Area Risk Protection Insurance Regulations; Common Crop Insurance Policy Basic Provisions; Common Crop Insurance Regulations, Sunflower Seed Crop Insurance Provisions; and Common Crop Insurance Regulations, Dry Pea Crop Insurance Provisions, 76420-76428 [2020-26036]

Download as PDF 76420 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 230 / Monday, November 30, 2020 / Rules and Regulations specific dollar amount.) This new withdrawal election is subject to the spousal consent rules set forth at 5 U.S.C. 8435(a)(1)(B). TKELLEY on DSKBCP9HB2PROD with RULES Tax Implications The FRTIB recognizes the value of giving TSP participants more flexibility with respect to installment payments. However, TSP participants should be aware of potential tax consequences mandated by the Internal Revenue Code (Code) that may result from stopping installment payments calculated based on life expectancy. TSP participants who separate from service before the age of 55 and choose to receive installment payments may be subject to a 10% early withdrawal penalty under Code section 72(t). Installment payments based on life expectancy are an exception to the rule. However, the penalty can be applied retroactively if the participant does any of the following within five years of beginning payments or before reaching age 591⁄2: (1) Stopping life-expectancybased payments; (2) switching lifeexpectancy-based payments to payments of a fixed dollar amount; or (3) withdrawing money in addition to the life-expectancy based payments. Doing any of these things in that period of time will make the participant liable for the penalty tax on the payments he or she previously received. These tax consequences are mandated by the Code and are not eliminated by this FRTIB rule change. Direct Final Rulemaking The FRTIB is publishing this regulation as a direct final rule. In a direct final rulemaking, an agency publishes its rule in the Federal Register along with a statement that the rule will become effective unless the agency receives significant adverse comment within a specified period. The content of this direct final rule relieves a restriction on a TSP participant’s ability to make a postseparation withdrawal election to receive installment payments based on life expectancy. Therefore, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553, notice and comment are not required, and this rule may become effective after publication in the Federal Register without public comment. Nevertheless, the FRTIB appreciates that members of the public may have perspectives or information that could impact the FRTIB’s views with respect to the removal of these restrictions. The FRTIB, therefore, is providing a 30-day public comment period, and intends to consider all comments submitted during that period. The FRTIB will withdraw the rule if it receives significant adverse VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:14 Nov 27, 2020 Jkt 253001 comment. Comments that are not adverse may be considered for modifications to part 1650 at a future date. If no significant adverse comment is received, the rule will become effective 40 days after publication, without additional notice. Regulatory Flexibility Act PART 1650—METHODS OF WITHDRAWING FUNDS FROM THE THRIFT SAVINGS PLAN 1. The authority citation for part 1650 continues to read as follows: ■ Authority: 5 U.S.C. 8351, 8432d, 8433, 8434, 8435, 8474(b)(5) and 8474(c)(1). 2. Amend § 1650.13 by revising paragraph (b) to read as follows: ■ I certify that this regulation will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This regulation will affect Federal employees and members of the uniformed services who participate in the Thrift Savings Plan, which is a Federal defined contribution retirement savings plan created under the Federal Employees’ Retirement System Act of 1986 (FERSA), Public Law 99–335, 100 Stat. 514, and which is administered by the FRTIB. Paperwork Reduction Act I certify that these regulations do not require additional reporting under the criteria of the Paperwork Reduction Act. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 Pursuant to the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995, 2 U.S.C. 602, 632, 653, 1501–1571, the effects of this regulation on state, local, and tribal governments and the private sector have been assessed. This regulation will not compel the expenditure in any one year of $100 million or more by state, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector. Therefore, a statement under section 1532 is not required. § 1650.13 Installment Payments. * * * * * (b) A participant can make the following changes at any time as described in § 1650.17(c): (1) A participant receiving installment payments calculated based on life expectancy can elect to change to fixed dollar installment payments; (2) A participant receiving installment payments based on a fixed dollar amount can elect to stop these payments and make a new election to receive installment payments calculated based on life expectancy; (3) A participant receiving installment payments based on a fixed dollar amount can elect to change the amount of his or her fixed payments; and (4) A participant receiving fixed dollar installment payments can elect to change the frequency of his or her installment payments. * * * * * [FR Doc. 2020–26339 Filed 11–25–20; 11:15 am] BILLING CODE 6760–01–P DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Federal Crop Insurance Corporation 7 CFR Parts 407 and 457 Submission to Congress and the General Accounting Office RIN 0563–AC70 Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 810(a)(1)(A), the FRTIB submitted a report containing this rule and other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States before publication of this rule in the Federal Register. This rule is not a major rule as defined at 5 U.S.C. 804(2). Area Risk Protection Insurance Regulations; Common Crop Insurance Policy Basic Provisions; Common Crop Insurance Regulations, Sunflower Seed Crop Insurance Provisions; and Common Crop Insurance Regulations, Dry Pea Crop Insurance Provisions List of Subjects in 5 CFR Part 1650 Alimony, Claims, Government employees, Pensions, Retirement. Ravindra Deo, Executive Director, Federal Retirement Thrift Investment Board. For the reasons stated in the preamble, the FRTIB amends 5 CFR Chapter VI as follows: PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 [Docket ID FCIC–20–0008] Federal Crop Insurance Corporation, USDA. ACTION: Final rule with request for comments. AGENCY: The Federal Crop Insurance Corporation (FCIC) amends the Area Risk Protection Insurance (ARPI) Regulations; Common Crop Insurance Policy (CCIP), Basic Provisions; Common Crop Insurance Regulations, Sunflower Seed Crop Insurance SUMMARY: E:\FR\FM\30NOR1.SGM 30NOR1 TKELLEY on DSKBCP9HB2PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 230 / Monday, November 30, 2020 / Rules and Regulations Provisions (Sunflower Seed Crop Provisions); and Common Crop Insurance Regulations, Dry Pea Crop Insurance Provisions (Dry Pea Crop Provisions). The intended effect of this action is to improve prevented planting provisions, revise beginning farmer or rancher and veteran farmer or rancher provisions and clarify arbitration provisions. In addition to these changes, FCIC is making clarifications to the Dry Pea Crop Provisions and revising the cancellation and termination dates in the Sunflower Seed Crop Provisions. The changes to the policy made in this rule are applicable for the 2021 and succeeding crop years for crops with a contract change date on or after November 30, 2020. For all other crops, the changes to the policy made in this rule are applicable for the 2022 and succeeding crop years. DATES: Effective Date: This final rule is effective November 30, 2020. Comment Date: We will consider comments that we receive by the close of business January 29, 2021. FCIC may consider the comments received and may conduct additional rulemaking based on the comments. ADDRESSES: We invite you to submit comments on this rule. You may submit comments by either of the following methods, although FCIC prefers that you submit comments electronically through the Federal eRulemaking Portal: • Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to https://www.regulations.gov/ docket?D=FCIC-20-0008 and follow the instructions for submitting comments. • Mail: Director, Product Administration and Standards Division, Risk Management Agency, US Department of Agriculture, P.O. Box 419205, Kansas City, MO 64133–6205. In your comment, specify docket ID FCIC–20–0008. Comments will be available for viewing online at www.regulations.gov. Comments received will be posted without change, including any personal information provided. In addition, comments will be available for public inspection at the above address during business hours from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except holidays. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Francie Tolle; telephone (816) 926– 7829; or email francie.tolle@usda.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: agricultural producers and rural communities. The Risk Management Agency (RMA) administers the FCIC regulations. FCIC is committed to increasing the availability and effectiveness of Federal crop insurance as a risk management tool. Approved Insurance Providers (AIPs) sell and service Federal crop insurance policies in every state and in Puerto Rico through a public-private partnership. FCIC reinsures the AIPs who share the risk associated with catastrophic losses due to major weather events. FCIC’s vision is to secure the future of agriculture by providing world class risk management tools to rural America. Federal crop insurance policies typically consist of the Basic Provisions, the Crop Provisions, the Special Provisions, the Commodity Exchange Price Provisions, if applicable, other applicable endorsements or options, the actuarial documents for the insured agricultural commodity, the Catastrophic Risk Protection Endorsement, if applicable, and the applicable regulations published in 7 CFR chapter IV. FCIC amends the ARPI Basic Provisions, the CCIP Basic Provisions, the Sunflower Seed Crop Provisions, and the Dry Pea Crop Provisions. The changes to the policy made in this rule are applicable for the 2021 and succeeding crop years for crops with a contract change date on or after November 30, 2020. For all other crops the changes to the policy made in this rule are applicable for the 2022 and succeeding crop years. Background FCIC serves America’s agricultural producers through effective, marketbased risk management tools to strengthen the economic stability of CCIP Basic Provisions The changes to the CCIP Basic Provisions (7 CFR part 457.8) are: FCIC is revising section 3(l) to allow a producer that qualifies as a beginning VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:14 Nov 27, 2020 Jkt 253001 ARPI Basic Provisions The changes to the ARPI Basic Provisions (7 CFR part 407) are: FCIC is revising sections 23(d)(1), (2), and (5)(i) of the ARPI Basic Provisions to clarify the responsibility is on the producer to start dispute resolution through arbitration when the producer disagrees with an AIP determination. There has been confusion that this provision could require both the producer and the AIP to start arbitration prior to litigation. FCIC is also making non-substantive changes to the regulation. Examples include making references consistent, making grammatical corrections, and clarifying word changes. These revisions are editorial in nature and are intended to provide clarity to the regulation. PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 76421 farmer or rancher (BFR), or veteran farmer or rancher (VFR), to receive a yield based on the actual production history (APH) of the previous producer of the crop or livestock on the acreage, if the BFR or VFR was previously involved in the decision-making or physical activities of the crop or livestock on any farm. Previously, the provisions specified that the APH history of the acreage could only be used if the BFR or VFR was previously involved on the specific acreage acquired. Prevented planting is a feature of many crop insurance plans that provides a partial payment to cover certain pre-plant costs for a crop that was prevented from being planted due to an insurable cause of loss. After unprecedented prevented planting in 2019, FCIC examined how to improve the prevented planting coverage within a policy. FCIC held discussions with stakeholders via a Prevented Planting Taskforce that included FCIC and industry representatives. The taskforce reviewed the previous policy, discussed impacts, and explored policy improvements. The goal of the taskforce was to improve coverage for producers when needed most, but not replace market incentives with government incentives, while maintaining program integrity. The taskforce identified several issues that are extremely uncommon but could occur in years when prevented planting is catastrophic and widespread. The following lists the changes in section 17 of the CCIP Basic Provisions: FCIC is revising section 17(e)(1)(i) to add a reference to the new provisions in section 17(e)(1)(ii)(E). FCIC is revising section 17(e)(1)(ii) to allow the use of an intended acreage report for the first 2 consecutive crop years the producer farms in a new county, instead of only the first year. The CCIP Basic Provisions define ‘‘intended acreage report’’ as a report of the acreage a producer intends to plant, by crop, for the current crop year and used solely for the purpose of establishing eligible prevented planting acreage, as required in section 17. Further, section 17 states that if the insured did not plant any crop in the county for which prevented planting coverage was available in the 4 most recent crop years, the producer must complete and submit an intended acreage report to the AIP by the sales closing date, or within 10 days of land acquisition after the sales closing date, to establish the potential maximum number of eligible prevented planting acres. E:\FR\FM\30NOR1.SGM 30NOR1 76422 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 230 / Monday, November 30, 2020 / Rules and Regulations Based on the previous provision, when a producer adds new land in a new county, the producer could only indicate intended acres for the first year. An issue arises in the second year if the producer, following good farming practices for crop rotation, intends to plant a different crop. Because the producer only has 1 year of history in the county, the producer is limited in the amount of acreage (and type of crop) that can be claimed for prevented planting purposes. For example, a producer adds land in a new county. The first year, the producer files an intended acreage report for wheat and plants the entire acreage to wheat. The second year, the producer intends to plant corn, but is prevented from planting due to an insurable cause of loss. Under the previous regulations, the producer would not have any eligible prevented planting acreage for corn because they only have eligible wheat acres based on their first year’s history in their APH database. The producer would receive a prevented planting payment based on the eligible wheat acres. This would result in a different prevented planting payment than the intended corn crop, which may not be reflective of their preplant costs. As specified above, FCIC will revise section 17(e)(1)(ii) to allow the producer to submit an intended acreage report for the first 2 consecutive crop years the producer farms in a new county. In the above scenario, this will allow the producer to receive a prevented planting payment based on the acres contained on the intended acreage report for the second year and the payment will be based on corn. This change acknowledges rotational practices are a good farming practice. It will also result in more accurate prevented planting payments because they will be based on the producer’s actual intended plantings for that year. FCIC is revising section 17(e)(2) to provide that if following a failed first insured crop, an uninsured second crop is planted on the same acres within the same crop year, the planted acres of the uninsured crop will not be subtracted from the eligible prevented planting acreage. Section 17(e)(2) of the CCIP Basic Provisions previously stated, ‘‘Any eligible acreage determined in accordance with section 17(e)(1) will be reduced by subtracting the number of acres of the crop (insured and uninsured) that are timely and late planted, including acreage specified in section 16(b).’’ If following a failed first insured crop, the producer plants an uninsured second crop on the same acres within the same crop year; acres from both plantings (first insured crop and second uninsured crop) are subtracted from the eligible prevented planting acreage, even though it is the same physical land subtracted twice. On occasion, this can lead to the producer having acres that do not receive a prevented planting payment due to inadequate eligible prevented planting acres. This occurrence is extremely rare, but it affected a small number of producers in the 2019 crop year. To illustrate the rarity of these circumstances, for the reduction to apply under the previous regulation, all of the following must have been true for the producer: (1) Planted a first crop that fails, (2) Planted a second crop on the same acreage following the failed crop, and (3) Exhausted eligible prevented planting acres available to pay a claim. The underlying concern is that the same physical acres are subtracted twice from overall prevented planting eligible acres. To illustrate the inequity of the double subtraction, the following is a simple example of the previous provisions. A producer has 100 total acres of cropland (fields A & B) and intends to plant all 100 acres to corn. Based on production history, the producer also has 100 prevented planting eligible acres (50 for corn and 50 for soybeans). The producer plants 50 acres of corn in field A, resulting in 50 corn acres subtracted from eligible prevented planting acres. At this point, TKELLEY on DSKBCP9HB2PROD with RULES Corn ................................................................................................................. Soybeans ......................................................................................................... Scenario 2: A producer has 50 acres of prevented planting corn eligibility and 50 acres of prevented planting soybean eligibility; prevented planting eligibility is eliminated on field B. VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:14 Nov 27, 2020 Jkt 253001 Planted (insured & uninsured) Eligible acres Crop 100 0 Previously, prevented planting eligible acres are reduced by planted acres of insured and uninsured crops, and the 50 acres of planted and then failed corn in field A would exhaust corn prevented PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 there are 50 soybean eligible prevented planting acres and zero corn eligible prevented planting acres. A flood destroys the 50 acres of corn in field A, the AIP determines it is not practical to replant, and the producer does not have to replant to retain insurance. The producer files a claim for indemnity for the crop loss and receives an indemnity for the field A 50 destroyed corn acres. Later, the producer plants the 50 acres in field A to soybeans that are not insured. The second planting of field A (uninsured soybeans) would result in the subtraction of 50 acres of eligible prevented planting acres of soybeans. This equates to 100 eligible prevented planting acres being subtracted from the same 50 physical acres (field A); leaving 0 eligible prevented planting acres remaining for the 50 physical acres prevented from planting in field B that remains unplanted. FCIC is removing the double subtraction on field A by no longer subtracting the uninsured second planting from eligible prevented planting acres. This would allow a prevented planting payment on field B, if those acres were unable to be planted, and if other policy provisions for prevented planting claims are met. To illustrate the inequity of the previous provisions in a different way, see the following scenarios below. These scenarios show the disparate treatment of two producers in the same situation, except that their 100 prevented planting eligible acres are for different crops. Scenario 1: Producer has 100 acres of corn prevented planting eligible acres and 0 acres of soybean prevented planting eligibility. There is no impact on prevented planting eligibility for field B. Since there are 0 acres of soybean eligible prevented planting acres, the 50 planted acres of uninsured soybeans (field A) would not be subtracted from prevented planting eligibility. In this case, the producer would remain eligible for a prevented planting payment on the 50 acres of corn (field B) that were prevented from being planted. 50 50 Prevented from planting 50 0 Available for payment 50 0 planting eligibility. The planting of 50 acres of uninsured soybeans in field A would exhaust the soybean prevented planting eligibility as well. There would be no remaining eligible prevented E:\FR\FM\30NOR1.SGM 30NOR1 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 230 / Monday, November 30, 2020 / Rules and Regulations 76423 planting acres for the 50 acres of corn prevented from being planted in field B. Corn ................................................................................................................. Soybeans ......................................................................................................... Regulation change: For this example, the change to the regulation results in Scenario 2 having the same result as Scenario 1 with 50 eligible acres of Eligible acres TKELLEY on DSKBCP9HB2PROD with RULES Corn ..................................................................................... Soybeans ............................................................................. FCIC is revising section 17(f)(1) to provide an exception if the producer can prove intent to plant based on inputs applied or available to apply, rotation, etc., the producer could then be paid a prevented planting payment based on their intended crop, even if it’s different than the crop that was planted in the field. Previously, section 17(f)(1) of the CCIP Basic Provisions stated, ‘‘Any prevented planting acreage within a field that contains planted acreage will be considered to be acreage of the same crop, type, and practice that is planted in the field.’’ For example, a producer intends to plant a 100-acre field to corn, but it is too wet prior to the final plant date. Prior to the end of the late planting period for corn, she begins planting the field to soybeans. She planted 20 acres of soybeans before getting rained out. The producer submits a claim for the remaining 80 acres as prevented planting corn. The producer does not have history of producing both corn and soybeans in the same field in the same crop year. Prevented planting is common to the area and the producer has adequate corn prevented planting eligible acres to cover the 80 acres prevented from planting. As a result, the producer has receipts for seed and other inputs to prove intent to plant corn. She expects to be paid prevented planting for corn at a higher per acre amount on 80 acres. However, because she planted 20 acres of soybeans in the same field as her prevented planting claim, section 17(f)(1) requires the 80 acres to be considered soybeans and be paid at a lower per acre amount. The previous provision may have incentivized the producer to not plant soybeans in order 17:14 Nov 27, 2020 Jkt 253001 50 50 prevented planting soybeans which can be used to make the corn payment claimed. Changing this to not subtract the uninsured acres of soybeans planted Crop VerDate Sep<11>2014 Planted (insured & uninsured) Eligible acres Crop Planted (insured) 50 50 Frm 00005 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 Available for payment 50 0 0 0 on field A will be a more equitable treatment of producers under catastrophic loss conditions. Planted (uninsured) 50 0 to maintain the higher prevented planting payment on corn. Revising the provision could reduce prevented planting payments when this situation arises in the future. With the revisions to section 17(f)(1) to provide an exception if the producer can prove intent to plant by inputs applied or available to apply, rotation, etc., in the example, the producer could provide documentation that fertilizer application, seed purchases, historical crop rotation patterns, etc. were consistent with intentions to plant corn. The producer could then be paid using available corn prevented planting acres, rather than having to consider the prevented planting acres soybeans. FCIC is adding a new section 17(f)(5)(iii) to clarify prevented planting coverage will not be provided if the act of haying or grazing a cover crop contributed to the acreage being prevented from planting or the cover crop was otherwise harvested prior to the end of the late planting period. In a previous final rule, section 17(f)(5)(ii) was revised to remove the words ‘‘or cover’’ following the word ‘‘volunteer,’’. In addition, FCIC removed a Special Provisions statement that read: ‘‘In lieu of Section 17(f)(5)(ii) of the Common Crop Insurance Basic Provisions, haying or grazing a cover crop will not impact eligibility for a prevented planting payment provided such action did not contribute to the acreage being prevented from planting.’’ FCIC received comments regarding concerns this change could lead to misunderstanding and unforeseen consequences. Some may interpret this to mean that a cover crop could be hayed or grazed even if the act contributed to the acreage being prevented from planting or that a cover PO 00000 50 50 Prevented from planting 0 50 Prevented from planting 50 0 Available for payment 0 50 crop could be otherwise harvested prior to the end of the late planting period. Therefore, the additional language incorporates the previous Special Provisions statements. FCIC is revising section 17(f)(8) to implement the ‘‘1 in 4’’ requirement nationwide (beyond just the Prairie Pothole National Priority Area discussed below). Acreage must be physically available for planting to be eligible for a prevented planting payment. The ‘‘1 in 4’’ requirement is contained in a Special Provisions statement and is an extension of the CCIP Basic Provisions that the acreage must be physically available for planting. The ‘‘1 in 4’’ requirement states that the acreage must have been planted to a crop, insured, and harvested (or if not harvested, adjusted for claim purposes due to an insurable cause of loss) in at least 1 out of the previous 4 crop years. The ‘‘1 in 4’’ requirement has been in place since the 2012 crop year in the Prairie Pothole National Priority Area, which encompasses the states of Iowa, Minnesota, Montana, North Dakota, and South Dakota. The requirement in that area addressed prevented planting payments that were repeatedly made on acreage not physically available for planting (that is, acreage that is perpetually wet, such as potholes). Adding the language to the CCIP Basic Provisions for national applicability will allow for equal treatment for all areas of the United States and further mitigate waste, fraud and abuse for all acreage that is not physically available for planting to a crop to be insured. The Special Provisions statement had a requirement that the acreage must have been harvested, or if not harvested, was adjusted for claim purposes under the E:\FR\FM\30NOR1.SGM 30NOR1 TKELLEY on DSKBCP9HB2PROD with RULES 76424 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 230 / Monday, November 30, 2020 / Rules and Regulations authority of the Act due to an insured cause of loss (other than a cause of loss related to flood or excess moisture). FCIC identified perpetual drought conditions as a vulnerability and received requests to expand the ‘‘1 in 4’’ requirement in previous years. Therefore, FCIC added that in order to meet the ‘‘1 in 4’’ requirement, claim purposes could not be ‘‘due to drought’’ to address prevented planting payments that were repeatedly made on acreage not physically available for planting on perpetually dry acreage when a crop was not harvested. This incorporates provisions from a Special Provisions statement and as a result, the Special Provisions statement is removed. FCIC is revising section 20(a) and 20(b)(1) to clarify the responsibility is on the producer to start dispute resolution through arbitration when the producer disagrees with an AIP determination. The AIP is the only party that makes a determination so the producer is the only party to the contract that could disagree with the determination the AIP made. There has been confusion that this provision could require both the producer and the AIP to start arbitration prior to litigation. FCIC is also making non-substantive changes to the regulation. Examples include making references consistent, making grammatical corrections, and clarifying word changes. These revisions are editorial in nature and are intended to provide clarity to the regulation. June 26, 2020 (85 FR 38276). In reviewing the changes made, FCIC found some of the changes described in that rule were not made in the Code of Federal Regulations. Additionally, FCIC received comments to that final rule and is making revisions that are editorial in nature are intended to provide clarity to the regulation. There are other comments that FCIC received in response to the final rule published June 26, 2020, that FCIC is continuing to review. Sunflower Seed Crop Insurance Provisions FCIC is revising section 4 of the Sunflower Seed Crop Insurance Provisions (7 CFR part 457.108) to change the cancellation and termination dates in 4 Texas counties from March 15 to January 31 to align with the January 31 sales closing date in these counties. This change is being made after a data mining exercise where FCIC identified that the sales closing date and cancellation/termination date did not match in these 4 counties. FCIC is also making non-substantive changes to the regulation, including removing commas and correcting a spelling error. Executive Order 12866, ‘‘Regulatory Planning and Review,’’ and Executive Order 13563, ‘‘Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review,’’ direct agencies to assess all 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 emphasized the importance of quantifying both costs and benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, and of promoting flexibility. Executive Order 13777, ‘‘Enforcing the Regulatory Reform Agenda,’’ established a federal policy to alleviate unnecessary regulatory burdens on the American people. