[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 7 (Tuesday, January 12, 2016)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 1337-1345]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-32951]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Federal Crop Insurance Corporation
7 CFR part 457
[Docket No. FCIC-15-0002]
RIN 0563-AC48
Common Crop Insurance Regulations; Texas Citrus Fruit Crop
Insurance Provisions
AGENCY: Federal Crop Insurance Corporation, USDA.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Federal Crop Insurance Corporation (FCIC) proposes to
amend the Common Crop Insurance Regulations, Texas Citrus Fruit Crop
Insurance Provisions. The intended effect of this action is to provide
policy changes to better meet the needs of policyholders, to clarify
existing policy provisions, and to reduce vulnerability to program
fraud, waste, and abuse. Specifically, this proposed rule intends to
modify or clarify certain definitions, clarify unit establishment,
clarify substantive provisions for consistency with terminology
changes, modify the insured causes of loss, clarify required timing for
loss notices, modify portions of loss calculation formulas, and address
potential misinterpretations or ambiguity related to these issues. The
proposed changes will be effective for the 2018 and succeeding crop
years.
DATES: FCIC will accept written comments on this proposed rule until
close of business March 14, 2016. FCIC will consider these comments
when FCIC finalizes this rule.
ADDRESSES: FCIC prefers that interested persons submit comments
electronically through the Federal eRulemaking Portal. Interested
persons may submit comments, identified by Docket ID No. FCIC-15-0002,
by any of the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
Mail: Director, Product Administration and Standards
Division, Risk Management Agency, United States Department of
Agriculture, P.O. Box 419205, Kansas City, MO 64133-6205.
All comments received, including those received by mail, will be
posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided. Once these comments are posted to this
Web site, the public can access all comments at its convenience from
this Web site. All comments must include the agency name and docket
number or Regulatory Information Number (RIN) for this rule. For
detailed instructions on submitting comments and additional
information, see http://www.regulations.gov. If interested persons are
submitting comments electronically through the Federal eRulemaking
Portal and want to attach a document, FCIC requests use of a text-based
format. If interested persons wish to attach a document that is a
scanned Adobe PDF file, it must be scanned as text and not as an image,
thus allowing FCIC to search and copy certain portions of the
submissions. For questions regarding attaching a document that is a
scanned Adobe PDF file, please contact the RMA Web Content Team at
(816) 823-4694 or by email at [email protected].
Privacy Act: Anyone is able to search the electronic form of all
comments received for any dockets by the name of the person submitting
the comment (or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf of an
association, business, labor union, etc.). Interested persons may
review the complete User Notice and Privacy Notice for Regulations.gov
at http://www.regulations.gov/#!privacyNotice.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tim Hoffmann, Director, Product
Administration and Standards Division, Risk Management Agency, United
States Department of Agriculture, Beacon Facility, Stop 0812, Room 421,
P.O. Box 419205, Kansas City, MO 64141-6205, telephone (816) 926-7730.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Executive Order 12866
This rule has been determined to be not-significant for the
purposes of Executive Order 12866 and, therefore, it has not been
reviewed by the OMB.
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
Pursuant to the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(44 U.S.C. chapter 35, subchapter I), the collections of information in
this rule have been approved by OMB under control number 0563-0053.
E-Government Act Compliance
FCIC is committed to complying with the E-Government Act of 2002,
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.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA),
establishes requirements for Federal agencies to assess the effects of
their regulatory actions on State, local, and tribal governments and
the private sector. This rule contains no Federal mandates (under the
regulatory provisions of 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.
Executive Order 13132
It has been determined under section 1(a) of Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, that this rule does not have sufficient implications to
warrant consultation with the States. The provisions contained in this
rule will not have a substantial direct effect on States, or on the
relationship between the national government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government.
