Request for Information on Prevented Planting, 62524-62526 [2023-19584]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
62524
Notices
Federal Register
Vol. 88, No. 175
Tuesday, September 12, 2023
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER
contains documents other than rules or
proposed rules that are applicable to the
public. Notices of hearings and investigations,
committee meetings, agency decisions and
rulings, delegations of authority, filing of
petitions and applications and agency
statements of organization and functions are
examples of documents appearing in this
section.
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Federal Crop Insurance Corporation
Risk Management Agency
[Docket ID FCIC–23–0001]
Request for Information on Prevented
Planting
Federal Crop Insurance
Corporation and Risk Management
Agency, Department of Agriculture
(USDA).
ACTION: Notice of request for
information; reopening of comment
period.
AGENCY:
The Federal Crop Insurance
Corporation (FCIC) is reopening the
comment period for 30 days to allow the
public additional time to provide
comments on the prevented planting
provisions of the Common Crop
Insurance Policy (CCIP), Basic
Provisions published on May 23, 2023.
Prevented planting is a feature of many
crop insurance plans that provides a
payment to cover certain pre-plant costs
for a crop that was prevented from being
planted due to an insurable cause of
loss. FCIC is interested in public input
on the following: additional prevented
planting coverage based on harvest
prices in situations when harvest prices
are higher than established prices
initially set by FCIC prior to planting;
the requirement that acreage must have
been planted to a crop, insured, and
harvested, in at least 1 of the 4 most
recent crop years; additional levels of
prevented planting coverage; prevented
planting coverage on contracted crops;
and other general prevented planting
questions.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
SUMMARY:
The comment period for the
Request for Information on Prevented
Planting published on May 23, 2023, (at
88 FR 33081) is reopened. We will
consider comments that we receive by
October 12, 2023.
DATES:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:32 Sep 11, 2023
Jkt 259001
We invite you to submit
comments in response to this notice.
Send your comments through the
method below:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to
https://www.regulations.gov and search
for Docket ID FCIC–23–0001. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
All comments will be posted without
change and will be publicly available on
www.regulations.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Francie Tolle; telephone (816) 926–
7829; or email francie.tolle@usda.gov.
Persons with disabilities who require
alternative means for communication
should contact the USDA Target Center
at (202) 720–2600 (voice).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
ADDRESSES:
Background
FCIC is reopening the comment
period for the Request for Information
on Prevented Planting that was
published on May 23, 2023, (at 88 FR
33081–33084). The comment period for
the original notice closed on September
1, 2023. Based on requests received
during the initial comment period, FCIC
is reopening the comment period for an
additional 30 days to allow the public
to comment on the prevented planting
provisions.
FCIC serves America’s agricultural
producers through effective, marketbased risk management tools to
strengthen the economic stability of
agricultural producers and rural
communities. FCIC is committed to
increasing the availability and
effectiveness of Federal crop insurance
as a risk management tool. The Risk
Management Agency (RMA) administers
the FCIC regulations. The Approved
Insurance Providers (AIP) sell and
service Federal crop insurance policies
in every state through a public-private
partnership. FCIC reinsures the AIPs
who share the risk associated with
losses due to natural causes. FCIC’s
vision is to secure the future of
agriculture by providing world class risk
management tools to rural America.
Prevented planting coverage pays
when a producer is unable to plant an
insured crop due to an insured cause of
loss. The payment is intended to assist
in covering the normal costs associated
with preparing the land up to the point
of the seed going in the ground (preplant costs). These pre-plant costs can
include seed, purchase of machinery,
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
land rent, fertilizer, actions taken to
ready the field, pesticide, labor, and
repairs. Coverage is calculated as a
percent of the producer’s insurance
guarantee (for example, 60 percent for
soybeans).
FCIC is interested in all general
prevented planting comments but
requests public input from stakeholders
on the following specific topics:
Prevented Planting Coverage Based on
Harvest Prices for Revenue Protection
Insurance
Revenue protection is a plan of
insurance that provides protection
against loss of revenue due to a
production loss, price decline or
increase, or a combination of both.