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) designated this rule as not significant under Executive Order 12866, ‘‘Regulatory Planning and Review,’’ and therefore, OMB has not reviewed this rule and analysis of the costs and benefits is not required under either Executive Order 12866 or 13563. Dry Pea Crop Insurance Provisions FCIC is making non-substantive changes in the Dry Pea Crop Insurance Provisions (7 CFR part 457.140). Examples include making technical corrections and clarifying language changes. Changes were made to the Dry Pea Crop Insurance Provisions in a Final rule with request for comments, published in the Federal Register on VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:14 Nov 27, 2020 Jkt 253001 Effective Date and Notice and Comment The Administrative Procedure Act (APA, 5 U.S.C. 553) provides that the notice and comment and 30-day delay in the effective date provisions do not apply when the rule involves specified actions, including matters relating to contracts. This rule governs contracts for crop insurance policies and therefore falls within that exemption. Although not required by APA or any other law, FCIC has chosen to request comments on this rule. For major rules, the Congressional Review Act requires a delay to the effective date of 60 days after publication to allow for Congressional review. This rule is not a major rule under the Congressional Review Act, as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). Therefore, this final rule is effective November 30, 2020. Executive Orders 12866, 13563, 13771 and 13777 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 Executive Order 13771, ‘‘Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs,’’ requires that in order to manage the private costs required to comply with Federal regulations that for every new significant or economically significant regulation issued, the new costs must be offset by savings from deregulatory actions. As this rule is designated as not significant, it is not subject to Executive Order 13771. In a general response to the requirements of Executive Order 13777, USDA created a Regulatory Reform Task Force, and USDA agencies were directed to remove barriers, reduce burdens, and provide better customer service both as part of the regulatory reform of existing regulations and as an ongoing approach. FCIC reviewed this regulation and made changes to improve any provision that was determined to be outdated, unnecessary, or ineffective. Clarity of the Regulation Executive Order 12866, as supplemented by Executive Order 13563, requires each agency to write all rules in plain language. In addition to your substantive comments on this rule, we invite your comments on how to make the rule easier to understand. For example: • Are the requirements in the rule clearly stated? Are the scope and intent of the rule clear? • Does the rule contain technical language or jargon that is not clear? • Is the material logically organized? • Would changing the grouping or order of sections or adding headings make the rule easier to understand? • Could we improve clarity by adding tables, lists, or diagrams? • Would more, but shorter, sections be better? Are there specific sections that are too long or confusing? • What else could we do to make the rule easier to understand? Regulatory Flexibility Act The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601–612), as amended by SBREFA, generally requires an agency to prepare a regulatory analysis of any rule whenever an agency is required by APA or any other law to publish a proposed rule, unless the agency certifies that the rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This rule is not subject to the Regulatory Flexibility Act because as noted above, this rule is exempt from APA and no other law requires that a proposed rule be published for this rulemaking initiative. E:\FR\FM\30NOR1.SGM 30NOR1 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 230 / Monday, November 30, 2020 / Rules and Regulations Environmental Review In general, the environmental impacts of rules are to be considered in a manner consistent with the provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA, 42 U.S.C. 4321–4347) and the regulations of the Council on Environmental Quality (40 CFR parts 1500–1508). FCIC conducts programs and activities that have been determined to have no individual or cumulative effect on the human environment. As specified in 7 CFR 1b.4, FCIC is categorically excluded from the preparation of an Environmental Analysis or Environmental Impact Statement unless the FCIC Manager (agency head) determines that an action may have a significant environmental effect. The FCIC Manager has determined this rule will not have a significant environmental effect. Therefore, FCIC will not prepare an environmental assessment or environmental impact statement for this action and this rule serves as documentation of the programmatic environmental compliance decision. TKELLEY on DSKBCP9HB2PROD with RULES Executive Order 12372 Executive Order 12372, ‘‘Intergovernmental Review of Federal Programs,’’ requires consultation with State and local officials that would be directly affected by proposed Federal financial assistance. The objectives of the Executive Order are to foster an intergovernmental partnership and a strengthened Federalism, by relying on State and local processes for State and local government coordination and review of proposed Federal financial assistance and direct Federal development. For reasons specified in the final rule related notice regarding 7 CFR part 3015, subpart V (48 FR 29115, June 24, 1983), the programs and activities in this rule are excluded from the scope of Executive Order 12372. Executive Order 12988 This rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 12988, ‘‘Civil Justice Reform.’’ This rule will not preempt State or local laws, regulations, or policies unless they represent an irreconcilable conflict with this rule. Before any judicial actions may be brought regarding the provisions of this rule, the administrative appeal provisions of 7 CFR part 11 are to be exhausted. Executive Order 13132 This rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 13132, ‘‘Federalism.’’ The policies contained in this rule do not have any substantial direct effect on States, on the relationship between the VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:14 Nov 27, 2020 Jkt 253001 Federal government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government, except as required by law. Nor does this rule impose substantial direct compliance costs on State and local governments. Therefore, consultation with the States is not required. Executive Order 13175 This rule has been reviewed in accordance with the requirements of Executive Order 13175, ‘‘Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments.’’ Executive Order 13175 requires Federal agencies to consult and coordinate with Tribes on a government-to-government basis on policies that have Tribal implications, including regulations, legislative comments or proposed legislation, and other policy statements or actions 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. RMA has assessed the impact of this rule on Indian Tribes and determined that this rule does not, to our knowledge, have Tribal implications that require Tribal consultation under E.O. 13175. The regulation changes do not have Tribal implications that preempt Tribal law and are not expected have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian Tribes. If a Tribe requests consultation, RMA will work with the USDA Office of Tribal Relations to ensure meaningful consultation is provided where changes, additions and modifications identified in this rule are not expressly mandated by Congress. The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA, Pub. L. 104–4) requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their regulatory actions of State, local, and Tribal governments or the private sector. Agencies generally must prepare a written statement, including cost benefits analysis, for proposed and final rules with Federal mandates that may result in expenditures of $100 million or more in any 1 year for State, local or Tribal governments, in the aggregate, or to the private sector. UMRA generally requires agencies to consider alternatives and adopt the more cost effective or least burdensome alternative that achieves the objectives of the rule. This rule contains no Federal mandates, as defined in Title II of UMRA, for State, local, and Tribal governments or the PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 76425 private sector. Therefore, this rule is not subject to the requirements of sections 202 and 205 of UMRA. Federal Assistance Program The title and number of the Federal Domestic Assistance Program listed in the Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance to which this rule applies is No. 10.450—Crop Insurance. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 In accordance with the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. chapter 35, subchapter I), the rule does not change the information collection approved by OMB under control numbers 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. List of Subjects 7 CFR Part 407 Acreage allotments, Administrative practice and procedure, Barley, Corn, Cotton, Crop insurance, Peanuts, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sorghum, Soybeans, Wheat. 7 CFR Part 457 Acreage allotments, Crop insurance, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. Final Rule For the reasons discussed above, FCIC amends 7 CFR parts 407 and 457, effective for the 2021 and succeeding crop years for crops with a contract change date on or after November 30, 2020, and for the 2022 and succeeding crop years for all other crops, as follows: PART 407—AREA RISK PROTECTION INSURANCE REGULATIONS 1. The authority citation for 7 CFR part 407 continues to read as follows: ■ Authority: 7 U.S.C. 1506(l) and 1506(o). 2. Amend § 407.9 as follows: a. In section 1: i. In the definition of ‘‘Code of Federal Regulations (CFR)’’, remove the phrase ‘‘http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/’’ and add ‘‘https://www.ecfr.gov/’’ in its place; ■ ii. In the definition of ‘‘total premium’’, remove the phrase ‘‘section 7(e)(1)’’ and add ‘‘section 7(d)(1)’’ in its place; ■ b. In section 2: ■ ■ ■ E:\FR\FM\30NOR1.SGM 30NOR1 76426 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 230 / Monday, November 30, 2020 / Rules and Regulations i. In paragraph (k)(1)(ii), remove the phrase ‘‘sections (k)(2)(i)(A), (B) or (D)’’ and add ‘‘sections 2(k)(2)(i)(A), (B), or (D)’’ in its place; and ■ ii. In paragraph (k)(2)(ii), add a comma following the phrase ‘‘2(k)(2)(i)(A), (B)’’; and ■ c. In section 13, revise paragraph (d)(1); ■ d. In section 23 [Reinsured policies], revise paragraph (d)(1) introductory text, (d)(2), and (d)(5)(i). The revisions read as follows: ■ § 407.9 policy. * * Area risk protection insurance * * * 13. Indemnity and Premium Limitations * * * * * (d) * * * (1) If the records you provided are from acreage you double cropped in at least two of the last four crop years, you may apply your history of double cropping to any acreage of the insured crop in the county (for example you have 100 cropland acres in the county and have double cropped wheat and soybeans on all 100 acres in the county and you acquire an additional 100 acres in the county, you can apply your history of 100 double cropped acres to any of the 200 acres in the county); or * * * * * [Reinsured Policies] 23. Mediation, Arbitration, Appeal, Reconsideration, and Administrative and Judicial Review TKELLEY on DSKBCP9HB2PROD with RULES * * * * * (d) * * * (1) If you do not agree with any determination not covered by sections 23(a) and (c), the disagreement may be resolved through mediation. To resolve any dispute through mediation, you and we must both: * * * * * (2) If the disagreement cannot be resolved through mediation, or you and we do not agree to mediation, you must timely seek resolution through arbitration in accordance with the rules of the American Arbitration Association (AAA), unless otherwise stated in this subsection or rules are established by FCIC for this purpose. Any mediator or arbitrator with a familial, financial or other business relationship to you or us, or our agent or loss adjuster, is disqualified from hearing the dispute. * * * * * (5) * * * (i) You must initiate arbitration proceedings within 1 year of the date we denied your claim or rendered the VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:14 Nov 27, 2020 Jkt 253001 determination with which you disagree, whichever is later; * * * * * PART 457—COMMON CROP INSURANCE REGULATIONS § 457.8 3. The authority citation for part 457 continues to read as follows: ■ Authority: 7 U.S.C. 1506(l) and 1506(o). 