Executive Order 13175
This rule has been reviewed in accordance with the requirements of
Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments. The review reveals that this regulation will not have
substantial and direct effects on Tribal governments and will not have
significant Tribal implications.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
FCIC certifies that this regulation will not have a significant
economic impact
[[Page 1338]]
on a substantial number of small entities. Program requirements for the
Federal crop insurance program are the same for all producers
regardless of the size of their farming operation. For instance, all
producers are required to submit an application and acreage report to
establish their insurance guarantees and compute premium amounts, and
all producers are required to submit a notice of loss and production
information to determine the amount of an indemnity payment in the
event of an insured cause of crop loss. Whether a producer has 10 acres
or 1000 acres, there is no difference in the kind of information
collected. To ensure crop insurance is available to small entities, the
Federal Crop Insurance Act authorizes FCIC to waive collection of
administrative fees from limited resource farmers. FCIC believes this
waiver helps to ensure that small entities are given the same
opportunities as large entities to manage their risks through the use
of crop insurance. A Regulatory Flexibility Analysis has not been
prepared since this regulation does not have a significant impact on a
substantial number of small entities, and, therefore, this regulation
is exempt from the provisions of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
U.S.C. Sec. 605).
Federal Assistance Program
This program is listed in the Catalog of Federal Domestic
Assistance under No. 10.450.
Executive Order 12372
This program is not subject to the provisions of Executive Order
12372, which requires intergovernmental consultation with State and
local officials. See 2 CFR part 415, subpart C.
Executive Order 12988
This rule has been reviewed in accordance with Executive Order
12988 on civil justice reform. The provisions of this rule will not
have a retroactive effect. The provisions of this rule will preempt
State and local laws to the extent such State and local laws are
inconsistent herewith. With respect to any direct action taken by FCIC
or action by FCIC directing the insurance provider to take specific
action under the terms of the crop insurance policy, the administrative
appeal provisions published at 7 CFR part 11 must be exhausted before
any action against FCIC for judicial review may be brought.
Environmental Evaluation
This action is not expected to have a significant economic impact
on the quality of the human environment, health, or safety. Therefore,
neither an Environmental Assessment nor an Environmental Impact
Statement is needed.
Background
FCIC proposes to amend the Common Crop Insurance Regulations (7 CFR
part 457) by revising 7 CFR 457.119 Texas Citrus Fruit Crop Insurance
Provisions, to be effective for the 2018 and succeeding crop years.
Changes are intended to improve the insurance coverage offered, address
program integrity issues, simplify program administration, and improve
clarity of the policy provisions. Specifically, this proposed rule
intends to modify or clarify certain definitions, clarify unit
establishment, clarify substantive provisions for consistency with
terminology changes, modify the insured causes of loss, clarify
required timing for loss notices, modify portions of loss calculation
formulas, and address potential misinterpretations or ambiguity related
to these issues.
Some of the proposed changes result from the United States
Department of Agriculture (USDA) Acreage Crop Reporting Streamlining
Initiative (ACRSI), which has an objective of using common standardized
data and terminology to consolidate and simplify reporting requirements
for producers. Specifically, ACRSI is an initiative to reengineer the
procedures, processes, and standards to simplify commodity, acreage,
and production reporting by producers, eliminate or minimize
duplication of information collection by multiple agencies, and reduce
the burden on producers, allowing the producers to report this
information through FSA county office service centers, insurance agents
or through precision agriculture technology capabilities. USDA has made
a concerted effort to standardize terms across USDA agencies as much as
possible to allow the sharing of data, thereby reducing the burden on
producers in reporting their information. Many of the changes proposed
in this rule are a part of that effort. For example, as part of ACRSI,
FCIC is proposing to change the term ``crop'' to ``citrus fruit
commodity'' and to rename the ``citrus fruit commodities'' to be
consistent with the crop names used by other USDA agencies. FCIC has
been working with other USDA agencies to agree on appropriate
terminology for crop reporting. These terms are part of a Commodity
Validation Table that is updated as these terms are agreed upon. This
change will help facilitate information sharing among agencies, a step
that is necessary to achieve an ACRSI goal of relieving producers of
the burden of reporting the same information multiple times to
different USDA agencies. The addition of the term ``citrus fruit
group'' is intended to negate the impact of changes to ``citrus fruit
commodity'' names on coverage levels, unit structure, and
administrative fees. The ``citrus fruit groups'' for each ``citrus
fruit commodity'' will be listed in the Special Provisions. The
``citrus fruit groups'' will be the basis for determining coverage
levels and identifying the insured crop. These proposed changes are not
expected to change the current basis by which coverage levels are
selected, basic units are established, and administrative fees are
assessed.
