The U.S. Small Business Administration has announced that it will hold a Virtual Public Forum on September 17 to consider testimony on its proposed revisions to small business size standards and the methodology used to establish them.
This is an important opportunity. But it also raises important questions.
SBA says testimony presented during the forum will become part of the administrative record the agency considers when developing the final rule. SBA also states that it will attempt to accommodate everyone interested in testifying, although time limits may be necessary depending on registration.
There is also important context surrounding the development of these proposals. Before becoming Associate Administrator of SBA’s Office of Government Contracting and Business Development, Ryan Lambert served on the majority policy staff of the House Small Business Committee during its examination of SBA size standards. Approximately two and a half years after the Committee’s February 2024 size standards hearing, Lambert is now the SBA official identified with both the proposed 2026 size standards rule and revised methodology. That continuity makes questions about how these proposals were developed, which offices were involved and whose input helped shape them particularly relevant.
If SBA genuinely wants meaningful input from the small business community, GovContractPros believes three issues deserve immediate attention.
Why Hasn’t SBA Extended the Comment Period?
First, an extension of the public comment period is absolutely necessary.
These proposals could fundamentally alter how the federal government defines a small business across hundreds of industries. SBA itself estimates that its proposed changes would add more than 110,000 firms to the universe of businesses classified as small.
Small businesses need sufficient time to determine what these changes mean for their individual NAICS codes, competitive environments, set-aside opportunities, teaming strategies and long-term growth.
A public forum is valuable, but it is not a substitute for providing stakeholders adequate time to analyze the underlying methodology and submit informed comments supported by data.
What Role Did SBA’s Office of Size Standards Play?
Second, SBA should provide greater transparency regarding the role of its Office of Size Standards in developing these proposals.
SBA describes the Office of Size Standards as the office responsible for making recommendations to the Administrator for establishing or revising size standards based on changes in industries and the economy.
Yet the August 2026 proposed rule and revised methodology identify the Office of Government Contracting and Business Development, led by Associate Administrator Ryan Lambert, as the responsible office.
That raises a straightforward question:
What role did the Office of Size Standards play in developing the new methodology and proposed standards, and why does the process appear to have shifted to GCBD?
For changes this consequential, small businesses deserve to understand not only what SBA is proposing, but how the proposal was developed.
Who Will SBA Hear From?
Finally, SBA should make clear how testimony will be selected and accommodated.
There is already a documented congressional record surrounding size standards.
In February 2024, the House Committee on Small Business held a hearing specifically examining SBA’s size standards. Witnesses included Jay Lambke of Government Acquisitions, Brad Moore of Sterling Computers, Andrew Christ of Compass Constructors and Erin Allen of Contemporaries.
The 2026 SBA proposal subsequently cites testimony from Lambke, as well as later congressional testimony from Michael Ramos of Raymond Global, as part of the rationale supporting changes to the existing system.
Those voices are part of the record.
Now SBA should ensure that the broader small business community has an equally meaningful opportunity to be heard.
Will testimony at the September 17 forum be open broadly to affected small businesses and stakeholders?
How will speakers be selected if requests exceed the available time?
And will companies that have not previously participated in congressional hearings or industry advocacy have the same opportunity to place their concerns on the administrative record?
These are fair questions.
GovContractPros has already raised serious concerns about SBA’s proposed size standards and has called for additional time for the small business community to evaluate their potential impact.
The September 17 forum is an opportunity for SBA to listen. But meaningful public participation requires more than opening a microphone for two hours.
It requires time, transparency and a process that ensures the full small business community has an opportunity to be heard.
Read SBA’s September 11 public testimony notice: sba-consider-public-testimony-proposed-size-standards-rules
Need help understanding how SBA’s proposed size standards could impact your business? GovContractPros can help you evaluate the potential impact on your NAICS codes, competitive landscape and federal contracting strategy. Reach out to our team to discuss what these proposed changes could mean for your business.