4. Amend § 457.8 as follows: a. Under the heading ‘‘FCIC Policies’’, in the first paragraph, remove the phrase ‘‘on the RMA’s website’’ and add ‘‘on RMA’s website’’ in its place; ■ b. Under the heading ‘‘Reinsured Policies’’, in the first paragraph, remove the phrase ‘‘bulletins) published on the RMA’s website’’ and add ‘‘bulletins), published on RMA’s website’’ in its place; ■ c. In section 1: ■ i. Revise the definition of ‘‘approved yield’’; ■ ii. In the definition of ‘‘Code of Federal Regulations (CFR)’’, remove the website address of ‘‘http:// www.access.gpo.gov/’’ and add ‘‘https:// www.ecfr.gov/’’ in its place; ■ iii. In the definition of ‘‘RMA’s website’’, add the word ‘‘or’’ following the website address of ‘‘www.rma.usda.gov;’’ ■ iv. Revise the definition of ‘‘second crop’’; ■ d. In section 3, in paragraph (l)(1), remove the phrase ‘‘acreage you were previously involved with’’ and add ‘‘new acreage’’ in its place; ■ e. Revise section 15(i)(1); ■ f. In section 17: ■ i. In section 17(e)(1)(i), add the phrase ‘‘, unless you qualify for the exception in section 17(e)(1)(ii)(E)’’ at the end of the paragraph before the colon; ■ ii. In section 17(e)(1)(i)(B)(3), remove the phrase ‘‘you lease the previous year and continue to leased’’ and add ‘‘you leased the previous year and continue to lease’’ in its place; ■ iii. Add paragraphs (e)(1)(ii)(E) and (F); ■ iv. Revise paragraph (e)(2); ■ v. In paragraph (f)(1) introductory text, remove the phrase ‘‘to be’’; ■ vi. In paragraph (f)(1)(ii), remove the word ‘‘or’’ at the end of the paragraph; ■ vii. Revise paragraph (f)(1)(iii); ■ viii. Add paragraph (f)(1)(iv); ■ ix. Revise paragraph (f)(4)(ii) introductory text and (f)(4)(ii)(A); ■ x. Add paragraph (f)(5)(iii); ■ xi. Add paragraphs (f)(8)(i) and (ii); ■ g. In section 18, in paragraph (f)(1)(iii), add a comma following the phrase ‘‘for the crop’’; and ■ h. In section 20 [For reinsured policies]: ■ ■ PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 i. Revise paragraph (a) introductory text; ■ ii. Revise paragraph (b)(1); The revisions and additions read in part as follows: ■ * * The application and policy. * * * Common Crop Insurance Policy * * * * * 1. Definitions. * * * * * Approved yield. The actual production history (APH) yield, calculated and approved by the verifier, used to determine the production guarantee by summing the yearly actual, assigned, adjusted or unadjusted transitional yields and dividing the sum by the number of yields contained in the database, which will always contain at least four yields. The database may contain up to 10 consecutive crop years of actual or assigned yields. The approved yield may have yield options elected under section 36, revisions according to section 3, or other limitations according to FCIC procedures applied when calculating the approved yield. * * * * * Second crop. With respect to a single crop year, the next occurrence of planting any agricultural commodity for harvest following a first insured crop on the same acreage. The second crop may be the same or a different agricultural commodity as the first insured crop, except the term does not include a replanted crop. If following a first insured crop, a cover crop that is planted on the same acreage and harvested for grain or seed is considered a second crop. A cover crop that is covered by FSA’s noninsured crop disaster assistance program (NAP) or receives other USDA benefits associated with forage crops will be considered a second crop. A crop meeting the conditions stated in this definition is considered to be a second crop regardless of whether or not it is insured. * * * * * 15. Production Included in Determining an Indemnity and Payment Reductions * * * * * (i) * * * (1) If the records you provided are from acreage you double cropped in at least two of the last four crop years, you may apply your history of double cropping to any acreage of the insured crop in the county (for example, you have 100 cropland acres in the county E:\FR\FM\30NOR1.SGM 30NOR1 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 230 / Monday, November 30, 2020 / Rules and Regulations and have double cropped wheat and soybeans on all 100 acres in the county and you acquire an additional 100 acres in the county, you can apply your history of 100 double cropped acres to any of the 200 acres in the county); or * * * * * 17. Prevented Planting TKELLEY on DSKBCP9HB2PROD with RULES * * * * * (e) * * * (1) * * * (ii) * * * (E) If you were eligible to file an intended acreage report the first crop year, you may file an intended acreage report for the second crop year. If you choose to file an intended acreage report for the second crop year, the number of eligible acres will be the number of acres specified on your intended acreage report and not the number of eligible acres determined in accordance with section 17(e)(1)(i). (F) You cannot file an intended acreage report more than 2 consecutive crop years. * * * * * (2) Any eligible acreage determined in accordance with section 17(e)(1) will be reduced by subtracting the number of acres of the crop (insured and uninsured) that are timely and late planted, including acreage specified in section 16(b), unless your first insured crop failed and you plant an uninsured second crop on the same acres within the same crop year, the acres for the uninsured second crop will not be subtracted from the eligible prevented planting acreage. * * * * * (f) * * * (1) * * * (iii) The insured crop planted in the field would not have been planted on the remaining prevented planting acreage (e.g., where due to Crop Provisions, Special Provisions, or processor contract specifications rotation requirements would not be met, or you already planted the total number of acres specified in the processor contract); or (iv) The acreage that was prevented from being planted constitutes at least 20 acres or 20 percent of the total insurable acreage in the field and you provide proof that you intended to plant another crop or crop type on the acreage (including, but not limited to inputs purchased, applied or available to apply, or that acreage was part of a crop rotation). * * * * * (4) * * * (ii) For the insured crop that is prevented from being planted, you VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:14 Nov 27, 2020 Jkt 253001 provide records acceptable to us of acreage and production that show (your double cropping history is limited to the highest number of acres double cropped within the applicable four-year period unless your double cropping history is determined in accordance with section 15(i)(3)): (A) You have double cropped acreage in at least 2 of the last 4 crop years in which the insured crop that is prevented from being planted in the current crop year was grown (you may apply your history of double cropping to any acreage of the insured crop in the county (for example, you have 100 cropland acres in the county and have double cropped wheat and soybeans on all 100 acres and you acquire an additional 100 acres in the county, you can apply your history of 100 double cropped acres to any of the 200 acres in the county)); or * * * * * (5) * * * (iii) The act of haying or grazing a cover crop contributed to the acreage being prevented from being planted or the cover crop was otherwise harvested prior to the end of the late planting period. * * * * * (8) * * * (i) In order for acreage to be considered physically available for planting, the acreage must: (A) Be free of trees, rocky outcroppings, or other factors that prevent proper and timely preparation of the seedbed for planting and harvest of the crop in the crop year; (B) Not be enrolled in a USDA program that removes the acreage from crop production; (C) Not be planted to a perennial crop (i.e., trees or vines either planted on the acreage, or not removed from the acreage in a proper or timely manner, thus preventing the timely planting of a crop for the crop year); (D) Not have pasture, rangeland or forage in place (see section 17(f)(6)); (E) In at least 1 of the 4 most recent crop years immediately preceding the current crop year, have been planted to a crop: (1) Using recognized good farming practices; (2) Insured under the authority of the Act; and (3) That was harvested, or if not harvested, was adjusted for claim purposes under the authority of the Act due to an insured cause of loss (other than a cause of loss related to flood, excess moisture, drought, or other cause of loss specified in the Special Provisions). PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 76427 (ii) Once any acreage does not satisfy the criteria set-forth in section 17(f)(8)(i)(E)(1), (2), and (3) in 1 of the 4 most recent crop years immediately preceding the current crop year, such acreage will be considered physically unavailable for planting until the acreage has been planted to a crop in accordance with 17(f)(8)(i)(E)(1), (2), and (3) for 2 consecutive crop years. * * * * * [For Reinsured Policies] 20. Mediation, Arbitration, Appeal, Reconsideration, and Administrative and Judicial Review (a) If you do not agree with any determination made by us except those specified in section 20(d) or (e), the disagreement may be resolved through mediation in accordance with section 20(g). If the disagreement cannot be resolved through mediation, or you and we do not agree to mediation, you must timely seek resolution through arbitration in accordance with the rules of the American Arbitration Association (AAA), except as provided in sections 20(c) and (f), and unless rules are established by FCIC for this purpose. Any mediator or arbitrator with a familial, financial or other business relationship to you or us, or our agent or loss adjuster, is disqualified from hearing the dispute. * * * * * (b) * * * (1) You must initiate arbitration proceedings within 1 year of the date we denied your claim or rendered the determination with which you disagree, whichever is later; * * * * * ■ 4. Amend § 457.108 as follows: ■ a. In the introductory text, remove the year ‘‘2017’’ and add ‘‘2021’’ in its place; ■ b. In section 1, in the definition of ‘‘planted acreage’’, remove the word ‘‘ini’’ and add ‘‘in’’ in its place; ■ c. Revise section 4; ■ d. In section 11: ■ i. In paragraph (c)(iv)(A), remove the comma following the phrase ‘‘in locations acceptable to us’’; ■ ii. In paragraph (d)(3)(i), remove the comma following the phrase ‘‘or conditions’’. The revision reads as follows: § 457.108 Sunflower seed crop insurance provisions. * * * * * 5. Cancellation and Termination Dates. In accordance with section 2 of the Basic Provisions, the cancellation and termination dates are: ■ E:\FR\FM\30NOR1.SGM 30NOR1 76428 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 230 / Monday, November 30, 2020 / Rules and Regulations Cancellation and termination dates State and county Hidalgo, Jim Wells, Nueces, and Starr Counties, Texas .................................................................................. All other Texas counties and all other States .................................................................................................... * * * * * 6. Amend § 457.140 as follows a. In section 1, in the definition of ‘‘price election’’, remove the phrase ‘‘the provisions of’’; ■ b. In section 2, remove the phrase ‘‘FSA farm serial number’’ and add the phrase ‘‘FSA farm number’’ in its place; ■ c. In section 3, in paragraph (b)(1), remove the word ‘‘documentsdo’’ and add ‘‘documents do’’ in its place; ■ d. In section 7: ■ i. In paragraph (a)(2)(ii), remove the word ‘‘and’’ at the end of the paragraph; ■ ii. Revise paragraphs (a)(3) and (a)(4); ■ iii. In paragraph (c), remove the phrase ‘‘the sales closing date’’ and add the phrase ‘‘its sales closing date’’ in its place; ■ e. In section 8: ■ i. In paragraph (c) introductory text, remove the ‘‘al’’ at the end of the paragraph; ■ ii. In paragraph (c)(2), remove the phrase ‘‘to be’’; ■ iii. In paragraph (d), remove the word ‘‘fall’’ and add ‘‘fall-planted’’ in its place; ■ f. In section 9: ■ i. Remove one of the duplicate section 9 headings ‘‘Insurance Period’’; ■ ii. In paragraph (a), remove the phrase ‘‘fall and spring-planted types’’ and add ‘‘fall-planted and spring-planted types’’ in its place; ■ e. In section 11, in paragraph (a)(6), remove the phrase ‘‘fall-planted dry pea acreage’’ and add ‘‘fall-planted types’’ in its place; ■ h. In section 13: ■ i. In Example 2, paragraph (3), remove the comma and add a semi-colon in its place and add a semi-colon at the end of the paragraph; ■ ii. In Example 2, paragraph (6), remove the number ‘‘1.0’’ and add ‘‘1.00’’ in its place; ■ iii. In Example 2, paragraph (7), remove the comma and add a semicolon in its place; ■ iv. In paragraph (e) introductory text, remove the phrase ‘‘If applying a moisture adjustment, it’’ and add ‘‘Any adjustment for moisture’’ in its place; ■ i. In section 14, in paragraph (a), remove the word ‘‘fall’’ and add ‘‘fallplanted’’ in its place; ■ j. In section 15: ■ i. In paragraph (d), remove the phrase ‘‘both a both fall and spring-planted types’’ and add ‘‘both fall-planted and spring-planted types’’ in its place; and TKELLEY on DSKBCP9HB2PROD with RULES ■ ■ VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:14 Nov 27, 2020 Jkt 253001 ii. In paragraph (e)(4), remove the phrase ‘‘insured fall-plantedacreage’’ and add ‘‘insured fall-planted acreage’’ in its place. The revision read as follows: ■ § 457.108 Dry pea crop insurance provisions. * * * * * 7. Insured Crop (a) * * * (3) That are not planted to plow down, graze, harvest as hay, or otherwise not planted for harvest as a mature dry pea crop; and (4) That are not (unless allowed by the Special Provisions or by written agreement): (i) Interplanted with another crop; (ii) Planted into an established grass or legume; or (iii) Planted as a nurse crop. * * * * * Martin Barbre, Manager, Federal Crop Insurance Corporation. [FR Doc. 2020–26036 Filed 11–27–20; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410–08–P COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION 17 CFR Part 50 RIN 3038–AE33 Swap Clearing Requirement Exemptions Commodity Futures Trading Commission. ACTION: Final rule. AGENCY: The Commodity Futures Trading Commission (Commission or CFTC) is adopting amendments to the regulations governing which swaps are exempt from the clearing requirement set forth in applicable provisions of the Commodity Exchange Act (CEA). These amendments exempt from the clearing requirement swaps entered into by certain central banks, sovereign entities, international financial institutions, bank holding companies, savings and loan holding companies, and community development financial institutions. The Commission also is publishing a compliance schedule setting forth all the past compliance dates for the 2012 SUMMARY: PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 January 31. March 15. and 2016 swap clearing requirement regulations. Finally, the Commission is making certain other, non-substantive technical amendments. DATES: The effective date for this final rule is December 30, 2020. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sarah E. Josephson, Deputy Director, at 202–418–5684 or sjosephson@cftc.gov; Megan A. Wallace, Senior Special Counsel, at 202–418–5150 or mwallace@cftc.gov; Melissa D’Arcy, Special Counsel, at 202–418–5086 or mdarcy@cftc.gov; Division of Clearing and Risk; or Ayla Kayhan, Office of the Chief Economist, at 202–418–5947 or akayhan@cftc.gov, in each case at the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, Three Lafayette Centre, 1155 21st Street NW, Washington, DC 20581. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Table of Contents I. Background A. Ongoing Review of 17 CFR Part 50 Regulations and May 2020 Proposal B. Swap Clearing Requirement C. Swaps With Central Banks, Sovereign Entities, and IFIs D. DCR No-Action Letters for Four Additional IFIs E. DCR No-Action Letters for Certain Bank Holding Companies, and Savings and Loan Holding Companies, and CDFIs F. DCR No-Action Letters for Relief for Community Development Financial Institutions II. Final Rule for Swaps Not Subject to the Clearing Requirement A. May 2020 Proposal B. Comments Received C. Swaps Entered Into by Central Banks, Sovereign Entities, and IFIs D. Exemption for Certain Central Banks, Sovereign Entities, and IFIs E. Data Related to Swaps Entered Into by IFIs F. Swaps Entered Into by Bank Holding Companies, Savings and Loan Holdings Companies, and CDFIs G. Exemption for CDFIs H. Exemption for Certain Bank Holding Companies and Savings and Loan Holding Companies I. Data Related to Swaps Entered Into by CDFIs, Bank Holding Companies, and Savings and Loan Holding Companies J. Adoption of Subpart D of Part 50 III. Clearing Requirement Compliance Schedule and Compliance Dates IV. Technical Amendment to Subpart C for Banks, Savings Associations, Farm Credit System Institutions, and Credit Unions E:\FR\FM\30NOR1.SGM 30NOR1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 230 (Monday, November 30, 2020)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 76420-76428]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-26036]