For consistency with ACRSI objectives, FCIC proposes to expand the
category of ``type'' in the actuarial documents to include four
subcategories named ``commodity type,'' ``class,'' ``subclass,'' and
``intended use.'' FCIC is also planning to expand the category of
``practice'' in the actuarial documents to include four subcategories
named ``cropping practice,'' ``organic practice,'' ``irrigation
practice,'' and ``interval.'' Proposed changes to the Texas Citrus
Fruit Crop Insurance Provisions, such as replacing references to the
term ``type'' with the term ``commodity type'' will provide a method
for this transition.
The proposed changes are as follows:
1. FCIC proposes to remove the paragraph immediately preceding
section 1, which refers to the order of priority if a conflict exists
among the policy provisions. This same provision is contained in the
Basic Provisions. Therefore, the appearance here is duplicative and
should be removed from the Texas Citrus Fruit Crop Insurance
Provisions.
FCIC proposes to remove all references to section titles of the
Basic Provisions used in the Texas Citrus Fruit Crop Insurance
Provisions, while retaining the section numbers. The section titles are
not necessary to reference the section and removing these titles will
prevent FCIC from having to revise the Crop Provisions should these
section titles change in the Basic Provisions. This information
proposed to be removed is currently contained in parenthesis following
references to section numbers of the Basic Provisions throughout the
Texas Citrus Fruit Crop Insurance Provisions.
2. Section 1 (``Definitions'')--FCIC proposes to remove the
definition of ``crop'' and replace it with a definition of ``citrus
fruit commodity'' because the actuarial documents refer to commodities
rather than crops. FCIC proposes to replace the term ``crop''
[[Page 1339]]
with the term ``insured crop'' where appropriate throughout the Crop
Provisions. The insured crop will be based on the ``citrus fruit
group'' in accordance with the proposed revisions to section 7. FCIC
proposes to include the ``citrus fruit commodity'' names in the
definition to enable the insured to more easily determine the citrus
fruit commodities that are insurable under the Texas Citrus Fruit Crop
Insurance Provisions. The new ``citrus fruit commodity'' names will
combine several current ``crops'' into a single ``citrus fruit
commodity.'' For example, the current crops ``Early & Midseason
Oranges'' and ``Late Oranges'' will become insurable types under the
new ``citrus fruit commodity'' of ``oranges.'' FCIC proposes this
change because of ACRSI. FCIC has been working with other USDA agencies
to agree on appropriate terminology for crop reporting. These terms are
part of a Commodity Validation Table that is updated as these terms are
agreed upon. This proposed change in terminology does not change the
varieties of citrus that are insurable.
FCIC proposes to add the definition of ``citrus fruit group.'' The
term ``citrus fruit group'' refers to a method of grouping combinations
of commodity types and intended uses within the citrus fruit commodity
through the Special Provisions for the purposes of electing coverage
levels and determining the insured crop, which is the basis for
establishing basic units, guarantees, and assessing administrative
fees. FCIC proposes this change because of ACRSI. Because producers
will be reporting using the terminology contained in the Commodity
Validation Table, FCIC has changed the commodity names to match this
agreed upon terminology. However, the citrus fruit group concept is
being implemented to prevent changes to how the crop can be insured.
For example, this change will allow producers who report Valencia
oranges with an intended use of juice and Navel oranges with an
intended use of fresh to continue to insure these as separate crops
even though they will both be categorized for reporting under the
commodity of oranges.
