[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 5 (Friday, January 8, 2021)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 1288-1292]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-29287]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Federal Emergency Management Agency
44 CFR Part 333
[Docket ID FEMA-2020-0019]
RIN 1660-AB04
Emergency Management Priorities and Allocations System (EMPAS)
AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, Department of Homeland
Security (DHS).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This final rule adopts, with minor technical edits, an interim
final rule with request for comments published in the Federal Register
on May 13, 2020, establishing standards and procedures by which the
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) may require certain
contracts or orders that promote the national defense be given priority
over other contracts or orders and setting new standards and procedures
by which FEMA may allocate materials, services, and facilities to
promote the national defense under emergency and non-emergency
conditions pursuant to section 101 of the Defense Production Act of
1950, as amended. These regulations are part of FEMA's response to the
ongoing COVID-19 emergency.
DATES: Effective Date: This final rule is effective January 8, 2021.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Marc Geier, Office of Policy and
Program Analysis, 202-924-0196, FEMA-DPA@fema.dhs.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background and Legal Authority
On May 13, 2020, FEMA published in the Federal Register an interim
final rule establishing standards and procedures by which FEMA may
require certain contracts or orders that promote the national defense
be given priority over other contracts or orders and setting new
standards and procedures by which FEMA may allocate materials,
services, and facilities to promote the national defense under
emergency and non-emergency conditions pursuant to section 101 of the
Defense Production Act of 1950, as amended. See 85 FR 28500.
Section 101 of the Defense Production Act of 1950, as amended (DPA
or the Act), authorizes the President to require that performance under
contracts or orders (other than contracts of employment) which the
President deems necessary or appropriate to promote the national
defense take priority over performance under any other contract or
order. For the purpose of assuring such priority, the President may
require acceptance and performance of such contracts or orders in
preference to other contracts or orders by any person the President
finds to be capable of their performance.\1\ Section 101 also
authorizes the President to allocate materials, services, and
facilities in such manner, upon such conditions, and to such extent as
the President shall deem necessary or appropriate to promote the
national defense.\2\ Executive Order 13911, ``Delegating Additional
Authority Under the Defense Production Act With Respect to Health and
Medical Resources To Respond to the Spread of COVID-19,'' 85 FR 18403
(Apr. 1, 2020), delegated the President's authority under Section 101
to the Secretary of Homeland Security with respect to health and
medical resources needed to respond to the spread of Coronavirus
Disease 2019 (COVID-19) within the United States. The Secretary of
Homeland Security has further delegated these authorities to the FEMA
Administrator.\3\ FEMA published its interim final rule to comply with
Section 101(d), which requires agencies delegated authority under
Section 101 to issue final rules to establish standards and procedures
by which the priorities and allocations authority is used to promote
the national defense.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 50 U.S.C. 4511(a)(1).
\2\ 50 U.S.C. 4511(a)(2).
\3\ DHS Delegation 09052 Rev. 00.1, ``Delegation of Defense
Production Act Authority to the Administrator of the Federal
Emergency Management Agency'' (Apr. 1, 2020).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The interim final rule established the Emergency Management
Priorities and Allocations System (EMPAS), which became part of the
Federal Priorities and Allocations System (FPAS), the body of
regulations that establishes standards and procedures for implementing
the President's authority under Section 101(a) of the DPA. This rule
finalizes the interim final rule.
II. Discussion Public Comments and FEMA's Responses
The public comment period on the interim final rule closed on June
12, 2020, and four germane public comments were received. One comment
was generally supportive of the regulation, pointing out that having
the EMPAS rule in place allows FEMA to leverage the DPA in response to
the COVID-19 pandemic over an extended period of time or eventually
extend it to more general emergency preparedness activities. Given the
ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, FEMA is considering use of the EMPAS
regulation to combat the COVID-19 pandemic over an extended period of
time. Since implementation of the regulation in May, FEMA has modified
and extended an order allocating certain scarce and critical materials
for domestic use to ensure the resources were not exported from the
United States without specific approval by FEMA, and continues to
consider options for using EMPAS to address mission needs. See 85 FR
48113 (Aug. 10, 2020). Finalizing the EMPAS regulation allows FEMA to
respond to public comments in a timely manner and ensures FEMA's
continued ability to use its authorities as appropriate in response to
the COVID-19 pandemic. FEMA is also better prepared should delegations
of priorities and allocations authority for other types of resources be
issued in the future, as it will already have a regulatory framework in
place.