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

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Federal Crop Insurance Corporation

7 CFR Parts 407 and 457

RIN 0563-AC70
[Docket ID FCIC-20-0008]


Area Risk Protection Insurance Regulations; Common Crop Insurance 
Policy Basic Provisions; Common Crop Insurance Regulations, Sunflower 
Seed Crop Insurance Provisions; and Common Crop Insurance Regulations, 
Dry Pea Crop Insurance Provisions

AGENCY: Federal Crop Insurance Corporation, USDA.

ACTION: Final rule with request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: The Federal Crop Insurance Corporation (FCIC) amends the Area 
Risk Protection Insurance (ARPI) Regulations; Common Crop Insurance 
Policy (CCIP), Basic Provisions; Common Crop Insurance Regulations, 
Sunflower Seed Crop Insurance

[[Page 76421]]

Provisions (Sunflower Seed Crop Provisions); and Common Crop Insurance 
Regulations, Dry Pea Crop Insurance Provisions (Dry Pea Crop 
Provisions). The intended effect of this action is to improve prevented 
planting provisions, revise beginning farmer or rancher and veteran 
farmer or rancher provisions and clarify arbitration provisions. In 
addition to these changes, FCIC is making clarifications to the Dry Pea 
Crop Provisions and revising the cancellation and termination dates in 
the Sunflower Seed Crop Provisions. The changes to the policy made in 
this rule are applicable for the 2021 and succeeding crop years for 
crops with a contract change date on or after November 30, 2020. For 
all other crops, the changes to the policy made in this rule are 
applicable for the 2022 and succeeding crop years.

DATES: 
    Effective Date: This final rule is effective November 30, 2020.
    Comment Date: We will consider comments that we receive by the 
close of business January 29, 2021. FCIC may consider the comments 
received and may conduct additional rulemaking based on the comments.

ADDRESSES: We invite you to submit comments on this rule. You may 
submit comments by either of the following methods, although FCIC 
prefers that you submit comments electronically through the Federal 
eRulemaking Portal:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to https://www.regulations.gov/docket?D=FCIC-20-0008 and follow the instructions 
for submitting comments.
     Mail: Director, Product Administration and Standards 
Division, Risk Management Agency, US Department of Agriculture, P.O. 
Box 419205, Kansas City, MO 64133-6205. In your comment, specify docket 
ID FCIC-20-0008.
    Comments will be available for viewing online at 
www.regulations.gov. Comments received will be posted without change, 
including any personal information provided. In addition, comments will 
be available for public inspection at the above address during business 
hours from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Francie Tolle; telephone (816) 926-
7829; or email [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    FCIC serves America's agricultural producers through effective, 
market-based risk management tools to strengthen the economic stability 
of agricultural producers and rural communities. The Risk Management 
Agency (RMA) administers the FCIC regulations. FCIC is committed to 
increasing the availability and effectiveness of Federal crop insurance 
as a risk management tool. Approved Insurance Providers (AIPs) sell and 
service Federal crop insurance policies in every state and in Puerto 
Rico through a public-private partnership. FCIC reinsures the AIPs who 
share the risk associated with catastrophic losses due to major weather 
events. FCIC's vision is to secure the future of agriculture by 
providing world class risk management tools to rural America.
    Federal crop insurance policies typically consist of the Basic 
Provisions, the Crop Provisions, the Special Provisions, the Commodity 
Exchange Price Provisions, if applicable, other applicable endorsements 
or options, the actuarial documents for the insured agricultural 
commodity, the Catastrophic Risk Protection Endorsement, if applicable, 
and the applicable regulations published in 7 CFR chapter IV.
    FCIC amends the ARPI Basic Provisions, the CCIP Basic Provisions, 
the Sunflower Seed Crop Provisions, and the Dry Pea Crop Provisions. 
The changes to the policy made in this rule are applicable for the 2021 
and succeeding crop years for crops with a contract change date on or 
after November 30, 2020. For all other crops the changes to the policy 
made in this rule are applicable for the 2022 and succeeding crop 
years.

ARPI Basic Provisions

    The changes to the ARPI Basic Provisions (7 CFR part 407) are:
    FCIC is revising sections 23(d)(1), (2), and (5)(i) of the ARPI 
Basic Provisions to clarify the responsibility is on the producer to 
start dispute resolution through arbitration when the producer 
disagrees with an AIP determination. There has been confusion that this 
provision could require both the producer and the AIP to start 
arbitration prior to litigation.
    FCIC is also making non-substantive changes to the regulation. 
Examples include making references consistent, making grammatical 
corrections, and clarifying word changes. These revisions are editorial 
in nature and are intended to provide clarity to the regulation.

CCIP Basic Provisions

    The changes to the CCIP Basic Provisions (7 CFR part 457.8) are:
    FCIC is revising section 3(l) to allow a producer that qualifies as 
a beginning farmer or rancher (BFR), or veteran farmer or rancher 
(VFR), to receive a yield based on the actual production history (APH) 
of the previous producer of the crop or livestock on the acreage, if 
the BFR or VFR was previously involved in the decision-making or 
physical activities of the crop or livestock on any farm. Previously, 
the provisions specified that the APH history of the acreage could only 
be used if the BFR or VFR was previously involved on the specific 
acreage acquired.
    Prevented planting is a feature of many crop insurance plans that 
provides a partial payment to cover certain pre-plant costs for a crop 
that was prevented from being planted due to an insurable cause of 
loss. After unprecedented prevented planting in 2019, FCIC examined how 
to improve the prevented planting coverage within a policy. FCIC held 
discussions with stakeholders via a Prevented Planting Taskforce that 
included FCIC and industry representatives. The taskforce reviewed the 
previous policy, discussed impacts, and explored policy improvements. 
The goal of the taskforce was to improve coverage for producers when 
needed most, but not replace market incentives with government 
incentives, while maintaining program integrity. The taskforce 
identified several issues that are extremely uncommon but could occur 
in years when prevented planting is catastrophic and widespread. The 
following lists the changes in section 17 of the CCIP Basic Provisions:
    FCIC is revising section 17(e)(1)(i) to add a reference to the new 
provisions in section 17(e)(1)(ii)(E).
    FCIC is revising section 17(e)(1)(ii) to allow the use of an 
intended acreage report for the first 2 consecutive crop years the 
producer farms in a new county, instead of only the first year.
    The CCIP Basic Provisions define ``intended acreage report'' as a 
report of the acreage a producer intends to plant, by crop, for the 
current crop year and used solely for the purpose of establishing 
eligible prevented planting acreage, as required in section 17. 
Further, section 17 states that if the insured did not plant any crop 
in the county for which prevented planting coverage was available in 
the 4 most recent crop years, the producer must complete and submit an 
intended acreage report to the AIP by the sales closing date, or within 
10 days of land acquisition after the sales closing date, to establish 
the potential maximum number of eligible prevented planting acres.

