GORDON:
Whoever
submits
the
bid
9
to
you.

10
AUDIENCE
MEMBER:
Right.
But
how
11
would
we
manage
­­
or
how
would
we
go
about
12
finding
out
all
these
potential
­­

13
MR.
GORDON:
Well,
you
would
look
in
14
places
like
(
indiscernible)
and
places
like
that
15
to
try
to
find
all
the
minority­
and
women­
owned
16
businesses
that
are
available
in
your
area.

17
MS.
RAMSEY:
Mark,
I
think
that
18
we're
using
the
term
as
it's
set
forth
in
the
19
proposed
rules.
When
you
talk
about
bidders,

20
we're
talking
about
companies
that
have
submitted
21
a
bit.
And
when
you
creat
a
tabulation
of
bids
at
22
the
time
you
opened
the
bid.
That's
what
will
23
comprise
that
bidders
list.

24
That
bidders
list
may
very
well
have
25
bidders
on
it
that
are
on
your
HUB
list
and
they
70
1
may
have
them
on
the
North
Central
Regional
2
Certification
list,
they
may
come
from
a
variety
3
of
lists.
They
may
also
not
be
on
any
of
those,

4
but
they
represent
a
group
of
(
indiscernible.)

5
So
from
this
point
forward,
if
those
6
tabulations
are
kept
systematically,
then
that's
7
one
(
indiscernible)
from
the
various
other
lists.

8
AUDIENCE
MEMBER:
Thank
you.

9
AUDIENCE
MEMBER:
Patricia
Loving,

10
Texas
Water
Development
Board.
For
those
of
us
to
11
maintain
a
centralized
bidders
list
at
our
board
12
for
all
the
contracts
­­
for
all
the
loans
that
we
13
have
let
out,
it
would
be
a
little
impossible.
We
14
track
on
our
data
system
by
contract
for
the
City
15
of
Houston
­­
say,
we
just
gave
them
$
100,000,000.

16
That
might
be
50
individual
contracts
that
we
17
track.

18
And
of
those
contracts,
we
will
have
19
the
winning
bid.
The
City
of
Houston
has
a
20
sophisticate
enough
system
that
they
have
a
21
bidders
list
and
they
have
all
those
people
on
22
their
own
bidders
list.
I
think
my
concern
is
23
two­
fold.

24
First,
from
the
state
perspective,

25
that
we
would
not
be
able
to
have
the
person­
power
71
1
to
­­
or
the
money
at
this
point
­­
to
maintain
2
any
kind
of
a
list
of
every
single
person
who's
3
ever
bid
on
any
one
of
our
contract.

4
The
second
point
would
be
that
for
5
very
small
entities
­­
that's
why
I
wanted
to
talk
6
about
the
$
250,000,
because
our
Drinking
Water
7
Program
­­
we
have
quite
a
few
programs
that
come
8
in
under
$
250,000
­­
and
I,
basically,
well
be
9
that
person
who
does
all
that
outreach,
and
get
10
them
all
the
names,
and
get
them
all
the
lists,

11
(
indiscernible)
because
many
of
our
entities
don't
12
even
have
internet
access.

13
I
understand
the
intent
of
it,
but
14
I'm
just
really
concerned
how
it's
going
to
fall
15
out
at
the
state
and
local
level.

16
AUDIENCE
MEMBER:
Tom
Jordan
with
17
the
City
of
Fort
Worth.
I
think
many
of
you
are
18
making
a
mountain
our
of
a
mole
hill.
Because
19
this
is
not
a
major
problem,
believe
me.

20
The
State
of
Texas
for
­­
or
any
21
other
agency
­­
when
your
contractors
bid
to
22
whoever,
the
engineer
or
the
project
manager
23
develops
a
listing
of
whoever
bid.
The
only
thing
24
you
need
to
do
is
when
they
submit
­­
when
they
25
finish
with
that
bid,
that
is
the
bid
list.
Have
72
1
you
send
you
a
copy.
That's
all.

