[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 152 (Wednesday, August 7, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 48035-48037]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-19017]



 ========================================================================
 Rules and Regulations
                                                 Federal Register
 ________________________________________________________________________
 
 This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory documents 
 having general applicability and legal effect, most of which are keyed 
 to and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is published 
 under 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.
 
 The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the Superintendent of Documents. 
 Prices of new books are listed in the first FEDERAL REGISTER issue of each 
 week.
 
 ========================================================================
 

  Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 152 / Wednesday, August 7, 2013 / 
Rules and Regulations  

[[Page 48035]]



DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Commodity Credit Corporation

7 CFR Part 1410

RIN 0560-AH80


Conservation Reserve Program, Re-Enrollment

AGENCY: Commodity Credit Corporation, USDA.

ACTION: Final rule; Technical Amendment.

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

SUMMARY: This rule makes a technical correction to the Commodity Credit 
Corporation (CCC) Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) regulations to 
clarify that land with use restrictions that prohibit the production of 
agricultural commodities, typically through an easement or other deed 
restrictions, is not eligible for re-enrollment in CRP. This is not a 
new policy and would not have affected any program determinations for 
recent CRP sign ups, had this change been specified in the regulations 
at the time. This amendment will improve the regulations by maintaining 
consistency with longstanding policy. This rule corrects a provision in 
the current regulations that allows re-enrollment in CRP of land with 
easements or other deed restrictions that restrict the production of 
agricultural commodities. A 2003 interim rule inadvertently added that 
provision through an incorrect cross-reference, but clearly stated in 
the preamble that the intent was to exclude land with such easements or 
deed restrictions from re-enrollment. The purpose of CRP is to cost-
effectively assist producers in conserving and improving soil, water, 
wildlife, and other natural resources by converting environmentally-
sensitive acreage from the production of agricultural commodities to a 
long-term vegetative cover.

DATES: Effective Date: August 7, 2013.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Beverly J. Preston; telephone 202-720-
9563. Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for 
communications (Braille, large print, audio tape, etc.) should contact 
the USDA Target Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    CRP was first authorized in the Food Security Act of 1985 (16 
U.S.C. 3830-3835a, commonly known as the 1985 Farm Bill). This rule 
amends the CRP regulations in 7 CFR part 1410 to clarify that land with 
use restrictions that prohibit the production of agricultural 
commodities, typically through an easement or other deed restriction, 
is not eligible for re-enrollment in CRP.
    The purpose of CRP is to cost-effectively assist producers in 
conserving and improving soil, water, wildlife, and other natural 
resources by converting environmentally-sensitive acreage generally 
devoted to the production of agricultural commodities to a long-term 
vegetative cover and to address issues raised by State, regional, and 
national conservation initiatives. Participants enroll land in CRP 
contracts for 10 to 15 years in exchange for annual rental payments and 
financial assistance to install certain conservation practices and to 
maintain approved vegetative, tree, or other appropriate covers. The 
purpose and scope of CRP are not changing with this rule.
    The regulations in 7 CFR 1410.6(c)(2) specifies that land is 
ineligible for enrollment into CRP if the use of the land is restricted 
through deed or other restrictions prior to enrollment in CRP 
prohibiting the production of agricultural commodities during any part 
of the contract term. However, through an incorrect cross reference 
that is being removed with this rule, this section also provides an 
exception to the easement ineligibility if the land is re-enrolled in 
the CRP during the final year of an expiring CRP contract. As currently 
written, the regulation therefore allows for re-enrolling land into CRP 
even if there is an easement in place, or an easement has been filed 
that would begin as soon as the current CRP contract expires; even 
though such easement restricts the production of agricultural 
commodities.
    It was never the intent or the policy of CCC to allow land with 
such crop use restrictions to be re-enrolled in CRP. That provision was 
inadvertently added in the 2003 interim rule implementing 2002 Farm 
Bill (the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002, Pub. L. 107-
171) changes to CRP, which was published in the Federal Register on May 
8, 2003 (68 FR 24830-24845). The preamble to the 2003 interim rule, 
states specifically `` . . . any acreage currently in the CRP will be 
basically eligible to be offered for continued enrollment if the 
current contract is scheduled to expire the day before a new contract 
would become effective. However, land will be ineligible for enrollment 
if it is subject to a CRP useful life easement that extends beyond the 
current contract term. The interim rule provides that re-enrollment of 
currently enrolled acreage will be based on the same criteria as for 
enrolling new acreage.''
    Nearly all FSA and CCC programs have specific prohibitions on 
duplicate payments, meaning that beneficiaries may not receive payments 
from two different programs for the same land, crop, or loss. Allowing 
for re-enrollment in CRP where the land is already under an easement 
would be a type of duplicate payment, because landowners have already 
been compensated for the easement, usually by a State. CCC has not and 
should not pay participants annual CRP rental payments on land where an 
easement already ensures that the conservation benefits established 
under the original CRP contract will continue long term or even 
permanently. As noted in the preamble to the final rule for CRP 
published in the Federal Register on May 14, 2004 (69 FR 26755-26763), 
no comments were received on the 2003 interim rule opposing the 
ineligibility provision for re-enrollment of land with easements, as 
specified in the preamble. CCC has not allowed such re-enrollment, as 
stated consistently in the handbooks for CRP. However, the correction 
in this rule is needed to make the regulations consistent with policy.
    If re-enrollment of land with restrictive easements were allowed, 
the primary beneficiaries would be landowners whose land is enrolled at 
the State level in the Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program (CREP).

