Common Crop Insurance Regulations; Processing Sweet Corn Crop Insurance Provisions, 55171-55174 [2013-21826]

Download as PDF 55171 Rules and Regulations Federal Register Vol. 78, No. 175 Tuesday, September 10, 2013 This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory documents having general applicability and legal effect, most of which are keyed to and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is published under 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510. The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the Superintendent of Documents. Prices of new books are listed in the first FEDERAL REGISTER issue of each week. SPECIAL INSPECTOR GENERAL FOR IRAQ RECONSTRUCTION 5 CFR Chapter LXXXII Removal of Standards of Ethical Conduct Regulations Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction. ACTION: Final rule. AGENCY: On September 22, 2010, the Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction (SIGIR), with the concurrence of the Office of Government Ethics (OGE), issued a final rule for employees of the SIGIR that supplemented the executive-branchwide Standards of Ethical Conduct (Standards) issued by OGE. With certain exceptions, this supplemental regulation, required SIGIR employees, except special Government employees, to obtain approval before engaging in outside employment. This is the only rule SIGIR has published in the Federal Register and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations. The SIGIR is due to terminate its operations on September 30, 2013. Accordingly, there is no need for this Chapter or any SIGIR regulation in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) after that date because SIGIR will not exist and will therefore have no employees subject to this rule. DATES: This rule is effective on September 30, 2013. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael H. Mobbs, Deputy General Counsel, Telephone- 703–604–0429; email- michael.h.mobbs2.civ@mail.mil. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with RULES SUMMARY: Background SIGIR’s enabling legislation, Public Law 108–106, 5 U.S.C. app 8G note, as amended, at section 3001(o), requires SIGIR to terminate within 180 days after the date on which amounts appropriated or otherwise made VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:54 Sep 09, 2013 Jkt 229001 available for the reconstruction of Iraq that are unexpended are less than $250,000,000. SIGIR has determined this date to be September 30, 2013. Accordingly, this issuance removes SIGIR’s rule and existing text from the Federal Register. The SIGIR is due to terminate its operations on September 30, 2013. Accordingly, there is no need for this Chapter or any SIGIR regulation in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) after that date because SIGIR will not exist and will therefore have no employees subject to this CFR chapter. Administrative Procedure Act Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(b) SIGIR finds good cause exists for waiving the general notice of proposed rulemaking and opportunity for public comment as to this rule. Notice and comment before the effective date are being waived because this rule concerns matters of agency organization, practice and procedure. Executive Orders 12866 and 12988 Because this rule relates to SIGIR personnel, it is exempt from the provisions of Executive Orders Nos. 12866 and 12988. Regulatory Flexibility Act SIGIR has determined, pursuant to the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. chapter 6, that this rulemaking will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities because it primarily affects SIGIR employees. Paperwork Reduction Act The Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. chapter 35, does not apply because this rulemaking does not contain information collection requirements subject to the approval of the Office of Management and Budget. Congressional Review Act SIGIR has determined that this rule is not a rule as defined in 5 U.S.C. 804, and thus, does not require review by Congress. List of Subjects in 5 CFR Part 9201 Conflict of interests, Government employees. Accordingly, for the reasons set forth in the preamble, under the authority of 5 CFR 2635.105 and the agency’s general rulemaking authority, the PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction, with the concurrence of the Office of Government Ethics, is amending title 5 of the Code of Federal Regulations by removing chapter LXXXII, consisting of part 9201. Dated: September 3, 2013. Stuart W. Bowen, Jr. Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction. [FR Doc. 2013–21770 Filed 9–9–13; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3710–8N–P DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Federal Crop Insurance Corporation 7 CFR Part 457 [Docket No. FCIC–12–0001] RIN 0563–AC37 Common Crop Insurance Regulations; Processing Sweet Corn Crop Insurance Provisions Federal Crop Insurance Corporation, USDA. ACTION: Final rule. AGENCY: The Federal Crop Insurance Corporation (FCIC) finalizes the Common Crop Insurance Regulations, Processing Sweet Corn Crop Insurance Provisions. The intended effect of this action is to provide policy changes that better meet the needs of insured producers. The changes will be effective for the 2014 and succeeding crop years. DATES: This rule is effective October 10, 2013. