FR 2020-29029

The document in question is a notice from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), a part of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), seeking public comments on revisions to an information collection process. This process is governed by the Emergency Management Priorities and Allocations System (EMPAS) regulation and aims to support the President's authority under the Defense Production Act (DPA). This authority helps prioritize and allocate necessary resources for national defense, which includes areas such as homeland security and emergency preparedness.

General Summary

FEMA is inviting the public to comment on any aspects of the information collection process, which is crucial for facilitating the timely delivery of necessary goods and services in emergencies. The President’s directives on prioritizing and allocating resources are critical in maintaining national defense readiness, and this process supports these directives. Comments must be submitted by March 5, 2021, ensuring public participation in improving this regulatory process.

Significant Issues and Concerns

While the notice discusses "rated orders" under the EMPAS, it lacks detailed explanations or examples to clarify what these entail, particularly the differences between 'DX' and 'DO' rated orders. These distinctions could be significant for businesses and individuals trying to understand their obligations under these orders.

The procedures for requesting adjustments or appealing decisions regarding this process are described but could benefit from simplification or illustrative examples. Such comprehensive detailing would make the regulations more accessible to non-experts.

Furthermore, the burden estimates for respondents—only 8.5 hours annually and a cost of $533—seem surprisingly low and may not capture the true time and resources required for compliance. Similarly, the total annual cost to the federal government is listed as $188, which seems implausibly low and justifies further explanation.

Additionally, while the document calls for the immediate notification of delays, it fails to define what constitutes "immediate," leaving room for ambiguity that could complicate compliance.

Impact on the Public

For the general public, effective prioritization and allocation of critical resources during emergencies are vital. Clearer communication and robust engagement in this information collection process significantly ensure preparedness and response to national crises.

Impact on Stakeholders

For businesses, especially those involved in manufacturing or supplying critical goods, understanding the mechanics of 'rated orders' is imperative. Ambiguities about their responsibilities and the potential lack of clarity around costs create challenges in fulfilling obligations efficiently.

Government agencies, including FEMA itself, are stakeholders that might face operational inefficiencies if the processes and costs involved are not clearly understood and streamlined. Ensuring that all procedures are thoroughly outlined and the associated costs accurately projected will enhance inter-agency coordination and resource allocation efficacy.

In conclusion, while the notice efficiently seeks public input to improve vital emergency processes, clarifications and more detailed explanations could enhance understanding and compliance, ultimately better serving both public and specialized stakeholders.

In the document, there are notable references to financial estimates associated with the proposed collection of information by the Federal Emergency Management Agency under the Emergency Management Priorities and Allocations System (EMPAS). These financial references include estimated costs attributed to both respondents and the Federal Government.

The Estimated Total Annual Respondent Cost is noted at $533. This figure indicates the projected cost incurred by respondents, such as for-profit businesses, private non-profits, or government entities, in fulfilling the requirements set by the EMPAS regulation. The estimate also accounts for an annual burden of 8.5 hours, which implies that respondents would spend this approximate time to comply with the information collection needs. However, there is an issue noted regarding this estimate, as such a minimal burden and cost might not accurately reflect the true effort and resources required, suggesting a possible underestimation that could lead to compliance challenges for businesses.

The Estimated Total Annual Cost to the Federal Government is listed as $188. This is the projected expense for the government to manage and execute the information collection process detailed in the EMPAS regulation. Considering the typically higher expenditures involved in governmental processes, this relatively modest cost may raise questions regarding its accuracy or adequacy in covering all necessary administrative activities. Such a low figure might negate potential hidden or unlisted costs that could arise during the execution of these regulatory tasks.

The document does not provide a detailed breakdown or justification of these costs, and they appear notably lower than what might be expected for such regulatory compliance efforts. This low-cost projection may not take into full consideration the technical, human resource, and administrative efforts required for both respondents and the federal entity. Addressing these potential discrepancies could enhance transparency and provide stakeholders with a clearer understanding of the financial commitments inherent in fulfilling EMPAS requirements.

Furthermore, the agencies responsible for implementing and overseeing these operations might need to ensure adequate resources and mechanisms are in place to realistically assess and cover the financial impacts of these actions. Without a precise explanation or substantiation, the financial references could lead to misunderstandings or misalignments in both expectations and actual fiscal needs.