The commenter suggested that EMPAS authority should be extended to
include vaccine active ingredients as well as adjuvant or booster
additions to vaccines; measures to permit fill and finish of large
numbers of vaccine doses, including glass vials and other packaging;
and provide for distribution systems and medical facilities to
distribute vaccines when available at the most rapid rate. FEMA's
authority pursuant to EMPAS is clear; the
[[Page 1289]]
President delegated FEMA \4\ the authority to exercise section 101 of
the DPA with respect to health and medical resources needed to respond
to the spread of COVID-19 within the United States. The EMPAS
regulation defines ``health and medical resources'' as ``drugs,
biological products, medical devices, materials, facilities, health
supplies, services, and equipment required to diagnose, mitigate,
prevent the impairment of, improve, treat, cure, or restore the
physical or mental health conditions of the population.'' This
definition mirrors the definition of ``health resources'' established
by the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) in their Health
Resources Priority and Allocations System (HRPAS) regulation \5\ to
ensure consistency across agencies delegated authority by the President
to utilize these resources to respond to the COVID-19 pandemic.
Vaccines, which are defined as biological products under section 351(i)
of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 262(i)), are considered a
health and medical resource and thus would fall within the scope of the
HRPAS and EMPAS regulations, including any materials associated with
vaccines, including glass vials and other packaging.\6\ Similarly,
distribution systems and medical facilities for vaccine distribution
also constitute health and medical resources under EMPAS.\7\ Given the
need for consistency across agencies to ensure a unified response in
combating this pandemic and avoid any confusion in implementation, FEMA
is retaining the definition of ``health and medical resources'' from
the interim final rule and believes the definition provides sufficient
clarity regarding the resources covered by the rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ See Executive Order 13911, 85 FR 18403 (Apr. 1, 2020), DHS
Delegation 09052 Rev. 00 ``Delegation of Defense Production Act
Authority to the Administrator of the Federal Emergency Management
Agency'' (Jan. 3, 2017), and DHS Delegation 09052 Rev. 00.1,
``Delegation of Defense Production Act Authority to the
Administrator of the Federal Emergency Management Agency'' (Apr. 1,
2020).
\5\ See 45 CFR 101.20.
\6\ HHS has long held resource authority for health resources.
See Executive Order 13603, 77 FR 16651 (Mar. 22, 2012) and more
recently Executive Order 13909, 85 FR 16227 (Mar. 23, 2020). While
Executive Order 13911 delegated the same authorities to DHS, HHS's
extensive expertise in this area would be required for any vaccine
development-related efforts.
\7\ See 44 CFR 333.8. See also 45 CFR 101.20.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The same commenter pointed out that, while FEMA already possesses
subdelegated authority to use both the Department of Commerce's Defense
Priority and Allocations System (DPAS) and the Department of
Agriculture's Agriculture Priority and Allocations System (APAS)
regulations, having the EMPAS regulations should enhance
predictability. The commenter noted the EMPAS regulations were
generally patterned after other Federal Priority and Allocations System
(FPAS) regulations, with some exceptions. For example, the EMPAS
regulations discuss rated orders placed by FEMA or a Delegate Agency to
facilitate sales to third parties. The commenter noted this distinction
could refer to contracts placed in support of hospitals or other health
entities or serve as a more general reference to the overarching
distributor-style role FEMA and other Federal entities have played
during the COVID-19 pandemic response to date. The distinction could
also set up a type of hybrid rated order/allocation action. FEMA may
leverage the EMPAS regulation to facilitate sales to third parties with
respect to contracts placed in support of entities seeking scarce and
critical health and medical resources and to assist in the distribution
of these resources as appropriate. The agency does not intend to create
a hybrid rated order/allocation action.