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tim Hoffmann, Product Administration and Standards Division, Risk Management Agency, United States Department of Agriculture, P.O. Box 419205, Stop 0812, Room 421, Kansas City, MO 64141–6205, telephone (816) 926–7730. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: SUMMARY: Executive Order 12866 This rule has been determined to be not-significant for the purposes of Executive Order 12866 and, therefore, it has not been reviewed by the OMB. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 Pursuant to the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. chapter 35), the collections of information in this rule have been E:\FR\FM\10SER1.SGM 10SER1 55172 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 175 / Tuesday, September 10, 2013 / Rules and Regulations approved by OMB under control number 0563–0053. E-Government Act Compliance FCIC is committed to complying with the E-Government Act, to promote the use of the Internet and other information technologies to provide increased opportunities for citizen access to Government information and services, and for other purposes. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) establishes requirements for Federal agencies to assess the effects of their regulatory actions on State, local, and tribal governments and the private sector. This rule contains no Federal mandates (under the regulatory provisions of title II of the UMRA) for State, local, and tribal governments or the private sector. Therefore, this rule is not subject to the requirements of sections 202 and 205 of UMRA. Executive Order 13132 It has been determined under section 1(a) of Executive Order 13132, Federalism, that this rule does not have sufficient implications to warrant consultation with the States. The provisions contained in this rule will not have a substantial direct effect on States, or on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with RULES Executive Order 13175 This rule has been reviewed in accordance with the requirements of Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments. The review reveals that this regulation will not have substantial and direct effects on Tribal governments and will not have significant Tribal implications. Regulatory Flexibility Act FCIC certifies that this regulation will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. Program requirements for the Federal crop insurance program are the same for all producers regardless of the size of their farming operation. For instance, all producers are required to submit an application and acreage report to establish their insurance guarantees and compute premium amounts, and all producers are required to submit a notice of loss and production information to determine the amount of an indemnity payment in the VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:54 Sep 09, 2013 Jkt 229001 event of an insured cause of crop loss. Whether a producer has 10 acres or 1000 acres, there is no difference in the kind of information collected. To ensure crop insurance is available to small entities, the Federal Crop Insurance Act authorizes FCIC to waive collection of administrative fees from limited resource farmers. FCIC believes this waiver helps to ensure that small entities are given the same opportunities as large entities to manage their risks through the use of crop insurance. A Regulatory Flexibility Analysis has not been prepared since this regulation does not have an impact on small entities, and, therefore, this regulation is exempt from the provisions of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 605). Federal Assistance Program This program is listed in the Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance under No. 10.450. Executive Order 12372 This program is not subject to the provisions of Executive Order 12372, which require intergovernmental consultation with State and local officials. See the Notice related to 7 CFR part 3015, subpart V, published at 48 FR 29115, June 24, 1983. Executive Order 12988 This final rule has been reviewed in accordance with Executive Order 12988 on civil justice reform. The provisions of this rule will not have a retroactive effect. The provisions of this rule will preempt State and local laws to the extent such State and local laws are inconsistent herewith. With respect to any direct action taken by FCIC or action by FCIC directing the insurance provider to take specific action under the terms of the crop insurance policy, the administrative appeal provisions published at 7 CFR part 11 or 7 CFR part 400, subpart J for determinations of good farming practices, as applicable, must be exhausted before any action against FCIC for judicial review may be brought. Environmental Evaluation This action is not expected to have a significant economic impact on the quality of the human environment, health, or safety. Therefore, neither an Environmental Assessment nor an Environmental Impact Statement is needed. Background: This rule finalizes changes to the Common Crop Insurance Regulations (7 CFR part 457), Processing Sweet Corn Crop Insurance Provisions that were published by FCIC on May 11, 2012, as PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 a notice of proposed rulemaking in the Federal Register at 77 FR 27658–27659. The public was afforded 30 days to submit comments after the regulation was published in the Federal Register. FCIC received a total of 22 comments from 4 