Comment on FR Doc # 2026-11765

I am concerned that the proposed rule may impose an evidentiary burden that is difficult or impossible for many individuals who experience discrimination to satisfy. Discrimination is often subtle, inconsistent, and difficult to document. It frequently occurs in private conversations, informal interactions, or subjective decision-making processes where direct documentary evidence is unavailable. In many cases, the only evidence available is the firsthand recollection of the individual who experienced the discriminatory conduct. For that reason, I believe an individual's credible account of discrimination should be sufficient to initiate and support a complaint. Requiring documentary evidence, recordings, emails, or multiple witness statements may effectively prevent many legitimate claims from being considered, not because the discrimination did not occur, but because the nature of discrimination often makes such evidence impossible to obtain. This concern is particularly important in light of the purpose of this proposed rule. The SBA has recognized that individuals, including white applicants, may have been subjected to unlawful discrimination through DEI-related policies or practices. In many of those cases, there may be written policies, hiring criteria, internal communications, or other documentation evidencing the discriminatory conduct. By contrast, discrimination against racial minorities has historically been far less likely to be memorialized in writing, instead occurring through unwritten practices, subjective decision-making, or private interactions that leave little or no documentary evidence. As a result, imposing a documentary evidentiary requirement could have the unintended effect of making the complaint process substantially more accessible to white complainants than to minority complainants. An evidentiary standard that is significantly easier for one racial group to satisfy than another raises serious concerns about whether the complaint process is, in practice, equally available to all individuals. Ironically, a rule intended to eliminate discrimination could create an evidentiary framework that disproportionately disadvantages minority complainants simply because the discrimination they experience is less likely to produce documentary evidence. The SBA should ensure that its complaint process provides equal access to all individuals, regardless of race, and that the ability to pursue a claim does not depend on whether the discriminatory conduct happened to generate documentary evidence. If SBA determines that some form of corroboration is necessary, the requirement should be limited to a single supporting statement from an individual with relevant knowledge of the circumstances. Requiring more than one supporting statement or imposing additional evidentiary requirements would create an unreasonable barrier for many victims of discrimination and could discourage valid complaints from being brought forward. A balanced approach should recognize that the absence of extensive documentation does not mean discrimination did not occur. The rule should allow agencies to evaluate credibility and investigate claims while ensuring that individuals are not denied access to the complaint process simply because they lack evidence that is often unavailable by the very nature of discriminatory conduct. Thank you for considering this comment.