FCIC proposes to add the definition of ``commodity type'' because
this is a new category that will be added to the actuarial documents
for citrus fruit commodities for the 2018 crop year. Commodity type
will initially be displayed in the actuarial documents as a subcategory
of type. The expected combinations of commodity types and intended uses
will be grouped into citrus fruit groups as shown in the table below.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Citrus fruit commodity Commodity type Intended use Citrus fruit group
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Grapefruit........................... Rio Red & Star Ruby.... Fresh.................. A.
Grapefruit........................... Rio Red & Star Ruby.... Juice.................. A.
Grapefruit........................... Ruby Red............... Fresh.................. B.
Grapefruit........................... Ruby Red............... Juice.................. B.
Grapefruit........................... All Other.............. Fresh.................. C.
Grapefruit........................... All Other.............. Juice.................. C.
Oranges.............................. Early & Midseason...... Fresh.................. D.
Oranges.............................. Early & Midseason...... Juice.................. D.
Oranges.............................. Late................... Fresh.................. E.
Oranges.............................. Late................... Juice.................. E.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FCIC proposes to revise the definition of ``excess wind'' by:
Specifying the equivalent wind speed in knots; clarifying wind speed
reporting at U.S. National Weather Service (NWS) reporting stations;
and adding a clause to allow additional acceptable wind reporting
stations to be identified in the Special Provisions. FCIC proposes
these changes to provide clarity and add flexibility to use other
weather reporting stations if additional data points are needed in the
future.
FCIC proposes to add a definition of ``intended use.'' Currently,
insureds can select between the two types of fresh and juice. For the
2018 crop year, the type category in the actuarial documents will be
expanded to include subcategories for ``commodity type,'' ``class,''
``subclass,'' and ``intended use.'' Insureds will continue to be able
to select types for fresh and juice, but the intended use will be
specified in both the type category and the new intended use category.
This change only affects how they types are presented in the actuarial
documents and will not affect available coverage or reporting
requirements. The proposed definition is consistent with the definition
contained in the Florida Citrus Fruit Crop Insurance Provisions.
FCIC proposes to revise the definition of ``interplanted'' to
specify that the Crop Provisions definition is used in lieu of the
Basic Provisions definition. In the revised definition, FCIC proposes
to change the term ``crop'' to ``agricultural commodity.'' Agricultural
commodity is currently defined in the Basic Provisions as any crop or
other commodity produced, regardless of whether or not it is insurable.
As stated previously, FCIC is changing the term ``crop'' to ``insured
crop'' as appropriate throughout the Crop Provisions. However, for the
definition of interplanted acreage, changing ``crop'' to ``insured
crop'' would change the meaning of the provision by preventing
interplanted from applying to insurable crops interplanted with
agricultural commodities not insured under the Texas Citrus Fruit Crop
Provisions. Therefore, FCIC proposes to change the term ``crop'' to
``agricultural commodity'' in the definition of interplanted acreage.
This proposed change will allow ``interplanted'' to apply to acreage in
which an insured crop is interplanted with another insured crop or
uninsured agricultural commodity, regardless of whether or not the
additional insured crop or uninsured agricultural commodity is
insurable under the Texas Citrus Fruit Crop Insurance Provisions or any
other Crop Provisions.
FCIC proposes to remove the definition of ``local market price.''
FCIC proposes to remove this definition because FCIC proposes to remove
the only reference to local market price in the Texas Citrus Fruit Crop
Provisions, contained in paragraph 12(e).
FCIC proposes to revise the definition of ``production guarantee
(per acre)'' to clarify that the Crop Provisions definition is used in
lieu of the Basic Provisions definition. The Basic Provisions contains
a different definition of ``production guarantee (per acre)'' and the
Crop Provisions definition has already replaced that definition, but
this additional language confirms that interpretation. FCIC also
proposes to clarify this ``production guarantee (per acre)'' definition
in the Crop Provisions by specifying that requirements of section 3(e)
determine the yield used for calculating the production guarantee.