Under the revenue protection plan of
insurance, yield losses are compensated
using the harvest-time price if it is
higher than the price FCIC projected
prior to planting. This compensates
producers for the replacement value of
lost bushels. This type of coverage was
intended to help producers mitigate the
risk of having to buy out of delivery
contracts they are unable to fulfill due
to production losses. Currently, the
prevented planting calculation for
revenue protection is based on the
projected price and does not increase
with the harvest price.
Revenue protection is the most
popular insurance coverage in the crop
insurance program. Under revenue
protection, producers may elect a
harvest price exclusion option which
removes the protection against loss of
revenue due to harvest price increase.
Over 99 percent of revenue protection
policies maintain harvest price
coverage.
Following the volume of prevented
planting payments for 2019 and 2020, a
consistent suggestion emerged to allow
prevented planting payments to increase
with the harvest price, as is currently
done for lost production. Allowing the
harvest price for prevented planting
payments would not impact most years
as there needs to be both an increase in
the harvest price and a prevented
planting claim. Historical data suggests
the additional coverage would increase
prevented planting payments by
approximately 6 percent on average for
those policies with harvest price
revenue coverage. Consequently, there
would need to be a corresponding
increase in premium for these policies.
E:\FR\FM\12SEN1.SGM
12SEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 175 / Tuesday, September 12, 2023 / Notices
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
The following are questions for input
regarding prevented planting coverage
based on the harvest price:
1. Should prevented planting
payments be based on the harvest price
or the price used to establish the
insurance guarantee (projected price)?
2. What specific advantages or
disadvantages do you see for allowing
prevented planting coverage to be based
on the harvest price?
3. When a producer is prevented from
planting, what additional loss does a
producer suffer when the harvest price
increases and what should be
considered to estimate the value of the
loss?
4. Do you have any concerns about
allowing prevented planting coverage to
be based on the harvest price?
Prevented Planting ‘‘1 in 4’’
Requirement
Beginning with the 2021 crop year,
FCIC revised the prevented planting
provisions to implement the ‘‘1 in 4’’
requirement nationwide. The ‘‘1 in 4’’
requirement states that 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. This was
meant to reduce prevented planting
payments on land that is not generally
available to plant, thus lowering
insurance costs for all producers. Prior
to the 2021 crop year, the ‘‘1 in 4’’
requirement was only applicable to the
Prairie Pothole National Priority Area
and required that the acreage must be
physically available for planting.
In late 2022, FCIC announced the ‘‘1
in 4’’ requirement would be removed
from western states that have
experienced significant ongoing drought
in recent years. The purpose of
removing the requirement in these states
was to give FCIC more time to better
understand the unique needs of western
producers and to also ensure all parties
can provide input on the change.
The following are questions regarding
the prevented planting ‘‘1 in 4’’
requirement:
1. Since the nationwide
implementation of the ‘‘1 in 4’’
requirement, what situations have
created challenges due to this
requirement for producers that have
been prevented from planting?
2. Do you have recommendations that
would make the requirement more
flexible for producers while protecting
the integrity of the Federal Crop
Insurance Program?
3. Are there specific situations that
should exempt land from the ‘‘1 in 4’’
requirement and why?
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:32 Sep 11, 2023
Jkt 259001
4. Should the requirement be removed
from specific areas and why?
5. A portion of the ‘‘1 in 4’’
requirement allows crops that have been
adjusted for claims purposes due to an
insured cause of loss to be considered
harvested. However, this allowance
excludes claims adjusted due to the
following causes of loss: flood, excess
moisture, and drought. Should the
requirement exclude specific causes of
loss adjusted for claims purposes and
why?
6. Are you aware of additional
program integrity measures or
safeguards that should be considered
beyond what is in place today?
7. Do you believe there should be a
limit on the number of consecutive
years that a producer is eligible to
receive a prevented planting payment
on the same acreage? If so, what do you
believe the limit should be?