[[Page 76422]]

    Based on the previous provision, when a producer adds new land in a 
new county, the producer could only indicate intended acres for the 
first year. An issue arises in the second year if the producer, 
following good farming practices for crop rotation, intends to plant a 
different crop. Because the producer only has 1 year of history in the 
county, the producer is limited in the amount of acreage (and type of 
crop) that can be claimed for prevented planting purposes.
    For example, a producer adds land in a new county. The first year, 
the producer files an intended acreage report for wheat and plants the 
entire acreage to wheat. The second year, the producer intends to plant 
corn, but is prevented from planting due to an insurable cause of loss. 
Under the previous regulations, the producer would not have any 
eligible prevented planting acreage for corn because they only have 
eligible wheat acres based on their first year's history in their APH 
database. The producer would receive a prevented planting payment based 
on the eligible wheat acres. This would result in a different prevented 
planting payment than the intended corn crop, which may not be 
reflective of their pre-plant costs.
    As specified above, FCIC will revise section 17(e)(1)(ii) to allow 
the producer to submit an intended acreage report for the first 2 
consecutive crop years the producer farms in a new county. In the above 
scenario, this will allow the producer to receive a prevented planting 
payment based on the acres contained on the intended acreage report for 
the second year and the payment will be based on corn. This change 
acknowledges rotational practices are a good farming practice. It will 
also result in more accurate prevented planting payments because they 
will be based on the producer's actual intended plantings for that 
year.
    FCIC is revising section 17(e)(2) to provide that if following a 
failed first insured crop, an uninsured second crop is planted on the 
same acres within the same crop year, the planted acres of the 
uninsured crop will not be subtracted from the eligible prevented 
planting acreage.
    Section 17(e)(2) of the CCIP Basic Provisions previously stated, 
``Any eligible acreage determined in accordance with section 17(e)(1) 
will be reduced by subtracting the number of acres of the crop (insured 
and uninsured) that are timely and late planted, including acreage 
specified in section 16(b).'' If following a failed first insured crop, 
the producer plants an uninsured second crop on the same acres within 
the same crop year; acres from both plantings (first insured crop and 
second uninsured crop) are subtracted from the eligible prevented 
planting acreage, even though it is the same physical land subtracted 
twice. On occasion, this can lead to the producer having acres that do 
not receive a prevented planting payment due to inadequate eligible 
prevented planting acres. This occurrence is extremely rare, but it 
affected a small number of producers in the 2019 crop year. To 
illustrate the rarity of these circumstances, for the reduction to 
apply under the previous regulation, all of the following must have 
been true for the producer:
    (1) Planted a first crop that fails,
    (2) Planted a second crop on the same acreage following the failed 
crop, and
    (3) Exhausted eligible prevented planting acres available to pay a 
claim.
    The underlying concern is that the same physical acres are 
subtracted twice from overall prevented planting eligible acres. To 
illustrate the inequity of the double subtraction, the following is a 
simple example of the previous provisions. A producer has 100 total 
acres of cropland (fields A & B) and intends to plant all 100 acres to 
corn. Based on production history, the producer also has 100 prevented 
planting eligible acres (50 for corn and 50 for soybeans). The producer 
plants 50 acres of corn in field A, resulting in 50 corn acres 
subtracted from eligible prevented planting acres. At this point, there 
are 50 soybean eligible prevented planting acres and zero corn eligible 
prevented planting acres. A flood destroys the 50 acres of corn in 
field A, the AIP determines it is not practical to replant, and the 
producer does not have to replant to retain insurance. The producer 
files a claim for indemnity for the crop loss and receives an indemnity 
for the field A 50 destroyed corn acres. Later, the producer plants the 
50 acres in field A to soybeans that are not insured. The second 
planting of field A (uninsured soybeans) would result in the 
subtraction of 50 acres of eligible prevented planting acres of 
soybeans. This equates to 100 eligible prevented planting acres being 
subtracted from the same 50 physical acres (field A); leaving 0 
eligible prevented planting acres remaining for the 50 physical acres 
prevented from planting in field B that remains unplanted.
    FCIC is removing the double subtraction on field A by no longer 
subtracting the uninsured second planting from eligible prevented 
planting acres. This would allow a prevented planting payment on field 
B, if those acres were unable to be planted, and if other policy 
provisions for prevented planting claims are met.
    To illustrate the inequity of the previous provisions in a 
different way, see the following scenarios below. These scenarios show 
the disparate treatment of two producers in the same situation, except 
that their 100 prevented planting eligible acres are for different 
crops. Scenario 1: Producer has 100 acres of corn prevented planting 
eligible acres and 0 acres of soybean prevented planting eligibility. 
There is no impact on prevented planting eligibility for field B. Since 
there are 0 acres of soybean eligible prevented planting acres, the 50 
planted acres of uninsured soybeans (field A) would not be subtracted 
from prevented planting eligibility. In this case, the producer would 
remain eligible for a prevented planting payment on the 50 acres of 
corn (field B) that were prevented from being planted.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                      Planted
                      Crop                           Eligible       (insured &    Prevented from  Available  for
                                                       acres        uninsured)        planting        payment
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Corn............................................             100              50              50              50
Soybeans........................................               0              50               0               0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Scenario 2: A producer has 50 acres of prevented planting corn 
eligibility and 50 acres of prevented planting soybean eligibility; 
prevented planting eligibility is eliminated on field B. Previously, 
prevented planting eligible acres are reduced by planted acres of 
insured and uninsured crops, and the 50 acres of planted and then 
failed corn in field A would exhaust corn prevented planting 
eligibility. The planting of 50 acres of uninsured soybeans in field A 
would exhaust the soybean prevented planting eligibility as well. There 
would be no remaining eligible prevented

[[Page 76423]]

planting acres for the 50 acres of corn prevented from being planted in 
field B.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                      Planted
                      Crop                           Eligible       (insured &    Prevented from  Available  for
                                                       acres        uninsured)        planting        payment
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Corn............................................              50              50              50               0
Soybeans........................................              50              50               0               0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Regulation change: For this example, the change to the regulation 
results in Scenario 2 having the same result as Scenario 1 with 50 
eligible acres of prevented planting soybeans which can be used to make 
the corn payment claimed. Changing this to not subtract the uninsured 
acres of soybeans planted on field A will be a more equitable treatment 
of producers under catastrophic loss conditions.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     Eligible         Planted         Planted        Prevented    Available  for
              Crop                     acres         (insured)      (uninsured)    from planting      payment
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Corn............................              50              50               0              50               0
Soybeans........................              50               0              50               0              50
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    FCIC is revising section 17(f)(1) to provide an exception if the 
producer can prove intent to plant based on inputs applied or available 
to apply, rotation, etc., the producer could then be paid a prevented 
planting payment based on their intended crop, even if it's different 
than the crop that was planted in the field.
    Previously, section 17(f)(1) of the CCIP Basic Provisions stated, 
``Any prevented planting acreage within a field that contains planted 
acreage will be considered to be acreage of the same crop, type, and 
practice that is planted in the field.''
    For example, a producer intends to plant a 100-acre field to corn, 
but it is too wet prior to the final plant date. Prior to the end of 
the late planting period for corn, she begins planting the field to 
soybeans. She planted 20 acres of soybeans before getting rained out. 
The producer submits a claim for the remaining 80 acres as prevented 
planting corn. The producer does not have history of producing both 
corn and soybeans in the same field in the same crop year. Prevented 
planting is common to the area and the producer has adequate corn 
prevented planting eligible acres to cover the 80 acres prevented from 
planting.
    As a result, the producer has receipts for seed and other inputs to 
prove intent to plant corn. She expects to be paid prevented planting 
for corn at a higher per acre amount on 80 acres. However, because she 
planted 20 acres of soybeans in the same field as her prevented 
planting claim, section 17(f)(1) requires the 80 acres to be considered 
soybeans and be paid at a lower per acre amount. The previous provision 
may have incentivized the producer to not plant soybeans in order to 
maintain the higher prevented planting payment on corn. Revising the 
provision could reduce prevented planting payments when this situation 
arises in the future.
    With the revisions to section 17(f)(1) to provide an exception if 
the producer can prove intent to plant by inputs applied or available 
to apply, rotation, etc., in the example, the producer could provide 
documentation that fertilizer application, seed purchases, historical 
crop rotation patterns, etc. were consistent with intentions to plant 
corn. The producer could then be paid using available corn prevented 
planting acres, rather than having to consider the prevented planting 
acres soybeans.
    FCIC is adding a new section 17(f)(5)(iii) to clarify prevented 
planting coverage will not be provided if the act of haying or grazing 
a cover crop contributed to the acreage being prevented from planting 
or the cover crop was otherwise harvested prior to the end of the late 
planting period. In a previous final rule, section 17(f)(5)(ii) was 
revised to remove the words ``or cover'' following the word 
``volunteer,''. In addition, FCIC removed a Special Provisions 
statement that read: ``In lieu of Section 17(f)(5)(ii) of the Common 
Crop Insurance Basic Provisions, haying or grazing a cover crop will 
not impact eligibility for a prevented planting payment provided such 
action did not contribute to the acreage being prevented from 
planting.'' FCIC received comments regarding concerns this change could 
lead to misunderstanding and unforeseen consequences. Some may 
interpret this to mean that a cover crop could be hayed or grazed even 
if the act contributed to the acreage being prevented from planting or 
that a cover crop could be otherwise harvested prior to the end of the 
late planting period. Therefore, the additional language incorporates 
the previous Special Provisions statements.
    FCIC is revising section 17(f)(8) to implement the ``1 in 4'' 
requirement nationwide (beyond just the Prairie Pothole National 
Priority Area discussed below). Acreage must be physically available 
for planting to be eligible for a prevented planting payment. The ``1 
in 4'' requirement is contained in a Special Provisions statement and 
is an extension of the CCIP Basic Provisions that the acreage must be 
physically available for planting. The ``1 in 4'' requirement states 
that the acreage must have been planted to a crop, insured, and 
harvested (or if not harvested, adjusted for claim purposes due to an 
insurable cause of loss) in at least 1 out of the previous 4 crop 
years.
    The ``1 in 4'' requirement has been in place since the 2012 crop 
year in the Prairie Pothole National Priority Area, which encompasses 
the states of Iowa, Minnesota, Montana, North Dakota, and South Dakota. 
The requirement in that area addressed prevented planting payments that 
were repeatedly made on acreage not physically available for planting 
(that is, acreage that is perpetually wet, such as potholes). Adding 
the language to the CCIP Basic Provisions for national applicability 
will allow for equal treatment for all areas of the United States and 
further mitigate waste, fraud and abuse for all acreage that is not 
physically available for planting to a crop to be insured. The Special 
Provisions statement had a requirement that the acreage must have been 
harvested, or if not harvested, was adjusted for claim purposes under 
the

[[Page 76424]]

authority of the Act due to an insured cause of loss (other than a 
cause of loss related to flood or excess moisture). FCIC identified 
perpetual drought conditions as a vulnerability and received requests 
to expand the ``1 in 4'' requirement in previous years. Therefore, FCIC 
added that in order to meet the ``1 in 4'' requirement, claim purposes 
could not be ``due to drought'' to address prevented planting payments 
that were repeatedly made on acreage not physically available for 
planting on perpetually dry acreage when a crop was not harvested. This 
incorporates provisions from a Special Provisions statement and as a 
result, the Special Provisions statement is removed.
    FCIC is revising section 20(a) and 20(b)(1) to clarify the 
responsibility is on the producer to start dispute resolution through 
arbitration when the producer disagrees with an AIP determination. The 
AIP is the only party that makes a determination so the producer is the 
only party to the contract that could disagree with the determination 
the AIP made. There has been confusion that this provision could 
require both the producer and the AIP to start arbitration prior to 
litigation.
    FCIC is also making non-substantive changes to the regulation. 
Examples include making references consistent, making grammatical 
corrections, and clarifying word changes. These revisions are editorial 
in nature and are intended to provide clarity to the regulation.

Sunflower Seed Crop Insurance Provisions

    FCIC is revising section 4 of the Sunflower Seed Crop Insurance 
Provisions (7 CFR part 457.108) to change the cancellation and 
termination dates in 4 Texas counties from March 15 to January 31 to 
align with the January 31 sales closing date in these counties. This 
change is being made after a data mining exercise where FCIC identified 
that the sales closing date and cancellation/termination date did not 
match in these 4 counties.
    FCIC is also making non-substantive changes to the regulation, 
including removing commas and correcting a spelling error.

Dry Pea Crop Insurance Provisions

    FCIC is making non-substantive changes in the Dry Pea Crop 
Insurance Provisions (7 CFR part 457.140). Examples include making 
technical corrections and clarifying language changes. Changes were 
made to the Dry Pea Crop Insurance Provisions in a Final rule with 
request for comments, published in the Federal Register on June 26, 
2020 (85 FR 38276). In reviewing the changes made, FCIC found some of 
the changes described in that rule were not made in the Code of Federal 
Regulations. Additionally, FCIC received comments to that final rule 
and is making revisions that are editorial in nature are intended to 
provide clarity to the regulation. There are other comments that FCIC 
received in response to the final rule published June 26, 2020, that 
FCIC is continuing to review.