This commenter urged FEMA to be prepared to exercise EMPAS
authority and delegate authority to assure the ability to produce,
manufacture, fill, and finish coronavirus vaccines, specifically
requesting the regulation make clear that emergency authority includes
the ability to pre-manufacture vials and syringes as necessary to
provide a large number of vaccine doses. As explained above, although
vaccines and associated materials are within the authority delegated by
Executive Order 13911, HHS is the agency with expertise in vaccine
development and FEMA does not anticipate having a role in that process.
FEMA believes the regulation provides sufficient clarity regarding the
resource authority delegated by Executive Order 13911 and no changes
are required in this final rule.
Another commenter offered suggested improvements to Sec. 333.13
regarding timelines for responses to rated order requests.
Specifically, the commenter recommended changes to Sec. 333.13(d)(2)
to allow for responses within 6 or 12 hours ``after confirmation of
receipt by vendor/contractor personnel during normal business hours.''
FEMA appreciates that the proposed change would allow vendors and
contractors more time to handle rated order requests consistent with
their normal business practices, but rated orders are designated as
such specifically because of the need to handle them differently than
ordinary orders. The language in Sec. 333.13(d)(2) mirrors the
existing Department of Commerce DPAS regulations at 15 CFR
700.13(d)(2). As explained in the preamble to the interim final rule,
FEMA adopted language consistent with the DPAS regulation because rated
orders placed for the purpose of emergency preparedness would require a
shorter timeframe to ensure delivery in time to provide disaster
assistance, emergency response, or similar activities. Further, the
timeframes given in Sec. 333.13(d)(2) are the minimum allowed and only
apply when ``expedited action is necessary or appropriate.'' As such,
FEMA does not expect 6- or 12-hour response deadlines to be used
frequently, and therefore does not expect the regulatory provision to
impose a substantial burden on vendors and contractors. To ensure
consistency across FPAS regulations, and because of the nature of
FEMA's mission, FEMA is retaining the language from the interim final
rule in the final rule. Additionally, the commenter suggested the use
of the term ``immediately'' in Sec. 333.13(d)(3) and elsewhere could
not be realistically defined. The commenter recommended alternative
language, such as, ``as soon as reasonably practicable'' or ``promptly
with commercially reasonable efforts.'' Again, the language in EMPAS is
consistent with the Department of Commerce's DPAS regulations, where
this provision has been in use since 2014. Given the exigent
circumstances under which FEMA must provide emergency preparedness,
mitigation, response, and recovery services, the requirement for
immediate notification is necessary to ensure the ultimate timely
delivery of these services. In addition, FEMA does not believe that the
alternative terms provide a significantly more definite meaning.
Therefore, FEMA is retaining the language from the interim final rule
to ensure consistency across FPAS regulations.
Two commenters focused their comments exclusively on vaccines, a
topic not directly addressed by EMPAS. One commenter requested an
ethically produced vaccine that is not developed from aborted fetal
cells. The EMPAS regulation does not discuss vaccine development. As
explained above, FEMA's EMPAS regulation is limited to establishing
standards and procedures for priority and allocation orders for
``health and medical resources'' as defined in the interim final rule
at Sec. 333.8. Although vaccines fall within the scope of ``health and
medical resources'' authority delegated to HHS and to FEMA, FEMA has
not played a substantial role in the development of
[[Page 1290]]
the vaccine given HHS's expertise in the field and long-standing
resource authority in the area. Thus, FEMA is not revising the interim
final rule in this regard. Finally, one commenter stated her lack of
trust in vaccines and indicated she did not want vaccines to be
required for school attendance. The EMPAS regulations set standards and
procedures for priority and allocation orders for health and medical
resources to promote the national defense in response to the COVID-19
pandemic. The regulations do not require individuals to be vaccinated.
III. Technical Changes
This rule makes technical changes to the interim final rule. The
authority citation for the final rule is being updated to include DHS
Delegation Number 09052 Rev. 00 (Jan. 3, 2017), and to make non-
substantive formatting revisions to authorities previously included.