Prevented Planting 10 Percent
Additional Coverage
Insureds with additional coverage, a
coverage level greater than catastrophic
risk protection, may elect an additional
level of prevented planting coverage,
commonly referred to as buy-up
coverage, on or before the sales closing
date. The additional coverage level
allows producers to better tailor their
coverage to match their actual prevented
planting costs. The additional level of
prevented planting coverage also
requires the producer pay additional
premium. Prior to the 2018 crop year,
two additional prevented planting
coverage levels were available, 5 percent
(+5) and 10 percent (+10). FCIC
removed the +10 additional coverage
option beginning in the 2018 crop year.
Removing the +10 additional coverage
option maintained the balance between
providing coverage to producers and the
cost to taxpayers. While FCIC has
removed the +10 additional coverage
option, the +5 additional coverage
option is still available.
RMA is considering reinstating the
+10 additional coverage option. The
following are questions regarding the
+10 additional coverage option:
1. What specific advantages or
disadvantages do you see regarding
reinstating the +10 additional coverage
option?
2. If you believe reinstating the +10
additional coverage option will provide
needed protection for producers, why is
it needed in addition to the current +5
additional coverage option?
3. Do you have any concerns about
reinstating the +10 additional coverage
option?
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
62525
Prevented Planting Coverage on
Contracted Crops
For several crops, crop types, or
specific practices grown under a
contract with a processor, a contract
price option allows a producer to use
their contract price to determine the
insurance guarantee. For example, the
Contract Price Addendum allows
organic certified and transitional
producers of many crops to use the
price contained in their organic contract
for insurance. Currently, when the
contract price option is elected, the
prevented planting coverage is based on
the contract price. However, it has been
suggested that prevented planting costs
may be the same regardless of whether
the producer had a contract. FCIC is
requesting input on whether the
prevented planting guarantee should
use the RMA established price (price
election or projected price), regardless
of if the contract price option has been
elected.
The price election is the amount
contained in the actuarial documents
that is the value per pound, bushel, ton,
carton, or other applicable unit of
measure for the purposes of determining
premium and indemnity under the
policy. The projected price is the price
for each crop determined in accordance
with the Commodity Exchange Price
Provisions.1 The applicable projected
price is used for each crop for which
revenue protection is available,
regardless of whether you elect to obtain
revenue protection or yield protection
for the crop.
The following are questions regarding
prevented planting coverage on
contracted crops that can elect the
contract price option:
1. Are pre-planting costs higher for
contracted crops? If so, explain.
2. Should prevented planting
payments be based on the contract price
or RMA’s established price (price
election or projected price)? Please
explain why.
3. If a contract price is used for
prevented planting guarantee purposes,
should there be any limitations as to
when the contract is secured,
specifically when a cause of loss is
present that may prevent planting?
1 The Commodity Exchange Price Provisions
(CEPP) are used in conjunction with either the
Common Crop Insurance Policy Basic Provisions or
the Area Risk Protection Insurance Basic
Provisions, along with Crop Provisions for the
following crops: barley, canola or rapeseed, corn,
cotton, grain sorghum, rice, soybeans, sunflowers,
and wheat. CEPP specifies how and when the
projected and harvest price components will be
determined. Updated CEPP documents are on the
RMA website at www.rma.usda.gov/Policy-andProcedure/Insurance-Plans/Commodity-ExchangePrice-Provisions-CEPP.
E:\FR\FM\12SEN1.SGM
12SEN1
62526
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 175 / Tuesday, September 12, 2023 / Notices
Other General Prevented Planting
Questions
1. Do you believe all producers will
support paying higher premiums to
cover the costs of expanded prevented
planting benefits?
2. Are pre-planting costs the same for
all causes of loss? For example: Does a
multi-year drought leading to failure of
irrigation supply have the same preplanting costs as unexpected flooding
prior to planting?