Effective Date and Notice and Comment

    The Administrative Procedure Act (APA, 5 U.S.C. 553) provides that 
the notice and comment and 30-day delay in the effective date 
provisions do not apply when the rule involves specified actions, 
including matters relating to contracts. This rule governs contracts 
for crop insurance policies and therefore falls within that exemption. 
Although not required by APA or any other law, FCIC has chosen to 
request comments on this rule.
    For major rules, the Congressional Review Act requires a delay to 
the effective date of 60 days after publication to allow for 
Congressional review. This rule is not a major rule under the 
Congressional Review Act, as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). Therefore, 
this final rule is effective November 30, 2020.

Executive Orders 12866, 13563, 13771 and 13777

    Executive Order 12866, ``Regulatory Planning and Review,'' and 
Executive Order 13563, ``Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review,'' 
direct agencies to assess all 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 emphasized the importance 
of quantifying both costs and benefits, of reducing costs, of 
harmonizing rules, and of promoting flexibility. Executive Order 13777, 
``Enforcing the Regulatory Reform Agenda,'' established a federal 
policy to alleviate unnecessary regulatory burdens on the American 
people.
    The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) designated this rule as 
not significant under Executive Order 12866, ``Regulatory Planning and 
Review,'' and therefore, OMB has not reviewed this rule and analysis of 
the costs and benefits is not required under either Executive Order 
12866 or 13563.
    Executive Order 13771, ``Reducing Regulation and Controlling 
Regulatory Costs,'' requires that in order to manage the private costs 
required to comply with Federal regulations that for every new 
significant or economically significant regulation issued, the new 
costs must be offset by savings from deregulatory actions. As this rule 
is designated as not significant, it is not subject to Executive Order 
13771. In a general response to the requirements of Executive Order 
13777, USDA created a Regulatory Reform Task Force, and USDA agencies 
were directed to remove barriers, reduce burdens, and provide better 
customer service both as part of the regulatory reform of existing 
regulations and as an ongoing approach. FCIC reviewed this regulation 
and made changes to improve any provision that was determined to be 
outdated, unnecessary, or ineffective.

Clarity of the Regulation

    Executive Order 12866, as supplemented by Executive Order 13563, 
requires each agency to write all rules in plain language. In addition 
to your substantive comments on this rule, we invite your comments on 
how to make the rule easier to understand. For example:
     Are the requirements in the rule clearly stated? Are the 
scope and intent of the rule clear?
     Does the rule contain technical language or jargon that is 
not clear?
     Is the material logically organized?
     Would changing the grouping or order of sections or adding 
headings make the rule easier to understand?
     Could we improve clarity by adding tables, lists, or 
diagrams?
     Would more, but shorter, sections be better? Are there 
specific sections that are too long or confusing?
     What else could we do to make the rule easier to 
understand?

Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), as amended by 
SBREFA, generally requires an agency to prepare a regulatory analysis 
of any rule whenever an agency is required by APA or any other law to 
publish a proposed rule, unless the agency certifies that the rule will 
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small 
entities. This rule is not subject to the Regulatory Flexibility Act 
because as noted above, this rule is exempt from APA and no other law 
requires that a proposed rule be published for this rulemaking 
initiative.

[[Page 76425]]

Environmental Review

    In general, the environmental impacts of rules are to be considered 
in a manner consistent with the provisions of the National 
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA, 42 U.S.C. 4321-4347) and the 
regulations of the Council on Environmental Quality (40 CFR parts 1500-
1508). FCIC conducts programs and activities that have been determined 
to have no individual or cumulative effect on the human environment. As 
specified in 7 CFR 1b.4, FCIC is categorically excluded from the 
preparation of an Environmental Analysis or Environmental Impact 
Statement unless the FCIC Manager (agency head) determines that an 
action may have a significant environmental effect. The FCIC Manager 
has determined this rule will not have a significant environmental 
effect. Therefore, FCIC will not prepare an environmental assessment or 
environmental impact statement for this action and this rule serves as 
documentation of the programmatic environmental compliance decision.

Executive Order 12372

    Executive Order 12372, ``Intergovernmental Review of Federal 
Programs,'' requires consultation with State and local officials that 
would be directly affected by proposed Federal financial assistance. 
The objectives of the Executive Order are to foster an 
intergovernmental partnership and a strengthened Federalism, by relying 
on State and local processes for State and local government 
coordination and review of proposed Federal financial assistance and 
direct Federal development. For reasons specified in the final rule 
related notice regarding 7 CFR part 3015, subpart V (48 FR 29115, June 
24, 1983), the programs and activities in this rule are excluded from 
the scope of Executive Order 12372.

Executive Order 12988

    This rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 12988, ``Civil 
Justice Reform.'' This rule will not preempt State or local laws, 
regulations, or policies unless they represent an irreconcilable 
conflict with this rule. Before any judicial actions may be brought 
regarding the provisions of this rule, the administrative appeal 
provisions of 7 CFR part 11 are to be exhausted.

Executive Order 13132

    This rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 13132, 
``Federalism.'' The policies contained in this rule do not have any 
substantial direct effect on States, on the relationship between the 
Federal government and the States, or on the distribution of power and 
responsibilities among the various levels of government, except as 
required by law. Nor does this rule impose substantial direct 
compliance costs on State and local governments. Therefore, 
consultation with the States is not required.

Executive Order 13175

    This rule has been reviewed in accordance with the requirements of 
Executive Order 13175, ``Consultation and Coordination with Indian 
Tribal Governments.'' Executive Order 13175 requires Federal agencies 
to consult and coordinate with Tribes on a government-to-government 
basis on policies that have Tribal implications, including regulations, 
legislative comments or proposed legislation, and other policy 
statements or actions 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.
    RMA has assessed the impact of this rule on Indian Tribes and 
determined that this rule does not, to our knowledge, have Tribal 
implications that require Tribal consultation under E.O. 13175. The 
regulation changes do not have Tribal implications that preempt Tribal 
law and are not expected have a substantial direct effect on one or 
more Indian Tribes. If a Tribe requests consultation, RMA will work 
with the USDA Office of Tribal Relations to ensure meaningful 
consultation is provided where changes, additions and modifications 
identified in this rule are not expressly mandated by Congress.

The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995

    Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA, Pub. L. 
104-4) requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their 
regulatory actions of State, local, and Tribal governments or the 
private sector. Agencies generally must prepare a written statement, 
including cost benefits analysis, for proposed and final rules with 
Federal mandates that may result in expenditures of $100 million or 
more in any 1 year for State, local or Tribal governments, in the 
aggregate, or to the private sector. UMRA generally requires agencies 
to consider alternatives and adopt the more cost effective or least 
burdensome alternative that achieves the objectives of the rule. This 
rule contains no Federal mandates, as defined in Title II of 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.

Federal Assistance Program

    The title and number of the Federal Domestic Assistance Program 
listed in the Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance to which this rule 
applies is No. 10.450--Crop Insurance.

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

    In accordance with the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 
1995 (44 U.S.C. chapter 35, subchapter I), the rule does not change the 
information collection approved by OMB under control numbers 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.

List of Subjects

7 CFR Part 407

    Acreage allotments, Administrative practice and procedure, Barley, 
Corn, Cotton, Crop insurance, Peanuts, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements, Sorghum, Soybeans, Wheat.

7 CFR Part 457

    Acreage allotments, Crop insurance, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements.

Final Rule

    For the reasons discussed above, FCIC amends 7 CFR parts 407 and 
457, effective for the 2021 and succeeding crop years for crops with a 
contract change date on or after November 30, 2020, and for the 2022 
and succeeding crop years for all other crops, as follows:

PART 407--AREA RISK PROTECTION INSURANCE REGULATIONS

0
1. The authority citation for 7 CFR part 407 continues to read as 
follows:

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


0
2. Amend Sec.  407.9 as follows:
0
a. In section 1:
0
i. In the definition of ``Code of Federal Regulations (CFR)'', remove 
the phrase ``http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/'' and add ``https://www.ecfr.gov/'' in its place;
0
ii. In the definition of ``total premium'', remove the phrase ``section 
7(e)(1)'' and add ``section 7(d)(1)'' in its place;
0
b. In section 2:

[[Page 76426]]

0
i. In paragraph (k)(1)(ii), remove the phrase ``sections (k)(2)(i)(A), 
(B) or (D)'' and add ``sections 2(k)(2)(i)(A), (B), or (D)'' in its 
place; and
0
ii. In paragraph (k)(2)(ii), add a comma following the phrase 
``2(k)(2)(i)(A), (B)''; and
0
c. In section 13, revise paragraph (d)(1);
0
d. In section 23 [Reinsured policies], revise paragraph (d)(1) 
introductory text, (d)(2), and (d)(5)(i).
    The revisions read as follows:


Sec.  407.9  Area risk protection insurance policy.

* * * * *
13. Indemnity and Premium Limitations
* * * * *
    (d) * * *
    (1) If the records you provided are from acreage you double cropped 
in at least two of the last four crop years, you may apply your history 
of double cropping to any acreage of the insured crop in the county 
(for example you have 100 cropland acres in the county and have double 
cropped wheat and soybeans on all 100 acres in the county and you 
acquire an additional 100 acres in the county, you can apply your 
history of 100 double cropped acres to any of the 200 acres in the 
county); or
* * * * *
[Reinsured Policies]
23. Mediation, Arbitration, Appeal, Reconsideration, and Administrative 
and Judicial Review
* * * * *
    (d) * * *
    (1) If you do not agree with any determination not covered by 
sections 23(a) and (c), the disagreement may be resolved through 
mediation. To resolve any dispute through mediation, you and we must 
both:
* * * * *
    (2) If the disagreement cannot be resolved through mediation, or 
you and we do not agree to mediation, you must timely seek resolution 
through arbitration in accordance with the rules of the American 
Arbitration Association (AAA), unless otherwise stated in this 
subsection or rules are established by FCIC for this purpose. Any 
mediator or arbitrator with a familial, financial or other business 
relationship to you or us, or our agent or loss adjuster, is 
disqualified from hearing the dispute.
* * * * *
    (5) * * *
    (i) You must initiate arbitration proceedings within 1 year of the 
date we denied your claim or rendered the determination with which you 
disagree, whichever is later;
* * * * *

PART 457--COMMON CROP INSURANCE REGULATIONS

0
3. The authority citation for part 457 continues to read as follows:

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


0
4. Amend Sec.  457.8 as follows:
0
a. Under the heading ``FCIC Policies'', in the first paragraph, remove 
the phrase ``on the RMA's website'' and add ``on RMA's website'' in its 
place;
0
b. Under the heading ``Reinsured Policies'', in the first paragraph, 
remove the phrase ``bulletins) published on the RMA's website'' and add 
``bulletins), published on RMA's website'' in its place;
0
c. In section 1:
0
i. Revise the definition of ``approved yield'';
0
ii. In the definition of ``Code of Federal Regulations (CFR)'', remove 
the website address of ``http://www.access.gpo.gov/'' and add ``https://www.ecfr.gov/'' in its place;
0
iii. In the definition of ``RMA's website'', add the word ``or'' 
following the website address of ``www.rma.usda.gov;''
0
iv. Revise the definition of ``second crop'';
0
d. In section 3, in paragraph (l)(1), remove the phrase ``acreage you 
were previously involved with'' and add ``new acreage'' in its place;
0
e. Revise section 15(i)(1);
0
f. In section 17:
0
i. In section 17(e)(1)(i), add the phrase ``, unless you qualify for 
the exception in section 17(e)(1)(ii)(E)'' at the end of the paragraph 
before the colon;
0
ii. In section 17(e)(1)(i)(B)(3), remove the phrase ``you lease the 
previous year and continue to leased'' and add ``you leased the 
previous year and continue to lease'' in its place;
0
iii. Add paragraphs (e)(1)(ii)(E) and (F);
0
iv. Revise paragraph (e)(2);
0
v. In paragraph (f)(1) introductory text, remove the phrase ``to be'';
0
vi. In paragraph (f)(1)(ii), remove the word ``or'' at the end of the 
paragraph;
0
vii. Revise paragraph (f)(1)(iii);
0
viii. Add paragraph (f)(1)(iv);
0
ix. Revise paragraph (f)(4)(ii) introductory text and (f)(4)(ii)(A);
0
x. Add paragraph (f)(5)(iii);
0
xi. Add paragraphs (f)(8)(i) and (ii);
0
g. In section 18, in paragraph (f)(1)(iii), add a comma following the 
phrase ``for the crop''; and
0
h. In section 20 [For reinsured policies]:
0
i. Revise paragraph (a) introductory text;
0
ii. Revise paragraph (b)(1);
    The revisions and additions read in part as follows:


Sec.  457.8  The application and policy.