[[Page 48036]]

Many States require long term or even permanent easements as a 
condition of enrollment in CREP, and compensate landowners for those 
easements. Since such land already has easements, re-enrolling that 
land in CRP would force CCC to pay annual rental payments in exchange 
for no increase in environmental benefits. If this correction is not 
made, and our existing policy cannot be enforced, about 400-500 
contracts could be re-enrolled for an additional 10 to 15 years of 
rental payments, at a potential cost to the government of $180-250 
million total for no additional environmental benefits. Since CRP has 
an enrollment cap, and CREP re-enrollments would be non-competitive, 
those 400-500 contracts could potentially ``crowd out'' other 
applicants representing new, additional actual environmental benefits. 
Therefore, this correction is needed to ensure that the limited CRP 
funding goes to CRP contracts with specific environmental benefits.

Notice and Comment

    This rule is technical in nature, not substantive, and a delay in 
implementing this rule would be contrary to the public interest. 
Therefore, this rule is effective on publication. Also, regulations for 
this program are exempt from the notice and comment requirements of the 
Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 553), as specified in section 
2904 of the 2008 Farm Bill (Pub. L. 110-246, the Food, Conservation, 
and Energy Act of 2008), which allows that the regulations be 
promulgated and administered without regard to the notice and comment 
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 553 or the Statement of Policy of the Secretary 
of Agriculture effective July 24, 1971, (36 FR 13804) relating to 
notices of proposed rulemaking and public participation in rulemaking.

Executive Order 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. This technical 
correction, which is the result of a retrospective review of existing 
regulations, will improve the clarity of the regulation and harmonize 
it with longstanding USDA policy and existing handbooks.
    This technical amendment did not require Office of Management and 
Budget (OMB) designation of the level of significance under Executive 
Order 12866, ``Regulatory Planning and Review,'' and therefore OMB has 
not reviewed this rule.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), as amended by 
the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 
(SBREFA), generally requires an agency to prepare a regulatory 
flexibility analysis of any rule subject to the notice and comment 
rulemaking requirements under the Administrative Procedure Act (5 
U.S.C. 553) or any other statute, 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 CCC is not required to publish a notice of 
proposed rulemaking for this rule.