Marcia Bunger,
Manager, Federal Crop Insurance
Corporation; and Administrator, Risk
Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2023–19584 Filed 9–11–23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–08–P
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Food and Nutrition Service
Agency Information Collection
Activities: Proposed Collection;
Comment Request: Additional
Information To Be Collected From SubGrantees Under Uniform Grant
Application Package for Discretionary
Grant Programs
Food and Nutrition Service
(FNS), USDA.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
Cooperative agreement
recipients of the United States
Department of Agriculture’s (USDA)
Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) plan
to collect additional information from
sub-grantee applicants associated with
the Healthy Meals Incentive Initiative
(HMI 2) related to School Food System
Transformation. FNS already has
approval from the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB) for the collection of
information associated with the original
cooperative agreement under the
Uniform Grant Application for NonEntitlement Discretionary Grants, as
approved under OMB Control Number:
0584–0512 (Expiration Date: July 31,
2025). This notice solicits public
comment on the additional information
proposed for collection.
DATES: To be assured of consideration,
written comments must be submitted or
postmarked on or before October 12,
2023.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
SUMMARY:
ADDRESSES:
Comments are invited on: (a) Whether
the proposed collection of information
is necessary for the proper performance
of the functions of the agency, including
whether the information shall have
practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the
agency’s estimate of the burden of the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:32 Sep 11, 2023
Jkt 259001
proposed collection of information,
including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions that were
used; (c) ways to enhance the quality,
utility, and clarity of the information to
be collected; and (d) ways to minimize
the burden of the collection of
information on those who are to
respond.
Comments must be submitted through
one of the following methods:
• Preferred method: Submit
information through the Federal
eRulemaking Portal at https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submissions.
• Email: Send comments to
Bethany.Showell@usda.gov with a
subject line ‘‘Sub-grantee information
collection under OMB Control No.
0584–0512’’
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Bethany Showell of Food and Nutrition
Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture,
1320 Braddock Place, Alexandria,
Virginia 22314, 703–457–6783, or email
bethany.showell@usda.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Four
cooperative agreement recipients of the
United States Department of
Agriculture’s (USDA) Food and
Nutrition Service (FNS) will be
soliciting requests for funding
applications in the Fall of 2023 for subgrantee proposals associated with the
Healthy Meals Incentives Initiative
(HMI 2) related to School Food System
Transformation.
The Healthy Meals Incentives
Initiative (HMI) is already addressed
under OMB Approval No. 0584–0512 as
the Child Nutrition Healthy Meals
Incentive. FNS submitted a nonsubstantive change request to the Office
of Management and Budget (OMB) to
provide coverage under the Paperwork
Reduction Act (PRA) for the request for
proposals from sub-grantees. Out of an
abundance of caution and to ensure the
public is fully aware upfront of the
proposed sub-grantee submittals, FNS is
also simultaneously issuing this 30-day
Federal Register Notice, as explicitly
allowed under OMB Control No. 0584–
0512.
Four FNS cooperative agreement
recipients will ask for sub-grantee
applications beyond the uniform grant
application package discussed in OMB
control 0584–0512. The sub-grantee
proposals to be submitted will, in
general, address projects that support
the development of innovative solutions
for K–12 food service transformation.
The projects will support collaborative
partnerships between non-governmental
entities, school food authorities, and the
school food industry to encourage new
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 9990
approaches for the improvement of the
K–12 food system and to develop
creative solutions to provide nutritious
foods for school meals. The projects will
balance a regional and national focus.
The burden hours associated with the
request for applications from subgrantees and the submittal of proposals,
which we’re referring to as HMI 2, are
delineated in this Federal Register
Notice and already covered under the
‘‘miscellaneous’’ grants portion of the
existing OMB-approved information
collection. That miscellaneous grants
section is intended to encompass grants
that FNS could not foresee when FNS
submitted information collection
request 0584–0512 to OMB.
There are burden hours associated
with the cooperative agreement
recipients’ future drafting and posting of
a request for applications from subgrantees on each cooperator’s website
and associated communication efforts.
The estimate is 10 hours for each of the
four cooperators, for a total of 40 hours.
These 40 hours would be taken from the
existing competitive pre-award burden
hours of approximately 4,823 already
set aside for miscellaneous grants not
explicitly identified in OMB approval
number 0584–0512.
