Je veux savoir à propos de…

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 171 / Wednesday, September 8, 2021 / Rules and Regulations will include, so no change to the regulation is necessary.
A Tribe stated that the requirement for the incubator to provide access to investors should include a best efforts qualifier because the barriers in accessing capital in Indian Country are well documented.
Response: The applicant defines in their application what their best efforts will include, so no change to the regulation is necessary.
A Tribe stated that it is not unusual for for-profit business incubators to make a nominal investment in a business in exchange for equity in that business, accomplishing the dual goals of providing the new business with startup capital and help the program become self-sustaining. The Tribe requested clarification on whether such investments by business incubators participating in IBIP would be permissible.
Response: The IBIP is not structured in a way that would allow the business incubator to obtain return equity from its participating businesses. Incubators may, however, request that successful business participants give back to the program by mentoring and sharing best practices with other businesses.

jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES

5. Reports A Tribe recommended that the regulation also require awardees to submit reports detailing capital investments and revenue growth.
Response: The grantee is free to share information detailing capital investments and revenue growth in its report, but the rule does not require this information in the reports. Instead, the required annual report focuses on the number of Native businesses and entrepreneurs the incubator assists and their performance while participating and after graduation or departure from the incubator.
A commenter stated that the requirement for reporting business performance could be a deterrent for small business startups who are wary of making financial disclosures, so other metrics such as number of new employees or customers should be used instead.
Response: Financial oversight will consist of Federal reporting toward the grant funding only. The applicant will be able to specify how they are going to oversee the incubator activities and justify use of the grant funding and can craft those metrics to avoid revealing any financial disclosures that it believes will deter Native businesses and entrepreneurs from participating in the incubator.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

16:25 Sep 07, 2021

Jkt 253001

F. Comments on Subpart F Grant Administration 1. Evaluation of Awardee Performance A Tribe stated the requirement for awardees to become operational should become operational should be lengthened from 3 months to allow awardees at least 6 months.
Response: When determining the allowable start-up timeframe for grantees, OIED also considers the total time available to implement the activities under the grant. Since these are only one-year grants, allowing a 6-month start-up timeframe would leave only 6 months for implementation. For that reason, the final rule retains the 3-month timeframe for the grantee to commence providing services.
Two commenters stated their appreciation that the regulation does not include a requirement that businesses graduate from incubator programs within a certain period of time.
Response: The applicant decides when participant businesses graduate from their program. The incubator awardee itself receives funding for 3
years with one potential renewal.
2. Coordination With Other Federal Agencies A Tribe noted that one of the greatest problems facing economic development in Indian Country is the lack of practical broadband access and urged adding to the regulation that the named federal Departments and agencies be required to provide broadband support to the maximum extent practicable.
Response: The requested additional language was not included in the final regulation because that language is not clearly authorized by the statute;
however, OIED will actively engage with our Federal partners to continue to improve broadband in Indian Country.
See 25 U.S.C. 5806.
3. Funding Several commenters requested that additional funding be appropriated to this program.
Response: OIED relies upon Congress for annual appropriations for the IBIP.
G. Miscellaneous Comments A Tribe requested OIED consider the unique sovereign status of Tribes and unique issues Tribes and Tribal members face when attempting to obtain conventional financing in Indian Country. Another commenter also noted that Native American businesses and entrepreneurship will differ in practice and view across Tribal communities.
Another commenter provided statistics
PO 00000

Frm 00043

Fmt 4700

Sfmt 4700

50255

on the percentage of minority small business owners and stated that Native American businesses account for the smallest number of minority-owned firms.
Response: OIED recognizes the challenges of conventional financing in Indian Country. Congress also found in creating the IBIP that all entrepreneurs face challenges when transforming ideas into businesses, and entrepreneurs that want to provide services to reservation communities face additional barriers.
The IBIP is intended to help address these challenges and includes, as a minimum requirement, that IBIP
awardees offer culturally tailored incubation services to Native businesses and Native entrepreneurs. See 25 U.S.C.
5803e2A and 1187.44a1.
A commenter stated that OIED should commit to making information about IBIP applications, grant awards, and the impact of IBIP funding available publicly. This commenter stated that the information would be valuable for documenting demand for the program, understanding the programs reach and impact across Native communities and contexts, and raising the visibility of grant recipients.
Response: Disclosure of grant applications and reports are limited by Privacy Act and Freedom of Information Act FOIA exemptions, but OIED plans to share grant awards and success stories while complying with Privacy Act restrictions and FOIA exemptions.
A non-Tribal commenter urged OIED
to prioritize feedback from Tribes and Native-led organizations in the rulemaking process.
Response: OIED hosted governmentto-government consultation with Tribes during preparation of this final rule and considered Tribes input accordingly.
V. Procedural Requirements A. Regulatory Planning and Review E.O. 12866, 13563
Executive Order E.O. 12866 provides that the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs OIRA at the Office of Management and Budget OMB will review all significant rules. OIRA has determined that this rule is not significant.
E.O. 13563 reaffirms the principles of E.O. 12866 while calling for improvements in the Nations regulatory system to promote predictability, to reduce uncertainty, and to use the best, most innovative, and least burdensome tools for achieving regulatory ends. The E.O. directs agencies to consider regulatory approaches that reduce burdens and maintain flexibility and freedom of choice for the public where
E:FRFM08SER1.SGM

08SER1