Voglio sapere a riguardo di…

lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1

33488

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 120 / Friday, June 25, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
Further, the Winter Coverage Endorsement WCE provides optional coverage for barley and wheat producers from the winter final planting date until the spring final planting date in counties with both winter and spring final planting dates. If damage occurs during the WCE coverage period, the producer has three options: 1 Continue to care for the damaged crop and coverage will continue under the terms of the Basic Provisions, the Small Grains Crop Insurance Provisions and the WCE;
2 replant the damaged acreage and receive a replanting payment; or 3
destroy all remaining acreage and accept an appraised amount of production determined in accordance with section 11c1 of the Small Grains Crop Insurance Provisions to count against the unit production guarantee. The Common Crop Insurance Policy Basic Provisions says that no replanting payment will be made on acreage on which one replanting payment has already been allowed for the crop year.
Assume section 9a5 is removed, damage occurs prior to the winter final planting date, and a replanting payment is made. If the same acreage that received a replanting payment is damaged during the WCE coverage period, then the producers options under the WCE have been narrowed down to two as he likely will not choose to replant knowing he will not receive a replanting payment. When the producer elected the WCE at sales closing time, he would have expected three options in the event of damage.
Finally, in general, a replanting payment will not be made if acreage is damaged and that acreage was planted before the earliest planting date if an earliest planting date is listed in the actuarial documents. There are counties with both winter and spring final planting dates that currently do not have an earliest planting date listed for the winter type. If section 9a5 is removed, it is unclear if producers will plant earlier than they have historically planted knowing that there is a potential for a replanting payment if the crop fails before the winter final planting date.
Specifically, FCIC requests comments on the following questions; please provide any data and information that supports your comments:
1. Should FCIC provide a replanting payment for the winter type prior to the winter final planting date i.e., by removing section 9a5?
2. If section 9a5 is removed, while section 9b is left intact, what concerns do you have that producers who plant a winter type in both counties would be treated differently regarding replanting payments: Where producers in counties
VerDate Sep<11>2014

16:27 Jun 24, 2021

Jkt 253001

with both winter and spring final planting dates would receive a replanting payment prior to the winter final planting date and producers in counties with only a winter final planting date would not receive a replanting payment prior to the winter final planting date?
3. If section 9a5 is removed, what concerns do you have that the producer may not be eligible for a replanting payment under the WCE if he has already received a replanting payment on the same acreage?
4. If section 9a5 is removed, will FCIC need to create an earliest planting date for the winter types in counties where no earliest planting date exists to require that producers plant no earlier than a specific date in order to be eligible for a replanting payment?
Effective Date, Notice and Comment, and Exemptions 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.
This rule is exempt from the regulatory analysis requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act 5 U.S.C.
601612, as amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996.
For major rules, the Congressional Review Act requires a delay 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. 8042. Therefore, this final rule is effective on the date of publication in the Federal Register.
Although not required by APA or any other law, FCIC has chosen to request comments on this rule.
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563
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. The
PO 00000

Frm 00010

Fmt 4700

Sfmt 4700

requirements in Executive Orders 12866
and 13563 for the analysis of costs and benefits apply to rules that are determined to be significant.
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.
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?
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. 43214347 and the regulations of the Council on Environmental Quality 40 CFR parts 15001508. 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.

E:FRFM25JNR1.SGM

25JNR1