There are burden hours associated
with the potential for up to 250 subgrantee applicants to submit one
proposal each. The associated burden
would be 250 times 4 hours equals
1,000 hours. These 1,000 hours would
be taken from the existing competitive
pre-award total of 4,823 burden hours
set aside for miscellaneous competitive
grants in OMB approval number 0584–
0512.
There are burden hours for subgrantees’ submittal of a progress report;
there is a potential for up to 150 subgrantees to submit a progress report
which is equivalent to up to 150 subgrantees times 3 hours or 450 reporting
hours. These 450 hours would be taken
from the post-award total of 770 hours
set aside for miscellaneous competitive
grants in OMB approval number 0584–
0512.
FNS’ cooperative agreement
recipients who will be requesting
project proposals from sub-grantees will
utilize comments to be submitted to
adjust the collection of additional
information as necessary.
Tameka Owens,
Assistant Administrator, Food and Nutrition
Service.
[FR Doc. 2023–19631 Filed 9–11–23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–30–P
E:\FR\FM\12SEN1.SGM
12SEN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 175 (Tuesday, September 12, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 62524-62526]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-19584]
========================================================================
Notices
Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains documents other than rules
or proposed rules that are applicable to the public. Notices of hearings
and investigations, committee meetings, agency decisions and rulings,
delegations of authority, filing of petitions and applications and agency
statements of organization and functions are examples of documents
appearing in this section.
========================================================================
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 175 / Tuesday, September 12, 2023 /
Notices
[[Page 62524]]
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Federal Crop Insurance Corporation
Risk Management Agency
[Docket ID FCIC-23-0001]
Request for Information on Prevented Planting
AGENCY: Federal Crop Insurance Corporation and Risk Management Agency,
Department of Agriculture (USDA).
ACTION: Notice of request for information; reopening of comment period.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Federal Crop Insurance Corporation (FCIC) is reopening the
comment period for 30 days to allow the public additional time to
provide comments on the prevented planting provisions of the Common
Crop Insurance Policy (CCIP), Basic Provisions published on May 23,
2023. Prevented planting is a feature of many crop insurance plans that
provides a payment to cover certain pre-plant costs for a crop that was
prevented from being planted due to an insurable cause of loss. FCIC is
interested in public input on the following: additional prevented
planting coverage based on harvest prices in situations when harvest
prices are higher than established prices initially set by FCIC prior
to planting; the requirement that acreage must have been planted to a
crop, insured, and harvested, in at least 1 of the 4 most recent crop
years; additional levels of prevented planting coverage; prevented
planting coverage on contracted crops; and other general prevented
planting questions.
DATES: The comment period for the Request for Information on Prevented
Planting published on May 23, 2023, (at 88 FR 33081) is reopened. We
will consider comments that we receive by October 12, 2023.
ADDRESSES: We invite you to submit comments in response to this notice.
Send your comments through the method below:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to https://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID FCIC-23-0001. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
All comments will be posted without change and will be publicly
available on www.regulations.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Francie Tolle; telephone (816) 926-
7829; or email [email protected]. Persons with disabilities who
require alternative means for communication should contact the USDA
Target Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
FCIC is reopening the comment period for the Request for
Information on Prevented Planting that was published on May 23, 2023,
(at 88 FR 33081-33084). The comment period for the original notice
closed on September 1, 2023. Based on requests received during the
initial comment period, FCIC is reopening the comment period for an
additional 30 days to allow the public to comment on the prevented
planting provisions.
FCIC serves America's agricultural producers through effective,
market-based risk management tools to strengthen the economic stability
of agricultural producers and rural communities. FCIC is committed to
increasing the availability and effectiveness of Federal crop insurance
as a risk management tool. The Risk Management Agency (RMA) administers
the FCIC regulations. The Approved Insurance Providers (AIP) sell and
service Federal crop insurance policies in every state through a
public-private partnership. FCIC reinsures the AIPs who share the risk
associated with losses due to natural causes. FCIC's vision is to
secure the future of agriculture by providing world class risk
management tools to rural America.