2
I
would
also
like
to
say
that
the
3
City
of
Fort
Worth
­­
we're
probably
one
of
the
4
few
people
in
the
country
right
now
­­
we
require
5
that
when
at
a
prime
contractor
submits
a
bid
to
6
us,
and
I
can
fax
­­
e­
mail
you
a
form
­­
we
have
7
on
that
form
where
they
check
off
if
that
firm
is
8
DBA
certified,
(
indiscernible)
certified,
or
is
a
9
non­
certified
firm.
They
have
to
list
prime
­­

10
MWB/
DBE
contractor
and
non­
MWB
contractors
on
that
11
form.

12
It
is
a
requirement.
And
that
way
13
that
helps
us
also
to
look
and
see
­­
when
all
the
14
contractors
submit
that,
we
have
another
project
15
coming
along,
who
bid
it,
who
(
indiscernible),

16
and
what
they
did.

17
I
think
it's
very
important
and
it
18
helps
you
establish
some
type
of
record
of
that.

19
AUDIENCE
MEMBER:
Well,
what
we
have
20
at
the
State
of
Texas
­­
we
have
similar
forms
21
that
are
required
by
everyone
who
receives
any
of
22
our
grant
money
that
they
have
to
provide
23
documentation
on
their
good
faith
efforts,

24
documentation
on
who
they
hired,
and
have
to
have
25
contract
(
indiscernible).
73
1
We
have
all
of
that
information
2
because
we
have
to
use
to
report
to
the
3
(
indiscernible).

4
AUDIENCE
MEMBER:
All
that
does
is
5
if
you
have
a
list
of
everybody,
that
helps
you
to
6
go
after
them
and
say,
Hey,
you
that
have
a
7
minority
contractors
here
that
can
bid
on
this,
or
8
you
have
to
justify
to
me
why
you
cannot
use
a
9
minority
business.

10
AUDIENCE
MEMBER:
Well,
that's
11
because
you're
at
the
city
level
and
we're
at
the
12
state
level.
And
this
is
a
goal­
oriented
process
13
(
indiscernible)
program.
So
as
long
as
we
have
14
enough
process
documentation
showing
where
15
somebody
made
a
good
faith
effort
and
went
out
and
16
got
all
their
good
faith
efforts,
it
is
not
a
17
requirement
of
them
to
meet
that
goal.

18
And
in
particular,
in
some
of
our
19
areas
were
we
do
not
­­
in
some
rural
areas
where
20
we
do
not
have
women­
owned
businesses
or
21
minority­
owned
businesses,
then
we
cannot
­­

22
they'll
probably
never
get
to
meet
the
goal,
and
23
(
indiscernible.)

24
I
think
one
of
the
things
that
I
25
wish
we
could
do
was
report
small
businesses
in
74
1
rural
areas,
because
I
have
lots
of
small
2
businesses
in
rural
areas,
but
there's
no
place
to
3
report
it
(
indiscernible).

4
AUDIENCE
MEMBER:
I
just
wanted
to
5
get
a
clarification
on
this
bidders
list.
So
if
6
the
recipient
is
using
­­
say,
(
indiscernible)
or
7
SBA
or
the
State
of
Texas
HUB
list,
they
use
that
8
and
they
do
their
solicitation.
And
companies
9
come
in
and
bid.
And
then
you're
saying
that
10
recipient
has
to
do
one
extra
step,
which
is
11
everyone
that
came
in
to
bid,
record
their
name
or
12
keep
this
list.
So
the
next
time
that
they
go
out
13
for
another
proposal
or
another
contract,
they
14
will
also
send
bid
notices
to
those
people
on
this
15
list
­­
the
secondary
list,
in
addition,
to
using
16
(
indiscernible,)
SBA,
and
the
HUB
lists.