commenters. The commenters were insurance providers, an insurance services organization, and a Regional Office of the Risk Management Agency (RMA). The public comments received regarding the proposed rule and FCIC’s responses to the comments are as follows: Order of Priority Statement Comment: Commenters recommended deleting the order of priority statement, as the order of priority is contained in the Common Crop Insurance Policy, Basic Provisions and the order of priority statement has been removed from other recently updated policies. Response: No changes were proposed to this provision and the proposed change does not address a conflict or vulnerability in the provision. No change has been made to the final rule. Section 1—Definitions Comment: Commenters recommended eliminating unnecessary repetition of language contained in the definition of ‘‘practical to replant’’. Response: No changes were proposed to this provision and the proposed change does not address a conflict or vulnerability in the provision. Further, such a change would be substantive in nature and the public has not been provided an opportunity to comment. No change has been made to the final rule. Comment: Commenters stated that the proposed change to the ‘‘price election’’ definition makes no distinction between the ‘‘base contract price’’ and the ‘‘price election’’. Commenters further stated that the proposed definition could be read to mean that the producer must insure at 100 percent of the base contract price and cannot choose a lesser percentage. Commenters recommended adding language to the proposed definition to clarify that a producer may elect to insure a percentage of the base contract price. Response: FCIC considered this change but has determined that a revision to section 3 of the policy is more appropriate to address the issue raised by the commenters because this is more than a definitional change because it concerns an obligation of the policyholder to make the selection. No change has been made to the definition of ‘‘price election’’. Comment: One commenter recommended that FCIC add language to E:\FR\FM\10SER1.SGM 10SER1 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 175 / Tuesday, September 10, 2013 / Rules and Regulations Response: No changes were proposed to this provision and the proposed change does not address a conflict or vulnerability in the provision because the provision is question is specific to dry beans and is not applicable here. Further, such a change would be substantive in nature and the public has not been provided an opportunity to comment. No change has been made to the final rule. Section 2—Unit Division Comment: Commenters recommended that FCIC clarify policy provisions regarding the availability of unit structures under sections 2(a) and 2(b). Response: No changes were proposed to this provision and the proposed change does not address a conflict or vulnerability in the provision. Further, such a change would be substantive in nature and the public has not been provided an opportunity to comment. No change has been made to the final rule. rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with RULES the definition of ‘‘price election’’ stating the definition of ‘‘price election’’ may be otherwise defined by FCIC in the Special Provisions. Response: FCIC disagrees with the proposed change. In accordance with the order of priority contained in the Common Crop Insurance Policy, Basic Provisions, FCIC has the authority to provide the definition of ‘‘price election’’ in the Special Provisions, in lieu of the definition in the Basic Provisions. Therefore, no change has been made to the final rule. Comment: Commenters recommended that FCIC clarify the definition of ‘‘processor contract’’ regarding different base contract prices on multiple contracts with the same processor that specify amounts of production. Response: FCIC agrees with the suggested change and recognizes that it addresses a conflict created by FCIC’s proposed revision to the definition of ‘‘price election’’. FCIC has revised the definition to clarify how multiple contracts are handled under the policy. Section 11—Duties in the Event of Damage or Loss Comment: Commenters recommended that FCIC clarify terminology in 11(c). Response: Without more information FCIC is unable to determine what needs clarification. Further, no changes were proposed to this provision and the proposed change does not address a conflict or vulnerability in the provision, and any such change could be substantive in nature and the public has not been provided an opportunity to comment. No change has been made to the final rule. Section 3—Insurance Guarantees, Coverage Levels, and Prices for Determining Indemnities Comment: Commenters recommended that FCIC adjust the provision in 3(a) that limits the producer to selecting only one price election for all the processing sweet corn in the county to be consistent with the definition of ‘‘price election’’ proposed by FCIC. Commenters stated that the provision should instead limit the producer to selecting only one percentage of the price election for all the processing sweet corn in the county. Response: FCIC agrees with the suggested change and recognizes that it addresses a conflict created by FCIC’s proposed revision to the definition of ‘‘price election’’. FCIC has revised the provision accordingly. Comment: One commenter recommended that FCIC review 3(b) in relation to the