Environmental Review

    The environmental impacts of this rule have been considered in a 
manner consistent with the provisions of the National Environmental 
Policy Act (NEPA, 42 U.S.C. 4321-4347), the regulations of the Council 
on Environmental Quality (40 CFR parts 1500-1508), and FSA regulations 
for compliance with NEPA (7 CFR part 799). The technical correction 
identified in this final rule does not change the structure or goals of 
the program and can be considered simply administrative in nature. 
Therefore, FSA has determined that NEPA does not apply to this final 
rule and no environmental assessment or environmental impact statement 
will be prepared.

Executive Order 12372

    This program is not subject to Executive Order 12372, 
``Intergovernmental Review of Federal Programs,'' which requires 
consultation with State and local officials. See the notice related to 
7 CFR part 3015, subpart V, published in the Federal Register on June 
24, 1983 (48 FR 29115).

Executive Order 12988

    This rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 12988, ``Civil 
Justice Reform.'' The provisions of this rule will not have preemptive 
effect with respect to any State or local laws, regulations, or 
policies that conflict with such provision or which otherwise impede 
their full implementation. The rule will not have retroactive effect. 
Before any judicial action may be brought regarding this rule, all 
administrative remedies must be exhausted.

Executive Order 13132

    This rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 13132, 
``Federalism.'' The policies contained in this rule would not have any 
substantial direct effect on States, the relationship between the 
Federal Government and the States, or the distribution of power and 
responsibilities among the various levels of government. Nor would 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 for compliance with Executive Order 
13175, ``Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal 
Governments.'' Executive Order 13175 imposes requirements on the 
development of regulatory policies that have tribal implications or 
preempt tribal laws. The policies contained in this rule do not preempt 
Tribal law. USDA continues to consult with Tribal officials to have a 
meaningful consultation and collaboration on the development and 
strengthening of USDA regulations.

Unfunded Mandates

    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 on State, local, and Tribal governments or the 
private sector. Agencies generally must prepare a written statement, 
including a cost benefit 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 under title II of the 
UMRA, for State, local, and Tribal governments or the private sector. 
Therefore, this rule is not subject to the requirements of sections 202 
and 205 of UMRA.

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act

    This rule is not a major rule under the Small Business Regulatory 
Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121,

[[Page 48037]]

SBREFA) and FSA is not required to delay the effective date for 60 days 
from the date of publication to allow for Congressional review. 
Accordingly, this rule is effective on the date of publication in the 
Federal Register.

Federal Assistance Programs

    The title and number of the Federal Domestic Assistance Program in 
the Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance to which this rule applies 
is the Conservation Reserve Program--10.069.

Paperwork Reduction Act

    The regulations in this rule are exempt from the requirements of 
the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35), as specified in 
section 2904 of the 2008 Farm Bill, which provides that these 
regulations be promulgated and the programs in Title II of the 2008 
Farm Bill be administered without regard to the Paperwork Reduction 
Act.

E-Government Act Compliance

    CCC 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 in 7 CFR Part 1410

    Administrative practice and procedure, Agriculture, Environmental 
protection, Grant programs--Agriculture, Natural resources, Reporting 
and recordkeeping requirements, Soil conservation, Technical 
assistance, Water resources, Wildlife.

    For the reasons explained above, CCC amends 7 CFR part 1410 as 
follows:

PART 1410--CONSERVATION RESERVE PROGRAM

0
1. The authority citation for 7 CFR part 1410 continues to read as 
follows:

    Authority: 15 U.S.C. 714b and 714c; 16 U.S.C. 3801-3847.


Sec.  1410.6  [Amended]

0
2. Amend Sec.  1410.6, paragraph (c)(2), by removing the words ``and 
(3)''.

    Signed on July 29, 2013.
Juan M. Garcia,
Executive Vice President, Commodity Credit Corporation.
[FR Doc. 2013-19017 Filed 8-6-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-05-P