Comment on FR Doc # 2026-11765

I am concerned that the proposed rule may establish an evidentiary standard that many individuals who experience discrimination will be unable to meet. Discrimination is often subtle, inconsistent, and difficult to document. It commonly occurs during private conversations, informal interactions, or through subjective decision-making processes where documentary evidence simply does not exist. In many instances, the only available evidence is the firsthand account of the individual who experienced the discriminatory conduct. For that reason, a credible account from the complainant should be sufficient to initiate and support a complaint. Requiring documentary evidence, recordings, emails, or multiple witness statements could prevent many legitimate claims from being considered—not because discrimination did not occur, but because the circumstances under which discrimination typically occurs often make such evidence unavailable. This concern is especially significant given the purpose of this proposed rule. The SBA has acknowledged that individuals, including white applicants, may have experienced unlawful discrimination arising from DEI-related policies or practices. In some of those cases, there may be written policies, hiring criteria, internal communications, or other records that help demonstrate the alleged discriminatory conduct. By contrast, discrimination against racial minorities has historically been less likely to be documented in writing and has more often occurred through unwritten practices, discretionary decision-making, or private interactions that leave little or no documentary evidence. As a result, an evidentiary requirement centered on documentary proof could unintentionally make the complaint process more accessible for some complainants than for others. When one group is more likely to have access to written evidence because of the nature of the discrimination alleged, while another group is less likely to have comparable documentation, the complaint process may not function as an equally accessible avenue for all individuals. Ironically, a rule intended to eliminate discrimination could create an evidentiary framework that disproportionately disadvantages complainants whose experiences are inherently less likely to produce documentary evidence. The SBA should ensure that its complaint process is equally accessible regardless of race and that an individual's ability to pursue a complaint does not depend on whether the discriminatory conduct happened to generate documentation. If the SBA determines that some form of corroboration is appropriate, the requirement should be limited to a single supporting statement from a person with relevant knowledge of the circumstances. Requiring multiple supporting statements or additional forms of evidence would create an unnecessary obstacle for many individuals who have experienced discrimination and could discourage valid complaints from being filed. A balanced evidentiary standard should recognize that the absence of extensive documentation is not evidence that discrimination did not occur. The rule should allow agencies to assess credibility, investigate allegations, and evaluate the facts of each case while ensuring that individuals are not denied access to the complaint process simply because the nature of discriminatory conduct often leaves little or no documentary evidence. Thank you for considering these comments.