Dry Bean Crop Provisions to determine if similar language is appropriate for processing sweet corn. VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:54 Sep 09, 2013 Jkt 229001 Section 6—Report of Acreage Comment: One commenter recommended that FCIC revise section 6 to require the producer to report the base contract price on the acreage report. Response: No changes were proposed to this provision and the proposed change does not address a conflict or vulnerability in the provision. Further, such a change would be substantive in nature and the public has not been provided an opportunity to comment. No change has been made to the final rule. Section 12—Settlement of Claim Comment: Commenters recommended that FCIC revise instructions and examples for settling claims due to the proposed change to the ‘‘price election’’ definition. Response: No changes were proposed to this provision and the proposed change does not address a conflict or vulnerability in the provision. Further, such a change would be substantive in nature and the public has not been provided an opportunity to comment. No change has been made to the final rule. Section 14—Prevented Planting Comment: Commenters recommended eliminating the increased prevented planting coverage options for sweet corn. Response: No changes were proposed to this provision and the proposed change does not address a conflict or vulnerability in the provision. Further, PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 55173 such a change would be substantive in nature and the public has not been provided an opportunity to comment. No change has been made to the final rule. List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 457 Crop insurance, Processing sweet corn policy, Price elections. Final Rule Accordingly, as set forth in the preamble, the Federal Crop Insurance Corporation amends 7 CFR part 457 effective for the 2014 and succeeding crop years as follows: PART 457—COMMON CROP INSURANCE REGULATIONS 1. The authority citation for 7 CFR part 457 continues to read as follows: ■ Authority: 7 U.S.C. 1506(l), 1506(o). 2. Amend § 457.154 as follows: a. Amend the introductory text by removing ‘‘1998’’ and adding ‘‘2014’’ in its place; ■ b. Amend section 1 by adding a definition for ‘‘price election’’ in alphabetical order and revising the definition of ‘‘processor contract’’; ■ c. Amend section 3 by revising paragraph (a). The revised and added text reads as follows: ■ ■ § 457.154 Processing Sweet Corn crop insurance provisions. * * * * * 1. Definitions. * * * * * Price election. In lieu of the definition of price election in the Basic Provisions, the price election will be the base contract price stated in your processor contract. * * * * * Processor contract. A written agreement between the producer and a processor, containing at minimum: (a) The producer’s commitment to plant and grow sweet corn, and to deliver the sweet corn production to the processor; (b) The processor’s commitment to purchase all the production stated in the processor contract; and (c) A base contract price. Multiple contracts with the same processor that specify amounts of production will be considered as a single processor contract, unless the contracts are for different types. Your base contract price will be the weighted average of all applicable base contract prices. * * * * * E:\FR\FM\10SER1.SGM 10SER1 55174 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 175 / Tuesday, September 10, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 3. Insurance Guarantees, Coverage Levels, and Prices for Determining Indemnities. * * * * * (a) You may select only one price election percentage for all the processing sweet corn in the county insured under this policy. The percentage of the maximum price election you choose for one type will be applicable to all other types insured under this policy. * * * * * Signed in Washington, DC, on August 29, 2013. Brandon Willis, Manager, Federal Crop Insurance Corporation. [FR Doc. 2013–21826 Filed 9–9–13; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410–08–P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 10 CFR Part 1046 [Docket No. DOE–HQ–2012–0002] RIN 1992–AA40 Medical, Physical Readiness, Training, and Access Authorization Standards for Protective Force Personnel Department of Energy. Final rule. AGENCY: ACTION: The Department of Energy (DOE or Department) is amending its regulations governing the standards for medical, physical performance, training, and access authorizations for protective force (PF) personnel employed by contractors providing security services to the Department. Since the publication of the existing regulations in 1984, and particularly since 9/11, the DOE has totally transformed its approach to dealing with a much-evolved terrorist threat. This transformation has been informed by repeated analysis and testing since 9/ 11. The primary changes are: a move to more sophisticated weapons and detection and targeting systems, an increased reliance on hardened positions and armored response vehicles, and increased use of barriers to channel adversaries. The result is a defensive strategy designed to take full advantage of the fact that the terrorist must fight through the protective force to reach our SNM and other targets. This contrasts directly with the posture in the 1980s and 1990s. Today we expect the terrorist to fight his way through a pre-positioned, layered defense, which