17
Is
that
what
we're
essentially
18
saying
here,
Mark?

19
MR.
GORDON:
Yes.
Well,
one
of
the
20
reasons
is
that
we
hear
people
come
in
and
say
21
sometimes
that
they
tried
to
get
a
contract
one,

22
two,
or
three
years
ago.
And
they
weren't
even
23
solicited
on
another
solicitation
and
they
24
wondered
why
they
weren't
solicited.

25
AUDIENCE
MEMBER:
If
we
don't
place
75
1
(
indiscernible)
or
require
them
to
pick
the
same
2
companies
every
time.

3
MR.
GORDON:
No.
You're
­­

4
AUDIENCE
MEMBER:
That
would
create
5
the
same
network
that
you're
trying
to
fight
6
against
in
a
different
manner.
They
use
the
same
7
contractors
every
time.

8
MR.
GORDON:
Well,
we're
not
9
requiring
them
to
use
any
particular
company.

10
What
we're
saying
is
that
they
need
to
know
to
11
solicit
as
wide
a
base
of
companies
as
possible.

12
MR.
SUTTON:
Okay.
While
the
rest
13
of
you
are
still
busy
thinking
about
comments,
I
14
noticed
we
have
a
few
people
leaving.
And
to
make
15
everyone
knows
how
to
submit
a
written
comment,

16
please
make
sure
you
have
a
copy
of
the
questions
17
and
answers.
It's
a
two­
page
document,
front
and
18
back.
It
talks
about
the
EPA
docket,
how
you
can
19
submit
your
comments.

20
So
make
sure
you
have
a
copy
of
21
these
Q's
and
A's,
and
make
sure
you
follow
the
22
process
for
submitting
written
comments.
With
23
that,
we'll
open
the
floor
for
more
questions.

24
And
comments.

25
Any
more
questions,
comments,
76
1
anything
you
want
to
tell
us
today.

2
AUDIENCE
MEMBER:
Yes.
Dan
3
Dominguez
with
TCEQ.
I
think
it
would
be
helpful
4
if
you
could
define
words.
When
you
say
5
"
bidders,"
at
the
state,
but
those
words
mean
6
completely
different
things
to
us,
or
"
HUB."

7
If
you
could
maybe
put
in
some
8
definitions
on
your
proposed
rule
change.
It
9
would
definitely
help
us
be
able
to
make
a
more
10
educated
comment.

11
Thank
you.

12
MR.
SUTTON:
This
is
just
a
13
reminder,
we
do
need
your
comments
by
January
14
20th,
2004.

15
MS.
BRADFORD:
I'd
like
to
thank
you
16
all
for
coming.
If
there
are
no
additional
17
questions
­­

18
AUDIENCE
MEMBER:
I
have
one.
I'm
19
sorry.

20
AUDIENCE
MEMBER:
I
just
would
like
21
to
say
that
in
the
language
of
the
actual
written
22
rule,
I
think
it's
very
confusing
that
you
keep
23
talking
about
MBEs
and
WBEs
without
first
24
explaining
that
they
have
to
be
certified
as
one
25
of
those,
and
then
a
DBE.
77
1
And
I
think
you
should
get
2
consistent
about
it
because
I
think
those
people
3
that
aren't
in
the
federal
arena
are
going
to
be
4
very
confused.
Because
I
am
an
(
indiscernible)

5
and
I
was
DBE
certified,
but
I'm
also
a
WBE,
so
I
6
think
that
people
aren't
­­
from
what
is
written
7
there
in
the
actual
language
­­
understand.
I
8
recognize
the
$
750,000
as
the
federal
thing
for
a
9
(
indiscernible)
8A,
but
I
think
you
should
make
10
that
very
clear
distinction.

11
You
say
on
some
of
that,
First,
you
12
get
certified
as
an
MBE.
First,
you
get
certified
13
as
a
WBE.
Then
you
also
have
to
have
some
14
certification
through
some
agency,
so
that's
my
15
comment.