[[Page 1340]]
FCIC proposes to remove the definition of ``varieties'' because all
references to the term are proposed for removal and replacement with
the term ``commodity type'' in the Crop Provisions.
3. Section 2 (``Unit Division'')--FCIC proposes to revise paragraph
2(a) to state that basic units will be established for each insured
crop in accordance with section 1 of the Basic Provisions. The
definition of basic unit in section 1 of the Basic Provisions states
that basic units include all insurable acreage of the insured crop in
the county on the date coverage begins for the crop year: (1) In which
you have 100 percent crop share; or (2) which is owned by one person
and operated by another person on a share basis. Separate basic units
will be established for each citrus fruit group because FCIC proposes
to treat each citrus fruit group as a separate insured crop. For
example, under the new citrus fruit commodity of oranges, all early and
midseason oranges will be further classified under one citrus fruit
group and all late oranges will be further classified under another
citrus fruit group. These designations mean all of the insured's early
and midseason orange acreage can be insured as one basic unit and all
of the insured late orange acreage can be insured as a separate basic
unit. This proposed change in terminology will allow insureds to keep
their current unit structure under the new classification system.
FCIC proposes to revise paragraph 2(c) to state that optional units
may be established by either of the following options, but not both
options: (1) In accordance with Section 34(c) of the Basic Provisions,
except as provided in section 2(b) of these Crop Provisions; or (2)
non-contiguous land. FCIC proposes this revision to clarify that the
insured has a choice of optional units as allowed by the Basic
Provisions (except irrigated or non-irrigated practices) or by non-
contiguous land. As currently worded, the provision could be
misinterpreted to mean that optional units as allowed in the Basic
Provisions are not allowed under the Texas Citrus Fruit Crop Insurance
Provisions. In addition, the official Code of Federal Regulations
publication appears to have inadvertently omitted the following
language from the existing version that appeared in the applicable
Federal Register Notice establishing this language: The words ``. . .
optional units may be established if each . . .'' should have
previously appeared immediately following the word ``number,'' and
immediately before the provision ending phrase, ``. . . optional unit
is located on non-contiguous land.'' See 62 FR 65,130, 65,169 (Dec. 10,
1997). This omission by the official Code of Federal Regulations could
contribute to this potential misinterpretation that FCIC proposes to
correct.
4. Section 3 (``Insurance Guarantees, Coverage Levels, and Prices
for Determining Indemnities'')--FCIC proposes to revise paragraph 3(a)
by adding language to allow the insured to continue selecting separate
coverage levels and price elections by insured crop (i.e., citrus fruit
group) under the new definitions. For example, under the new
designation of citrus fruit commodity oranges, all early and midseason
oranges will be further classified together as one citrus fruit group
which requires the insured to select the same coverage level and
percent of price election for all fruit insured under this citrus fruit
group. Under the new designation of citrus fruit commodity oranges,
late oranges will be further classified under a separate citrus fruit
group, which will allow the insured to continue selection of a
different coverage level and percent of price election than selected
for its early and midseason orange acreage. These terminology revisions
will allow the insured to continue electing coverage levels and price
elections on the same basis as they currently elect coverage levels and
price elections, while continuing to further ACRSI goals. FCIC also
proposes to update the example in paragraph 3(a) for consistency with
these proposed changes.
FCIC proposes to revise paragraph 3(b) by removing the instructions
for calculating the production guarantee per acre from paragraphs
3(b)(1) and 3(b)(2). FCIC proposes this change because the same
information is already contained in the definition of ``production
guarantee (per acre).'' Removing these instructions from 3(b)(1) and
3(b)(2) will prevent perceived conflict between these provisions and
that definition because the information contained in paragraphs 3(b)(1)
and 3(b)(2) for calculating the production guarantee was intended as
duplicative, yet is stated differently than the information contained
in the definition of ``production guarantee (per acre).'' FCIC also
proposes to revise paragraph 3(b) to state that the production
guarantee is progressive and increases from the first stage to the
second stage guarantee. FCIC also proposes to remove the term
``final,'' and leave only the term ``second,'' in paragraph 3(b)(2).