The interim final rule contained a placeholder reference to an OMB
clearance number for an information collection under the Paperwork
Reduction Act. See 44 CFR 333.20(c). OMB issued the related Paperwork
Reduction Act Notice of Action on May 13, 2020, the same day the
interim final rule published in the Federal Register. As a result of
OMB's action, FEMA now has a permanent OMB clearance number. Therefore,
FEMA is removing from Sec. 333.20(c) the placeholder reference,
``1660-NW122'' and adding in its place the permanent number, ``1660-
0149.''
IV. Regulatory Analysis
A. Administrative Procedure Act (APA)
This rule is effective immediately because the delayed effective
date generally required by the APA is unnecessary. See 5 U.S.C.
553(d)(3). The interim final rule that this final rule makes final,
with only technical changes, is already in effect.
B. Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, Executive
Order 13563, Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review, and Executive
Order 13771, Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs
Executive Orders 12866 (``Regulatory Planning and Review'') and
13563 (``Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review'') direct agencies
to assess the costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives
and, if regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that
maximize net benefits (including potential economic, environmental,
public health and safety effects, distributive impacts, and equity).
Executive Order 13563 emphasizes the importance of quantifying both
costs and benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, and of
promoting flexibility. Executive Order 13771 (``Reducing Regulation and
Controlling Regulatory Costs'') directs agencies to reduce regulation
and control regulatory costs and provides that ``for every one new
regulation issued, at least two prior regulations be identified for
elimination, and that the cost of planned regulations be prudently
managed and controlled through a budgeting process.''
This final rule has been drafted and reviewed in accordance with
Executive Order 12866. This rule has been designated a ``significant
regulatory action'' and economically significant under Section 3(f) of
Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, the rule has been reviewed by the
Office of Management and Budget.
This final rule adopts the interim final rule (IFR) that
established standards and procedures by which FEMA may require certain
contracts or orders that promote the national defense be given priority
over other contracts or orders and setting new standards and procedures
by which FEMA may allocate materials, services, and facilities to
promote the national defense under emergency and non-emergency
conditions pursuant to section 101 of the Defense Production Act of
1950, as amended. Accordingly, relative to a post-IFR baseline, this
final rule has no economic impact. Below, FEMA also examines the rule's
impacts relative to a pre-IFR baseline.
This rule sets criteria and procedures under which FEMA will
authorize prioritization of certain orders or contracts as well as
criteria under which FEMA will issue orders allocating materials,
services, and facilities. Under prioritization, FEMA will designate
certain orders as one of two possible priority levels. Once so
designated, such orders are referred to as ``rated orders.'' The
recipient of a rated order must give it priority over an unrated order
or an order with a lower priority rating. A recipient of a rated order
may place orders of the same priority level with their suppliers and
subcontractors for supplies and services necessary to fulfill FEMA's
rated order. The suppliers and subcontractors must treat the request
from the recipient as a rated order with the same priority level as the
original rated order. The rule does not require recipients to fulfill
rated orders if the price or terms of sale are not consistent with the
price or terms of sale of similar non-rated orders. The rule provides a
defense from any liability for damages or penalties for any action or
inaction required to maintain compliance with the rule.
The impact of EMPAS on private companies receiving priority orders
is expected to vary. FEMA's issuance of a priority-rated order will
generally only modify the timing in which other orders are completed.
Deferred orders may face delays, which impose a burden on potential
recipients of these orders. FEMA's exercise of its priorities and
allocations authorities under section 101 of the DPA and EMPAS is
expected to have an overall positive impact on the U.S. public and
industry by creating a framework by which FEMA exercises its delegated
authorities, as discussed above.
Since implementation of the regulation in May, FEMA has modified
and extended an allocation order allocating certain scarce and critical
materials for domestic use to ensure those resources were not exported
from the United States without specific approval by FEMA, and FEMA
continues to consider options for using EMPAS to address mission needs.