16
MS.
BRADFORD:
Thank
you,
again.

17
Any
additional
comments.
I
do
want
to
thank
you
18
all
for
taking
the
time
out
of
your
schedules
to
19
come
here
today.
And
your
comments,
like
I
said,

20
are
very
important.
And
you
as
vendors,
the
21
program
is
really
designed,
and
will
try
to
help
22
the
DBEs.
The
whole
purpose
of
the
program
is
to
23
give
an
opportunity
for
everyone
to
come
to
the
24
table
and
to
participate
in
the
procurement.

25
Like
I
was
telling
you
earlier,
78
1
there's
a
lot
of
funding
that
goes
out
in
the
EPA
2
grant
program
to
our
recipients.
And
a
lot
of
3
those
recipients
are
state
recipients,
local
4
governments,
tribal
recipients,
universities,

5
nonprofit
organizations.
All
of
those
entities
6
are
receiving
funds
from
EPA,
and
as
part
of
that
7
grant
condition,
there
are
BDE
requirements.

8
So
they're
doing
any
type
of
9
procurement
activity,
they
should
be
applying
to
10
those
dollars.
And
you
can
knock
on
their
doors
11
and
say,
I
want
to
get
on
this
list.
Or
how
do
12
I
­­
what
do
I
need
to
do
to
do
business
with
that
13
agency.

14
But,
like
I
said,
we
do
thank
you
15
all
for
coming.
I
appreciate
it.
And
without
any
16
further
notice
­­

17
MR.
SUTTON:
Just
one
comment,

18
Debora.
I'd
just
like
to
reiterate
what
Debora
19
said
about
the
size
of
this
program.
To
put
it
in
20
perspective,
EPA
is
not
one
of
the
larger
federal
21
agencies.
We
do
about
one
billion
a
year
in
22
contract.
That's
direct
procurement,
but
this
23
program
­­
the
grant
program,
over
four
billion
24
dollars
a
year.
So
this
is
really
where
EPA's
25
dollars
are,
and
if
you're
a
small
business,
you
79
1
want
the
money.
You
don't
care
if
it's
coming
2
from
a
contract
or
it
it's
coming
from
a
grant
3
recipient.

4
But
if
you
have
any
questions
about
5
this
grant
program,
if
you
want
to
know,
Well,

6
which
state
agencies
are
getting
the
big
grant
7
dollars
for
Region
6,
talk
to
Debora.
Because
8
Debora
can
let
you
know
where
these
dollars
are
9
and
what
you
have
to
do
as
a
disadvantaged
10
business,
as
a
woman­
owned
business,
is
go
to
11
these
state
agencies
­­
which
those
that
want
to
12
get
the
big
dollars
­­
and
market
yourselves
and
13
try
to
go
after
some
of
these
funds.

14
MS.
BRADFORD:
Thank
you
all
for
15
coming.
We're
going
to
call
this
hearing
to
a
16
close.

17
(
End
of
proceedings)

18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
80
1
THE
STATE
OF
TEXAS
*

2
COUNTY
OF
DALLAS
*

3
4
THIS
IS
TO
CERTIFY
THAT
I,
Alma
S.

5
Rodriguez,
a
Certified
Shorthand
Reporter
in
and
6
for
the
State
of
Texas,
reported
in
shorthand
the
7
meeting
minutes
given
at
the
time
and
date
set
8
forth
in
the
caption
thereof,
and
that
the
above
9
and
foregoing
pages
contain
a
true
and
correct
10
transcript
of
said
minutes.

11
12
This
the
__________
day
of
_________,
2003.

13
14
_____________________________
15
ALMA
S.
RODRIGUEZ
Certified
Shorthand
Reporter
16
in
and
for
the
State
of
Texas
Certification
Number:
8115
17
Date
of
Expiration:
12/
31/
05
Esquire
Deposition
Services
18
Firm
Registration
No.
286
703
McKinney
Avenue
19
Suite
320
Dallas,
Texas
75202
20
214­
365­
9200
21
22
23
24
25