places a premium on operating sophisticated weapons and detection rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with RULES SUMMARY: VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:54 Sep 09, 2013 Jkt 229001 and tracking systems. The proposed revisions bring DOE protective force firearms qualification, training, medical and physical readiness requirements in line with these tactical and organizational priorities of 2013. It removes barriers to maintaining the desired experience levels of our protective forces while maintaining established qualification standards. The revised regulations: emphasize firearms training and proficiency testing that reflect current military practice and simulations technology, maximizing training time and decreasing cost; implements the Mission Essential Task List (METL) training framework adapted from the military, which allows for more effective use of training resources by aligning them with validated mission performance priorities, eliminate medical disqualifications for conditions which have become completely treatable since the 1980s, refines a physical readiness testing regimen that currently diverts time and training emphasis from tasks more directly supportive of mission success; and above all, encourage protective force personnel to stay sharp and missionfocused. Furthermore, this shift in emphasis has placed a greater premium upon the retention of mature, tactically experienced, and technically sophisticated personnel, particularly since these personnel represent a considerable investment by DOE in security background investigations and training. The revisions bring DOE PF medical and physical readiness requirements in line with these tactical and organizational priorities. The revisions reduce the exposure of the PF population to injuries related to physical readiness testing. The revisions further ensure that PF personnel are evaluated on a case-by-case basis on their ability to perform the essential functions of their positions without posing a direct threat to themselves or site personnel, the facility, or the general public. The revisions further ensure that reasonable accommodations are considered before a determination is made that an individual cannot perform the essential functions of a particular position. The rule also provides for new medical review processes for PF personnel disqualified from medical certification. The rule ensures that DOE PF medical and physical readiness requirements are compliant with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990, as amended by the Americans with Disabilities Act Amendments Act of 2009 (ADAAA), the Privacy Act and DOE implementing regulations, and changes in DOE policy regarding PF PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 operations made since the publication of the last version of this rule. Finally, the revision updates the regulation to reflect organizational changes in the Office of Health, Safety and Security and the creation of the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) as a semi-autonomous agency within the Department of Energy. DATES: This rule is effective March 10, 2014. Compliance with the provisions of this rule is required March 10, 2014 consistent with the conditions set forth in § 1046.2(e). ADDRESSES: Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents, comments received or transcript of the public hearing, go to http:// ;www.regulations.gov or contact John Cronin at (301) 903–6209 prior to visiting Department of Energy, Office of Security Policy, (HS–51), 19901 Germantown Rd., Germantown, MD 20874. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. John Cronin, Office of Security Policy at (301) 903–6209; John.Cronin@ hq.doe.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background II. Section by Section Analysis Including the Disposition of Public Comments III. Regulatory Review and Procedural Requirements A. Review under Executive Order 12866 B. Review under the Regulatory Flexibility Act C. Review under Paperwork Reduction Act D. Review under the National Environmental Policy Act E. Review under Executive Order 13132 F. Review under Executive Order 12988 G. Review under the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 H. Review under Executive Order 13211 I. Review under the Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act of 1999 J. Review under Section 32 of the Federal Energy Administration Act of 1974 K. Congressional Notification IV. Approval of the Office of the Secretary I. Background Pursuant to the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2011 et seq.) and DOE Organization Act of 1977 (42 U.S.C. 7101 et seq.), DOE owns and leases defense nuclear and other facilities in various locations in the United States. These facilities are operated by contractors (including subcontractors at all tiers) with DOE oversight or are operated by DOE. Protection of the DOE facilities is provided by armed and unarmed PF personnel employed by Federal Government contractors. These PF personnel are required to perform both routine and emergency duties, which E:\FR\FM\10SER1.SGM 10SER1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 175 (Tuesday, September 10, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 55171-55174]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-21826]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Federal Crop Insurance Corporation