See 85 FR 48113 (Aug. 10, 2020). Finalizing the EMPAS regulation allows
FEMA to respond to public comments in a timely manner and ensures
FEMA's continued ability to use its authorities as appropriate in
response to the COVID-19 pandemic. FEMA is also better prepared should
delegations of priorities and allocations authority for other types of
resources be issued in the future.
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.)
requires an agency to consider the impacts of certain rules on small
entities. The RFA's regulatory flexibility analysis requirements apply
to only those rules for which an agency was required to publish a
general notice of proposed rulemaking pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(b) or
any other law. See 5 U.S.C. 604(a). As discussed previously, FEMA did
not issue a notice of proposed rulemaking for this action, and was not
required to do so under any law. Thus, the RFA's requirements relating
to a final regulatory flexibility analysis do not apply.
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
As noted above, no notice of proposed rulemaking was published in
advance of this action. Therefore, the written statement provisions of
the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995, as amended, do not apply to
this regulatory action. See 2 U.S.C. 1532.
[[Page 1291]]
E. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
This rule contains information collections necessary to support
FEMA's implementation of the President's priorities and allocations
authority under Title I of the Defense Production Act of 1950 (DPA), as
amended (50 U.S.C. 4501, et seq.). The purpose of this authority is to
ensure the timely delivery of products, materials, and services
necessary or appropriate to promote the national defense.
The Requests for Special Priorities Assistance collection, 1660-
0149, was submitted under OMB's emergency clearance procedures.
Currently, FEMA is seeking public comment on collection 1660-0149
through the normal clearance process (see 85 FR 65066, Oct. 14, 2020
\8\).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ Collection 1660-0149's 30-day comment period ended on
November 13, 2020.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The new Rated Orders, Adjustments, Exceptions, or Appeals Under the
Emergency Management Priorities and Allocations System (EMPAS)
collection, 1660-0150, cleared OMB's emergency clearance procedures and
has an expiration date of 4/30/21. Additionally, FEMA will seek public
comments on the collection through the normal clearance process.
F. Privacy Act
Under the Privacy Act of 1974, 5 U.S.C. 552a, an agency must
determine whether implementation of a proposed regulation will result
in a system of records. A ``record'' is any item, collection, or
grouping of information about an individual that is maintained by an
agency, including, but not limited to, his/her education, financial
transactions, medical history, and criminal or employment history and
that contains his/her name, or the identifying number, symbol, or other
identifying particular assigned to the individual, such as a finger or
voice print or a photograph. See 5 U.S.C. 552a(a)(4). A ``system of
records'' is a group of records under the control of an agency from
which information is retrieved by the name of the individual or by some
identifying number, symbol, or other identifying particular assigned to
the individual. An agency cannot disclose any record which is contained
in a system of records except by following specific procedures.
In accordance with DHS policy, FEMA has completed two Privacy
Threshold Analyses (PTAs). DHS has determined that this rulemaking does
not affect the 1660-1660-0149 and the 1660-0150 OMB Control Numbers'
compliance with the E-Government Act of 2002 or the Privacy Act of
1974, as amended. Specifically, DHS has concluded that the 1660-0149
and 1660-0150 OMB Control Numbers are covered by the DHS/ALL/PIA-065
Electronic Contract Filing System (ECFS) Privacy Impact Assessment
(PIA). Additionally, DHS has decided that the 1660-0149 and the 1660-
0150 OMB Control Numbers are covered by the DHS/ALL-021 Department of
Homeland Security Contractors and Consultants, 73 FR 63179 (Oct. 23,
2008) System of Records Notice (SORN).
G. Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments
Executive Order 13175, ``Consultation and Coordination with Indian
Tribal Governments,'' 65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000, applies to agency
regulations that have Tribal implications, that is, regulations that
have substantial direct effects on one or more Indian tribes, on the
relationship between the Federal Government and Indian Tribes, or on
the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal
Government and Indian Tribes. Under this Executive order, to the extent
practicable and permitted by law, no agency shall promulgate any
regulation that has Tribal implications, that imposes substantial
direct compliance costs on Indian Tribal governments, and that is not
required by statute, unless funds necessary to pay the direct costs
incurred by the Indian Tribal government or the Tribe in complying with
the regulation are provided by the Federal Government, or the agency
consults with Tribal officials.