Prevented planting coverage pays when a producer is unable to plant
an insured crop due to an insured cause of loss. The payment is
intended to assist in covering the normal costs associated with
preparing the land up to the point of the seed going in the ground
(pre-plant costs). These pre-plant costs can include seed, purchase of
machinery, land rent, fertilizer, actions taken to ready the field,
pesticide, labor, and repairs. Coverage is calculated as a percent of
the producer's insurance guarantee (for example, 60 percent for
soybeans).
FCIC is interested in all general prevented planting comments but
requests public input from stakeholders on the following specific
topics:
Prevented Planting Coverage Based on Harvest Prices for Revenue
Protection Insurance
Revenue protection is a plan of insurance that provides protection
against loss of revenue due to a production loss, price decline or
increase, or a combination of both. Under the revenue protection plan
of insurance, yield losses are compensated using the harvest-time price
if it is higher than the price FCIC projected prior to planting. This
compensates producers for the replacement value of lost bushels. This
type of coverage was intended to help producers mitigate the risk of
having to buy out of delivery contracts they are unable to fulfill due
to production losses. Currently, the prevented planting calculation for
revenue protection is based on the projected price and does not
increase with the harvest price.
Revenue protection is the most popular insurance coverage in the
crop insurance program. Under revenue protection, producers may elect a
harvest price exclusion option which removes the protection against
loss of revenue due to harvest price increase. Over 99 percent of
revenue protection policies maintain harvest price coverage.
Following the volume of prevented planting payments for 2019 and
2020, a consistent suggestion emerged to allow prevented planting
payments to increase with the harvest price, as is currently done for
lost production. Allowing the harvest price for prevented planting
payments would not impact most years as there needs to be both an
increase in the harvest price and a prevented planting claim.
Historical data suggests the additional coverage would increase
prevented planting payments by approximately 6 percent on average for
those policies with harvest price revenue coverage. Consequently, there
would need to be a corresponding increase in premium for these
policies.
[[Page 62525]]
The following are questions for input regarding prevented planting
coverage based on the harvest price:
1. Should prevented planting payments be based on the harvest price
or the price used to establish the insurance guarantee (projected
price)?
2. What specific advantages or disadvantages do you see for
allowing prevented planting coverage to be based on the harvest price?
3. When a producer is prevented from planting, what additional loss
does a producer suffer when the harvest price increases and what should
be considered to estimate the value of the loss?
4. Do you have any concerns about allowing prevented planting
coverage to be based on the harvest price?
Prevented Planting ``1 in 4'' Requirement
Beginning with the 2021 crop year, FCIC revised the prevented
planting provisions to implement the ``1 in 4'' requirement nationwide.
The ``1 in 4'' requirement states that 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. This was meant to reduce prevented planting
payments on land that is not generally available to plant, thus
lowering insurance costs for all producers. Prior to the 2021 crop
year, the ``1 in 4'' requirement was only applicable to the Prairie
Pothole National Priority Area and required that the acreage must be
physically available for planting.
In late 2022, FCIC announced the ``1 in 4'' requirement would be
removed from western states that have experienced significant ongoing
drought in recent years. The purpose of removing the requirement in
these states was to give FCIC more time to better understand the unique
needs of western producers and to also ensure all parties can provide
input on the change.
The following are questions regarding the prevented planting ``1 in
4'' requirement:
1. Since the nationwide implementation of the ``1 in 4''
requirement, what situations have created challenges due to this
requirement for producers that have been prevented from planting?
2. Do you have recommendations that would make the requirement more
flexible for producers while protecting the integrity of the Federal
Crop Insurance Program?
3. Are there specific situations that should exempt land from the
``1 in 4'' requirement and why?
4. Should the requirement be removed from specific areas and why?
5. A portion of the ``1 in 4'' requirement allows crops that have
been adjusted for claims purposes due to an insured cause of loss to be
considered harvested. However, this allowance excludes claims adjusted
due to the following causes of loss: flood, excess moisture, and
drought. Should the requirement exclude specific causes of loss
adjusted for claims purposes and why?