* * * * *

Common Crop Insurance Policy

* * * * *
1. Definitions.
* * * * *
    Approved yield. The actual production history (APH) yield, 
calculated and approved by the verifier, used to determine the 
production guarantee by summing the yearly actual, assigned, adjusted 
or unadjusted transitional yields and dividing the sum by the number of 
yields contained in the database, which will always contain at least 
four yields. The database may contain up to 10 consecutive crop years 
of actual or assigned yields. The approved yield may have yield options 
elected under section 36, revisions according to section 3, or other 
limitations according to FCIC procedures applied when calculating the 
approved yield.
* * * * *
    Second crop. With respect to a single crop year, the next 
occurrence of planting any agricultural commodity for harvest following 
a first insured crop on the same acreage. The second crop may be the 
same or a different agricultural commodity as the first insured crop, 
except the term does not include a replanted crop. If following a first 
insured crop, a cover crop that is planted on the same acreage and 
harvested for grain or seed is considered a second crop. A cover crop 
that is covered by FSA's noninsured crop disaster assistance program 
(NAP) or receives other USDA benefits associated with forage crops will 
be considered a second crop. A crop meeting the conditions stated in 
this definition is considered to be a second crop regardless of whether 
or not it is insured.
* * * * *
    15. Production Included in Determining an Indemnity and Payment 
Reductions
* * * * *
    (i) * * *
    (1) If the records you provided are from acreage you double cropped 
in at least two of the last four crop years, you may apply your history 
of double cropping to any acreage of the insured crop in the county 
(for example, you have 100 cropland acres in the county

[[Page 76427]]

and have double cropped wheat and soybeans on all 100 acres in the 
county and you acquire an additional 100 acres in the county, you can 
apply your history of 100 double cropped acres to any of the 200 acres 
in the county); or
* * * * *
17. Prevented Planting
* * * * *
    (e) * * *
    (1) * * *
    (ii) * * *
    (E) If you were eligible to file an intended acreage report the 
first crop year, you may file an intended acreage report for the second 
crop year. If you choose to file an intended acreage report for the 
second crop year, the number of eligible acres will be the number of 
acres specified on your intended acreage report and not the number of 
eligible acres determined in accordance with section 17(e)(1)(i).
    (F) You cannot file an intended acreage report more than 2 
consecutive crop years.
* * * * *
    (2) Any eligible acreage determined in accordance with section 
17(e)(1) will be reduced by subtracting the number of acres of the crop 
(insured and uninsured) that are timely and late planted, including 
acreage specified in section 16(b), unless your first insured crop 
failed and you plant an uninsured second crop on the same acres within 
the same crop year, the acres for the uninsured second crop will not be 
subtracted from the eligible prevented planting acreage.
* * * * *
    (f) * * *
    (1) * * *
    (iii) The insured crop planted in the field would not have been 
planted on the remaining prevented planting acreage (e.g., where due to 
Crop Provisions, Special Provisions, or processor contract 
specifications rotation requirements would not be met, or you already 
planted the total number of acres specified in the processor contract); 
or
    (iv) The acreage that was prevented from being planted constitutes 
at least 20 acres or 20 percent of the total insurable acreage in the 
field and you provide proof that you intended to plant another crop or 
crop type on the acreage (including, but not limited to inputs 
purchased, applied or available to apply, or that acreage was part of a 
crop rotation).
* * * * *
    (4) * * *
    (ii) For the insured crop that is prevented from being planted, you 
provide records acceptable to us of acreage and production that show 
(your double cropping history is limited to the highest number of acres 
double cropped within the applicable four-year period unless your 
double cropping history is determined in accordance with section 
15(i)(3)):
    (A) You have double cropped acreage in at least 2 of the last 4 
crop years in which the insured crop that is prevented from being 
planted in the current crop year was grown (you may apply your history 
of double cropping to any acreage of the insured crop in the county 
(for example, you have 100 cropland acres in the county and have double 
cropped wheat and soybeans on all 100 acres and you acquire an 
additional 100 acres in the county, you can apply your history of 100 
double cropped acres to any of the 200 acres in the county)); or
* * * * *
    (5) * * *
    (iii) The act of haying or grazing a cover crop contributed to the 
acreage being prevented from being planted or the cover crop was 
otherwise harvested prior to the end of the late planting period.
* * * * *
    (8) * * *
    (i) In order for acreage to be considered physically available for 
planting, the acreage must:
    (A) Be free of trees, rocky outcroppings, or other factors that 
prevent proper and timely preparation of the seedbed for planting and 
harvest of the crop in the crop year;
    (B) Not be enrolled in a USDA program that removes the acreage from 
crop production;
    (C) Not be planted to a perennial crop (i.e., trees or vines either 
planted on the acreage, or not removed from the acreage in a proper or 
timely manner, thus preventing the timely planting of a crop for the 
crop year);
    (D) Not have pasture, rangeland or forage in place (see section 
17(f)(6));
    (E) In at least 1 of the 4 most recent crop years immediately 
preceding the current crop year, have been planted to a crop:
    (1) Using recognized good farming practices;
    (2) Insured under the authority of the Act; and
    (3) That was harvested, or if not harvested, was adjusted for claim 
purposes under the authority of the Act due to an insured cause of loss 
(other than a cause of loss related to flood, excess moisture, drought, 
or other cause of loss specified in the Special Provisions).
    (ii) Once any acreage does not satisfy the criteria set-forth in 
section 17(f)(8)(i)(E)(1), (2), and (3) in 1 of the 4 most recent crop 
years immediately preceding the current crop year, such acreage will be 
considered physically unavailable for planting until the acreage has 
been planted to a crop in accordance with 17(f)(8)(i)(E)(1), (2), and 
(3) for 2 consecutive crop years.
* * * * *
[For Reinsured Policies]
20. Mediation, Arbitration, Appeal, Reconsideration, and Administrative 
and Judicial Review
    (a) If you do not agree with any determination made by us except 
those specified in section 20(d) or (e), the disagreement may be 
resolved through mediation in accordance with section 20(g). If the 
disagreement cannot be resolved through mediation, or you and we do not 
agree to mediation, you must timely seek resolution through arbitration 
in accordance with the rules of the American Arbitration Association 
(AAA), except as provided in sections 20(c) and (f), and unless rules 
are established by FCIC for this purpose. Any mediator or arbitrator 
with a familial, financial or other business relationship to you or us, 
or our agent or loss adjuster, is disqualified from hearing the 
dispute.
* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (1) You must initiate arbitration proceedings within 1 year of the 
date we denied your claim or rendered the determination with which you 
disagree, whichever is later;
* * * * *

0
4. Amend Sec.  457.108 as follows:
0
a. In the introductory text, remove the year ``2017'' and add ``2021'' 
in its place;
0
b. In section 1, in the definition of ``planted acreage'', remove the 
word ``ini'' and add ``in'' in its place;
0
c. Revise section 4;
0
d. In section 11:
0
i. In paragraph (c)(iv)(A), remove the comma following the phrase ``in 
locations acceptable to us'';
0
ii. In paragraph (d)(3)(i), remove the comma following the phrase ``or 
conditions''.
    The revision reads as follows:


Sec.  457.108  Sunflower seed crop insurance provisions.

* * * * *

0
5. Cancellation and Termination Dates.
    In accordance with section 2 of the Basic Provisions, the 
cancellation and termination dates are:

[[Page 76428]]



------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                   Cancellation and
              State and county                    termination dates
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hidalgo, Jim Wells, Nueces, and Starr        January 31.
 Counties, Texas.
All other Texas counties and all other       March 15.
 States.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *

0
6. Amend Sec.  457.140 as follows
0
a. In section 1, in the definition of ``price election'', remove the 
phrase ``the provisions of'';
0
b. In section 2, remove the phrase ``FSA farm serial number'' and add 
the phrase ``FSA farm number'' in its place;
0
c. In section 3, in paragraph (b)(1), remove the word ``documentsdo'' 
and add ``documents do'' in its place;
0
d. In section 7:
0
i. In paragraph (a)(2)(ii), remove the word ``and'' at the end of the 
paragraph;
0
ii. Revise paragraphs (a)(3) and (a)(4);
0
iii. In paragraph (c), remove the phrase ``the sales closing date'' and 
add the phrase ``its sales closing date'' in its place;
0
e. In section 8:
0
i. In paragraph (c) introductory text, remove the ``al'' at the end of 
the paragraph;
0
ii. In paragraph (c)(2), remove the phrase ``to be'';
0
iii. In paragraph (d), remove the word ``fall'' and add ``fall-
planted'' in its place;
0
f. In section 9:
0
i. Remove one of the duplicate section 9 headings ``Insurance Period'';
0
ii. In paragraph (a), remove the phrase ``fall and spring-planted 
types'' and add ``fall-planted and spring-planted types'' in its place;
0
e. In section 11, in paragraph (a)(6), remove the phrase ``fall-planted 
dry pea acreage'' and add ``fall-planted types'' in its place;
0
h. In section 13:
0
i. In Example 2, paragraph (3), remove the comma and add a semi-colon 
in its place and add a semi-colon at the end of the paragraph;
0
ii. In Example 2, paragraph (6), remove the number ``1.0'' and add 
``1.00'' in its place;
0
iii. In Example 2, paragraph (7), remove the comma and add a semi-colon 
in its place;
0
iv. In paragraph (e) introductory text, remove the phrase ``If applying 
a moisture adjustment, it'' and add ``Any adjustment for moisture'' in 
its place;
0
i. In section 14, in paragraph (a), remove the word ``fall'' and add 
``fall-planted'' in its place;
0
j. In section 15:
0
i. In paragraph (d), remove the phrase ``both a both fall and spring-
planted types'' and add ``both fall-planted and spring-planted types'' 
in its place; and
0
ii. In paragraph (e)(4), remove the phrase ``insured fall-
plantedacreage'' and add ``insured fall-planted acreage'' in its place.
    The revision read as follows:


Sec.  457.108  Dry pea crop insurance provisions.

* * * * *
7. Insured Crop
    (a) * * *
    (3) That are not planted to plow down, graze, harvest as hay, or 
otherwise not planted for harvest as a mature dry pea crop; and
    (4) That are not (unless allowed by the Special Provisions or by 
written agreement):
    (i) Interplanted with another crop;
    (ii) Planted into an established grass or legume; or
    (iii) Planted as a nurse crop.
* * * * *

Martin Barbre,
Manager, Federal Crop Insurance Corporation.
[FR Doc. 2020-26036 Filed 11-27-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-08-P