7 CFR Part 457

[Docket No. FCIC-12-0001]
RIN 0563-AC37


Common Crop Insurance Regulations; Processing Sweet Corn Crop 
Insurance Provisions

AGENCY: Federal Crop Insurance Corporation, USDA.

ACTION: Final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Federal Crop Insurance Corporation (FCIC) finalizes the 
Common Crop Insurance Regulations, Processing Sweet Corn Crop Insurance 
Provisions. The intended effect of this action is to provide policy 
changes that better meet the needs of insured producers. The changes 
will be effective for the 2014 and succeeding crop years.

DATES: This rule is effective October 10, 2013.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tim Hoffmann, Product Administration 
and Standards Division, Risk Management Agency, United States 
Department of Agriculture, P.O. Box 419205, Stop 0812, Room 421, Kansas 
City, MO 64141-6205, telephone (816) 926-7730.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Executive Order 12866

    This rule has been determined to be not-significant for the 
purposes of Executive Order 12866 and, therefore, it has not been 
reviewed by the OMB.

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

    Pursuant to the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 
(44 U.S.C. chapter 35), the collections of information in this rule 
have been

[[Page 55172]]

approved by OMB under control number 0563-0053.

E-Government Act Compliance

    FCIC is committed to complying with the E-Government Act, to 
promote the use of the Internet and other information technologies to 
provide increased opportunities for citizen access to Government 
information and services, and for other purposes.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995

    Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) 
establishes requirements for Federal agencies to assess the effects of 
their regulatory actions on State, local, and tribal governments and 
the private sector. This rule contains no Federal mandates (under the 
regulatory provisions of title II of the UMRA) for State, local, and 
tribal governments or the private sector. Therefore, this rule is not 
subject to the requirements of sections 202 and 205 of UMRA.

Executive Order 13132

    It has been determined under section 1(a) of Executive Order 13132, 
Federalism, that this rule does not have sufficient implications to 
warrant consultation with the States. The provisions contained in this 
rule will not have a substantial direct effect on States, or on the 
relationship between the national government and the States, or on the 
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of 
government.

Executive Order 13175

    This rule has been reviewed in accordance with the requirements of 
Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal 
Governments. The review reveals that this regulation will not have 
substantial and direct effects on Tribal governments and will not have 
significant Tribal implications.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

    FCIC certifies that this regulation will not have a significant 
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. Program 
requirements for the Federal crop insurance program are the same for 
all producers regardless of the size of their farming operation. For 
instance, all producers are required to submit an application and 
acreage report to establish their insurance guarantees and compute 
premium amounts, and all producers are required to submit a notice of 
loss and production information to determine the amount of an indemnity 
payment in the event of an insured cause of crop loss. Whether a 
producer has 10 acres or 1000 acres, there is no difference in the kind 
of information collected. To ensure crop insurance is available to 
small entities, the Federal Crop Insurance Act authorizes FCIC to waive 
collection of administrative fees from limited resource farmers. FCIC 
believes this waiver helps to ensure that small entities are given the 
same opportunities as large entities to manage their risks through the 
use of crop insurance. A Regulatory Flexibility Analysis has not been 
prepared since this regulation does not have an impact on small 
entities, and, therefore, this regulation is exempt from the provisions 
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 605).

Federal Assistance Program

    This program is listed in the Catalog of Federal Domestic 
Assistance under No. 10.450.

Executive Order 12372

    This program is not subject to the provisions of Executive Order 
12372, which require intergovernmental consultation with State and 
local officials. See the Notice related to 7 CFR part 3015, subpart V, 
published at 48 FR 29115, June 24, 1983.

Executive Order 12988

    This final rule has been reviewed in accordance with Executive 
Order 12988 on civil justice reform. The provisions of this rule will 
not have a retroactive effect. The provisions of this rule will preempt 
State and local laws to the extent such State and local laws are 
inconsistent herewith. With respect to any direct action taken by FCIC 
or action by FCIC directing the insurance provider to take specific 
action under the terms of the crop insurance policy, the administrative 
appeal provisions published at 7 CFR part 11 or 7 CFR part 400, subpart 
J for determinations of good farming practices, as applicable, must be 
exhausted before any action against FCIC for judicial review may be 
brought.