Both final stage and second stage have the same meaning in the Texas
Citrus Fruit Crop Insurance Provisions because there are only two
stages and the terms are used interchangeably. Therefore, FCIC proposes
to remove the term ``final'' to prevent potential confusion if the
terms ``second'' and ``final'' are erroneously perceived to have
different meanings.
FCIC proposes to revise paragraph 3(d) by removing the term
``type'' and replacing the term ``type'' with the phrase ``commodity
type and intended use.'' This change will provide consistency with the
terminology revisions implemented to further ACRSI goals. FCIC proposes
to revise paragraphs 3(d)(4) and 3(d)(4)(i) by removing references to
``perennial crop'' and ``crop'' and replacing these terms with the term
``agricultural commodity.'' This change will provide consistency with
the proposed changes to the definition of ``interplanted.'' The
proposed change will allow the term ``interplanted'' to apply to
acreage in which an insured crop under these Crop Provisions (e.g.,
citrus fruit group) is interplanted with another insured crop or
uninsured agricultural commodity, regardless of whether or not the
other agricultural commodity is insurable under the Texas Citrus Fruit
Crop Insurance Provisions or any other Crop Provisions.
FCIC proposes to designate the undesignated paragraph following
paragraph 3(d)(4)(iii) as paragraph 3(e) and redesignate paragraphs
3(e) and 3(f) as paragraphs 3(f) and 3(g). FCIC proposes to revise
newly designated paragraph 3(e) to specify the yield adjustment timing
and method used, if circumstances occur that may reduce the yield
potential, based on when the circumstance occurred. The current
provision states that the Approved Insurance Provider will reduce the
yield used to establish the production guarantee, but does not
explicitly provide additional explanation for timing and method of
certain specific circumstances. The proposed paragraph 3(e)(1)
addresses circumstances that occurred before the beginning of the
insurance period and requires reduction of the yield used to establish
the production guarantee for the current crop year regardless of
whether the circumstance was due to an insured or uninsured cause of
loss and requires the Insured to report these circumstances that
occurred prior to the insurance period no later than the production
reporting date. The proposed paragraph 3(e)(2) addresses circumstances
that occurred after the beginning of the insurance period and the
insured notifies the Approved Insurance Provider of these circumstances
by the production reporting date. The
[[Page 1341]]
proposed paragraph 3(e)(2) will require the yield used to establish the
production guarantee to be reduced for the current crop year only if
the potential reduction in the yield used to establish the production
guarantee is due to an uninsured cause of loss. The proposed paragraph
3(e)(3) addresses circumstances that may reduce the yield that occurred
after the beginning of the insurance period and the insured fails to
notify the Approved Insurance Provider of these circumstances by the
production reporting date. The proposed paragraph 3(e)(3) requires an
amount equal to the reduction in the yield to be added to the
production to count calculated in paragraph 12(c) of these Crop
Provisions due to uninsured causes. Additionally, the proposed
paragraph 3(e)(3) requires reduction of the yield used to establish the
production guarantee for the subsequent crop year to reflect any
reduction in the productive capacity of the trees or the yield
potential of the insured acreage. These provisions are similar to
provisions that FCIC has recently added to other perennial crop
policies, such as the Arizona-California Citrus Crop Insurance
Provisions. Adding these provisions is intended to remove potential
ambiguity regarding the consequences when circumstances occur that will
reduce the yield potential and to promote consistency with
administration of similar policies such as the Arizona-California
Citrus Crop Insurance Provisions.
FCIC proposes to revise newly designated paragraph 3(g) by removing
the reference to ``one-year lag period.'' The phrase is not necessary
to describe when production must be reported. Therefore, FCIC proposes
to delete this reference to prevent confusion regarding production
reporting. FCIC also proposes to update the example in this paragraph
with contemporary dates. This proposed change is intended to prevent
the policy from appearing outdated. FCIC also proposes to revise the
sentence structure of this provision to provide clarity and consistency
with similar provisions in these Crop Provisions that are used in lieu
of the Basic Provisions.