FEMA has reviewed this final rule under Executive Order 13175 and
has determined that this final rule does not have a substantial direct
effect on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the
Federal Government and Indian Tribes, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian Tribes.
H. Executive Order 13132, Federalism
Executive Order 13132, ``Federalism,'' 64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999, sets forth principles and criteria that agencies must adhere to
in formulating and implementing policies that have federalism
implications, that is, regulations that have ``substantial direct
effects on the States, on the relationship between the National
Government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government.'' Federal
agencies must closely examine the statutory authority supporting any
action that would limit the policymaking discretion of the States, and
to the extent practicable, must consult with State and local officials
before implementing any such action.
FEMA has determined that this rulemaking does not have a
substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between
the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government, and
therefore does not have federalism implications as defined by the
Executive order.
I. National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA)
Under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), as
amended, 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq., an agency must prepare an
environmental assessment or environmental impact statement for any
rulemaking that significantly affects the quality of the human
environment. FEMA has determined that this rulemaking does not
significantly affect the quality of the human environment and
consequently has not prepared an environmental assessment or
environmental impact statement.
Rulemaking is a major Federal action subject to NEPA. Categorical
exclusion A3 included in the list of exclusion categories at Department
of Homeland Security Instruction Manual 023-01-001-01, Revision 01,
Implementation of the National Environmental Policy Act, Appendix A,
issued November 6, 2014, covers the promulgation of rules, issuance of
rulings or interpretations, and the development and publication of
policies, orders, directives, notices, procedures, manuals, and
advisory circulars if they meet certain criteria provided in A3(a-f).
This interim final rule meets Categorical Exclusion A3(a), ``[t]hose of
a strictly administrative or procedural nature,'' and A3(b), ``[t]hose
that implement, without substantive change, statutory or regulatory
requirements.''
J. Congressional Review of Agency Rulemaking
Under the Congressional Review of Agency Rulemaking Act (CRA), 5
U.S.C. 801-808, before a rule can take effect, the Federal agency
promulgating the rule must: Submit to Congress and to the Government
Accountability Office (GAO) a copy of the rule; a concise general
statement relating to the rule, including whether it is a major rule;
the proposed effective date of the rule; a copy of any cost-benefit
analysis; descriptions of the agency's actions under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act and the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act; and any other
information or statements required by relevant Executive orders.
[[Page 1292]]
FEMA has submitted this final rule to the Congress and to GAO
pursuant to the CRA. The Office of Management and Budget has determined
that this rule is a ``major rule'' within the meaning of the CRA. As
this rule contains FEMA's finding for good cause that notice and public
procedure are impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public
interest, there is not a required delay in the effective date. See 5
U.S.C. 808(2).
List of Subjects in 44 CFR Part 333
Administrative practice and procedure, Business and industry,
Government contracts, National defense, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Strategic and critical materials.
For the reasons stated in the preamble, the interim rule adding 44
CFR part 333, which was published at 85 FR 28500 on May 13, 2020, is
adopted as final with the following changes:
PART 333--EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT PRIORITIES AND ALLOCATIONS SYSTEM
0
1. The authority citation for part 333 is revised to read as follows:
Authority: 6 U.S.C. 313, 314; 50 U.S.C. 4511, et seq.; E.O.
13603, 77 FR 16651; E.O. 13909, 85 FR 16227; E.O. 13911, 85 FR
18403; DHS Delegation 09052, Rev. 00 (Jan. 3, 2017); DHS Delegation
09052 Rev 00.1 (Apr. 1, 2020).
Sec. 333.20 [Amended]
0
2. In Sec. 333.20, amend paragraph (c) by removing ``1660-NW122'' and
adding in its place ``1660-0149.''
Pete Gaynor,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2020-29287 Filed 1-7-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-19-P