Environmental Evaluation

    This action is not expected to have a significant economic impact 
on the quality of the human environment, health, or safety. Therefore, 
neither an Environmental Assessment nor an Environmental Impact 
Statement is needed.
    Background:
    This rule finalizes changes to the Common Crop Insurance 
Regulations (7 CFR part 457), Processing Sweet Corn Crop Insurance 
Provisions that were published by FCIC on May 11, 2012, as a notice of 
proposed rulemaking in the Federal Register at 77 FR 27658-27659. The 
public was afforded 30 days to submit comments after the regulation was 
published in the Federal Register.
    FCIC received a total of 22 comments from 4 commenters. The 
commenters were insurance providers, an insurance services 
organization, and a Regional Office of the Risk Management Agency 
(RMA). The public comments received regarding the proposed rule and 
FCIC's responses to the comments are as follows:

Order of Priority Statement

    Comment: Commenters recommended deleting the order of priority 
statement, as the order of priority is contained in the Common Crop 
Insurance Policy, Basic Provisions and the order of priority statement 
has been removed from other recently updated policies.
    Response: No changes were proposed to this provision and the 
proposed change does not address a conflict or vulnerability in the 
provision. No change has been made to the final rule.

Section 1--Definitions

    Comment: Commenters recommended eliminating unnecessary repetition 
of language contained in the definition of ``practical to replant''.
    Response: No changes were proposed to this provision and the 
proposed change does not address a conflict or vulnerability in the 
provision. Further, such a change would be substantive in nature and 
the public has not been provided an opportunity to comment. No change 
has been made to the final rule.
    Comment: Commenters stated that the proposed change to the ``price 
election'' definition makes no distinction between the ``base contract 
price'' and the ``price election''. Commenters further stated that the 
proposed definition could be read to mean that the producer must insure 
at 100 percent of the base contract price and cannot choose a lesser 
percentage. Commenters recommended adding language to the proposed 
definition to clarify that a producer may elect to insure a percentage 
of the base contract price.
    Response: FCIC considered this change but has determined that a 
revision to section 3 of the policy is more appropriate to address the 
issue raised by the commenters because this is more than a definitional 
change because it concerns an obligation of the policyholder to make 
the selection. No change has been made to the definition of ``price 
election''.
    Comment: One commenter recommended that FCIC add language to

[[Page 55173]]

the definition of ``price election'' stating the definition of ``price 
election'' may be otherwise defined by FCIC in the Special Provisions.
    Response: FCIC disagrees with the proposed change. In accordance 
with the order of priority contained in the Common Crop Insurance 
Policy, Basic Provisions, FCIC has the authority to provide the 
definition of ``price election'' in the Special Provisions, in lieu of 
the definition in the Basic Provisions. Therefore, no change has been 
made to the final rule.
    Comment: Commenters recommended that FCIC clarify the definition of 
``processor contract'' regarding different base contract prices on 
multiple contracts with the same processor that specify amounts of 
production.
    Response: FCIC agrees with the suggested change and recognizes that 
it addresses a conflict created by FCIC's proposed revision to the 
definition of ``price election''. FCIC has revised the definition to 
clarify how multiple contracts are handled under the policy.

Section 2--Unit Division

    Comment: Commenters recommended that FCIC clarify policy provisions 
regarding the availability of unit structures under sections 2(a) and 
2(b).
    Response: No changes were proposed to this provision and the 
proposed change does not address a conflict or vulnerability in the 
provision. Further, such a change would be substantive in nature and 
the public has not been provided an opportunity to comment. No change 
has been made to the final rule.

Section 3--Insurance Guarantees, Coverage Levels, and Prices for 
Determining Indemnities

    Comment: Commenters recommended that FCIC adjust the provision in 
3(a) that limits the producer to selecting only one price election for 
all the processing sweet corn in the county to be consistent with the 
definition of ``price election'' proposed by FCIC. Commenters stated 
that the provision should instead limit the producer to selecting only 
one percentage of the price election for all the processing sweet corn 
in the county.
    Response: FCIC agrees with the suggested change and recognizes that 
it addresses a conflict created by FCIC's proposed revision to the 
definition of ``price election''. FCIC has revised the provision 
accordingly.
    Comment: One commenter recommended that FCIC review 3(b) in 
relation to the Dry Bean Crop Provisions to determine if similar 
language is appropriate for processing sweet corn.
    Response: No changes were proposed to this provision and the 
proposed change does not address a conflict or vulnerability in the 
provision because the provision is question is specific to dry beans 
and is not applicable here. Further, such a change would be substantive 
in nature and the public has not been provided an opportunity to 
comment. No change has been made to the final rule.