6. Are you aware of additional program integrity measures or
safeguards that should be considered beyond what is in place today?
7. Do you believe there should be a limit on the number of
consecutive years that a producer is eligible to receive a prevented
planting payment on the same acreage? If so, what do you believe the
limit should be?
Prevented Planting 10 Percent Additional Coverage
Insureds with additional coverage, a coverage level greater than
catastrophic risk protection, may elect an additional level of
prevented planting coverage, commonly referred to as buy-up coverage,
on or before the sales closing date. The additional coverage level
allows producers to better tailor their coverage to match their actual
prevented planting costs. The additional level of prevented planting
coverage also requires the producer pay additional premium. Prior to
the 2018 crop year, two additional prevented planting coverage levels
were available, 5 percent (+5) and 10 percent (+10). FCIC removed the
+10 additional coverage option beginning in the 2018 crop year.
Removing the +10 additional coverage option maintained the balance
between providing coverage to producers and the cost to taxpayers.
While FCIC has removed the +10 additional coverage option, the +5
additional coverage option is still available.
RMA is considering reinstating the +10 additional coverage option.
The following are questions regarding the +10 additional coverage
option:
1. What specific advantages or disadvantages do you see regarding
reinstating the +10 additional coverage option?
2. If you believe reinstating the +10 additional coverage option
will provide needed protection for producers, why is it needed in
addition to the current +5 additional coverage option?
3. Do you have any concerns about reinstating the +10 additional
coverage option?
Prevented Planting Coverage on Contracted Crops
For several crops, crop types, or specific practices grown under a
contract with a processor, a contract price option allows a producer to
use their contract price to determine the insurance guarantee. For
example, the Contract Price Addendum allows organic certified and
transitional producers of many crops to use the price contained in
their organic contract for insurance. Currently, when the contract
price option is elected, the prevented planting coverage is based on
the contract price. However, it has been suggested that prevented
planting costs may be the same regardless of whether the producer had a
contract. FCIC is requesting input on whether the prevented planting
guarantee should use the RMA established price (price election or
projected price), regardless of if the contract price option has been
elected.
The price election is the amount contained in the actuarial
documents that is the value per pound, bushel, ton, carton, or other
applicable unit of measure for the purposes of determining premium and
indemnity under the policy. The projected price is the price for each
crop determined in accordance with the Commodity Exchange Price
Provisions.\1\ The applicable projected price is used for each crop for
which revenue protection is available, regardless of whether you elect
to obtain revenue protection or yield protection for the crop.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The Commodity Exchange Price Provisions (CEPP) are used in
conjunction with either the Common Crop Insurance Policy Basic
Provisions or the Area Risk Protection Insurance Basic Provisions,
along with Crop Provisions for the following crops: barley, canola
or rapeseed, corn, cotton, grain sorghum, rice, soybeans,
sunflowers, and wheat. CEPP specifies how and when the projected and
harvest price components will be determined. Updated CEPP documents
are on the RMA website at www.rma.usda.gov/Policy-and-Procedure/Insurance-Plans/Commodity-Exchange-Price-Provisions-CEPP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The following are questions regarding prevented planting coverage
on contracted crops that can elect the contract price option:
1. Are pre-planting costs higher for contracted crops? If so,
explain.
2. Should prevented planting payments be based on the contract
price or RMA's established price (price election or projected price)?
Please explain why.
3. If a contract price is used for prevented planting guarantee
purposes, should there be any limitations as to when the contract is
secured, specifically when a cause of loss is present that may prevent
planting?
[[Page 62526]]
Other General Prevented Planting Questions
1. Do you believe all producers will support paying higher premiums
to cover the costs of expanded prevented planting benefits?
2. Are pre-planting costs the same for all causes of loss? For
example: Does a multi-year drought leading to failure of irrigation
supply have the same pre-planting costs as unexpected flooding prior to
planting?
Marcia Bunger,
Manager, Federal Crop Insurance Corporation; and Administrator, Risk
Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2023-19584 Filed 9-11-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-08-P
