Voglio sapere a riguardo di…

jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES

34608

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 123 / Wednesday, June 30, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
regulation will be in a future rulemaking.
Comment: A commenter noted in section 17e2 that an uninsured second crop would include: 1 A
second crop planted after the Late Planting Period LPP or the Final Plant Date if a LPP was not applicable; and 2 A second crop which an insured elected not to insure under the first and second crop provisions in order to preserve a 100% indemnity for the 1st insured crop. The commenter had program vulnerability concerns and suggested a clarification or that the provision be removed. The situation is rare, and the proposed remedy is unnecessary and has added significant complexity to the provision, along with increasing the likelihood the provisions will apply to situations other than those intended. This is due to the provision applying to every uninsured 2nd crop following a failed first insured crop.
Response: This change was made to address the concern that in this situation the same physical acres are subtracted twice from the overall prevented planting eligible acres. This occurrence is extremely rare, but in years where widespread prevented planting is prevalent, such as in 2019, the provision provides important coverage for producers. No change will be made.
Comment: A commenter recommended adding the phrase practice in section 17f1iv like section 17f1i.
Response: FCIC will revise section 17f1iv for consistency.
Comment: A commenter suggested clarifying in section 17f1 if proof of the rotation alone is sufficient or whether both proof of the rotation and inputs are required regarding the phrase or that acreage was part of a crop rotation.
Response: FCIC believes the wording is clear regarding the phrase or that acreage was part of a crop rotation. The word or being used at the beginning of this phrase means that proof of rotation alone is sufficient. No change will be made.
Comment: Regarding section 17f8, a commenter requested a system be in place to support the increase in seeking and verifying this information for policies that have transferred between agents and AIPs.
Response: FCIC encourages producers to work with their agent in providing documentation. AIPs have access to data that can assist with verifying insurance history. There are other methods such as satellite imagery that may be beneficial when proving if a crop was planted and harvested.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

16:21 Jun 29, 2021

Jkt 253001

Comment: A commenter disagreed with the change in section 17f8 and stated it negatively impacted farmers in California by eliminating prevented planting payments to farmers who leased land that is fallowed, unless the fallowed land is farmed the next two years, regardless of water availability and other challenges inherent in production agriculture. The land will be eligible only if the entire leased acreage is in production in at least one year out of four. A commenter suggested to phase in the new 1 in 4 requirement over 4
years to allow farmers who use prevented planting coverage sufficient time to modify existing farming practices as needed e.g., install irrigation systems, acquire water, and secure related financing.
Response: The 1 in 4 requirement applies specifically to physical acreage land; not the producer, the lease, or the farming operation. No change will be made.
In addition to the changes described above, FCIC has made the following changes:
ARPI Basic Provisions and CCIP Basic Provisions For both ARPI Basic Provisions 7
CFR 407 and CCIP Basic Provisions 7
CFR 457.8, FCIC is revising the definition of veteran farmer or rancher in section 1 to allow the spouses veteran status not to impact whether a person is considered a veteran farmer or rancher. The provisions define person as an individual, partnership, association, corporation, estate, trust, or other legal entity, and wherever applicable, a State or a political subdivision or agency of a State. The word person does not include the United States Government or any agency thereof. The provisions state all entity substantial beneficial interest holders must qualify individually as a veteran. The change to the definition of veteran farmer or rancher will clarify the exception that allows a legal entity, comprised only of the veteran and their spouse, to qualify as a veteran farmer or rancher when a qualifying veteran has a non-veteran spouse. For example, a veteran starts farming and forms a corporation with their non-veteran spouse. The veteran meets the veteran farmer or rancher requirements, but the spouse is a nonveteran. With this change, their corporation would qualify as a veteran farmer or rancher.
ARPI Basic Provisions Other changes applicable only to the ARPI Basic Provisions 7 CFR 407 are:

PO 00000

Frm 00004

Fmt 4700

Sfmt 4700

Section 1FCIC is revising the definition of acreage reporting date to replace the term actuarial documents with Special Provisions. This change is being made to be consistent with the CCIP Basic Provisions.
FCIC is removing the definition of NASS National Agricultural Statistics Service for greater transparency regarding the data used to determine area yield guarantees and indemnities, because FCIC no longer uses NASS data but instead RMA data.
In addition to removing the definition, FCIC is removing any references to NASS data throughout the provisions.
Therefore, FCIC is removing paragraph 15e and redesignating paragraphs f and g as e and f.
CCIP Basic Provisions Other changes applicable only to the CCIP Basic Provisions 7 CFR 457.8 are:
Section 34FCIC is adding a new section 34a4ix to allow Crop Provisions to have enterprise units EU
by practice, type, or other insurance features. In 2018, FCIC developed the multi-county enterprise unit MCEU
endorsement. For the 2020 crop year, EUs by cropping practice for following another crop and not following another crop FAC/NFAC were made available in select grain sorghum and soybean counties. For the 2021 crop year, when a producer elects and fails to qualify for EUs on both irrigation or cropping practices they have an additional option to keep EU on practice that meets EU
qualifications and have basic or optional units on the other practice that does not meet EU qualifications. For example, a producer elects EU for both FAC and NFAC cropping practices, but does not qualify for EU for both practices. If discovery for not qualifying is on or before the acreage reporting date, the producer has an additional option to elect an EU on one cropping practice and basic or optional units on the other cropping practice. FCIC continues to receive requests from stakeholders to add the EU structure for a crop or allow the EU structure on a different basis than currently allowed. FCIC continues to review these requests individually to determine the feasibility of implementing the EU request. With this change, FCIC will have the flexibility to make these subsequent EU changes in individual Crop Provisions.
Section 37FCIC is revising sections 37c and e to allow a producer to report acreage as certified organic, or as acreage in transition to organic, when the producer certifies that they have requested, in writing, a written certification or other written documentation from a certifying agent
E:FRFM30JNR1.SGM

30JNR1