Section 6--Report of Acreage

    Comment: One commenter recommended that FCIC revise section 6 to 
require the producer to report the base contract price on the acreage 
report.
    Response: No changes were proposed to this provision and the 
proposed change does not address a conflict or vulnerability in the 
provision. Further, such a change would be substantive in nature and 
the public has not been provided an opportunity to comment. No change 
has been made to the final rule.

Section 11--Duties in the Event of Damage or Loss

    Comment: Commenters recommended that FCIC clarify terminology in 
11(c).
    Response: Without more information FCIC is unable to determine what 
needs clarification. Further, no changes were proposed to this 
provision and the proposed change does not address a conflict or 
vulnerability in the provision, and any such change could be 
substantive in nature and the public has not been provided an 
opportunity to comment. No change has been made to the final rule.

Section 12--Settlement of Claim

    Comment: Commenters recommended that FCIC revise instructions and 
examples for settling claims due to the proposed change to the ``price 
election'' definition.
    Response: No changes were proposed to this provision and the 
proposed change does not address a conflict or vulnerability in the 
provision. Further, such a change would be substantive in nature and 
the public has not been provided an opportunity to comment. No change 
has been made to the final rule.

Section 14--Prevented Planting

    Comment: Commenters recommended eliminating the increased prevented 
planting coverage options for sweet corn.
    Response: No changes were proposed to this provision and the 
proposed change does not address a conflict or vulnerability in the 
provision. Further, such a change would be substantive in nature and 
the public has not been provided an opportunity to comment. No change 
has been made to the final rule.

List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 457

    Crop insurance, Processing sweet corn policy, Price elections.

Final Rule

    Accordingly, as set forth in the preamble, the Federal Crop 
Insurance Corporation amends 7 CFR part 457 effective for the 2014 and 
succeeding crop years as follows:

PART 457--COMMON CROP INSURANCE REGULATIONS

0
1. The authority citation for 7 CFR part 457 continues to read as 
follows:

    Authority: 7 U.S.C. 1506(l), 1506(o).


0
2. Amend Sec.  457.154 as follows:
0
a. Amend the introductory text by removing ``1998'' and adding ``2014'' 
in its place;
0
b. Amend section 1 by adding a definition for ``price election'' in 
alphabetical order and revising the definition of ``processor 
contract'';
0
c. Amend section 3 by revising paragraph (a).
    The revised and added text reads as follows:


Sec.  457.154  Processing Sweet Corn crop insurance provisions.

* * * * *
    1. Definitions.
* * * * *
    Price election. In lieu of the definition of price election in the 
Basic Provisions, the price election will be the base contract price 
stated in your processor contract.
* * * * *
    Processor contract. A written agreement between the producer and a 
processor, containing at minimum:
    (a) The producer's commitment to plant and grow sweet corn, and to 
deliver the sweet corn production to the processor;
    (b) The processor's commitment to purchase all the production 
stated in the processor contract; and
    (c) A base contract price.
    Multiple contracts with the same processor that specify amounts of 
production will be considered as a single processor contract, unless 
the contracts are for different types. Your base contract price will be 
the weighted average of all applicable base contract prices.
* * * * *

[[Page 55174]]

    3. Insurance Guarantees, Coverage Levels, and Prices for 
Determining Indemnities.
* * * * *
    (a) You may select only one price election percentage for all the 
processing sweet corn in the county insured under this policy. The 
percentage of the maximum price election you choose for one type will 
be applicable to all other types insured under this policy.
* * * * *

    Signed in Washington, DC, on August 29, 2013.
Brandon Willis,
Manager, Federal Crop Insurance Corporation.
[FR Doc. 2013-21826 Filed 9-9-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-08-P