5. Section 7 (``Insured Crop'')--FCIC proposes to redesignate the
introductory paragraph of section 7 as paragraph (a) and redesignate
paragraphs 7(a) through 7(f) as 7(a)(1) through 7(a)(6). FCIC proposes
to revise the newly designated paragraph (a) by revising language to
designate the insured crop as each ``citrus fruit group'' the insured
elects to insure. This change in section 7 is necessary to prevent
changes to assessment of administrative fees because of revisions to
commodity names. This change will also allow the insured to continue to
elect to insure some citrus acreage and not insure other citrus acreage
on the same basis as is currently allowed.
FCIC proposes to revise the newly designated paragraph 7(a)(2) to
clarify that the insured crop must be grown on trees adapted to the
area. The current provision states the acreage must be adapted to the
area. However, the trees on which the insured crop is grown must be
adapted to the area.
FCIC proposes to revise the newly designated paragraph 7(a)(3) by
removing the term ``are'' and adding the term ``is'' in its place. FCIC
proposes this change to maintain verb usage consistent with the
language in newly redesignated paragraph 7(a).
FCIC proposes to add a new paragraph 7(b) to clarify assessment of
administrative fees. FCIC has received requests to clarify how
administrative fees are assessed in the Crop Provisions. Because each
citrus fruit group will be designated as a separate insured crop, each
citrus fruit group will be assessed a separate administrative fee in
accordance with section 7 of the Basic Provisions and section 6 of the
Catastrophic Risk Protection Endorsement.
6. Section 8 (``Insurable Acreage'')--FCIC proposes to revise
section 8 by adding the words ``fruit group'' immediately following the
word ``citrus'' and removing references to the term ``crop'' and
replacing them with the term ``agricultural commodity,'' except FCIC
will replace the first instance of ``crop'' appearing in section 8 with
``insured crop.'' These changes will provide consistency with the
proposed changes to the definition of ``interplanted.'' FCIC also
proposes to add language to clarify interplanted acreage is not
insurable unless a citrus fruit group is interplanted with another
perennial agricultural commodity.
7. Section 10 (``Causes of Loss'')--FCIC proposes to add provisions
in paragraph 10(a) that allow insects and disease as insurable causes
of loss unless excluded or otherwise restricted through the Special
Provisions, provided production losses are not due to damage resulting
from insufficient or improper application of control measures
recommended by agricultural experts. FCIC proposes to remove the
provisions in paragraph 10(b)(1) that only provide coverage against
damage or loss of production due to insects and disease if an insurable
cause of loss prevents the proper application of control measures,
causes properly applied control measures to be ineffective, or causes
disease or insect infestation for which no effective control mechanism
is available. For Texas citrus fruit, the language contained in
paragraph 10(b)(1) requires a determination that can be difficult to
make with regard to whether an underlying cause of loss prevented the
proper application of control measures, caused properly applied control
measures to be ineffective, or caused a disease or insect infestation
for which no effective control mechanism is available. The proposed
change removes this language and provides more comprehensive coverage
for citrus growers. This proposed change is similar to changes FCIC has
made to other perennial APH policies, such as the Arizona-California
Citrus Crop Insurance Provisions, as they have been revised.
The proposed language provides FCIC with greater flexibility to
exclude or restrict coverage through the Special Provisions. This
greater flexibility is intended to protect program integrity and
insured interests by allowing FCIC to exclude or restrict coverage for
certain diseases for which limited controls or mitigation practices are
available. For example, FCIC plans to exclude citrus greening
(Huanglongbing) from coverage through the Special Provisions. However,
FCIC seeks input from interested persons regarding exclusion of
coverage for this disease through the Special Provisions.
Citrus greening is a deadly bacterial disease that can infect
nearly all citrus species (Chung, K-R., and R. H. Brlansky. ``Citrus
diseases exotic to Florida: Huanglongbing (citrus greening).''
(2009).). The bacteria disrupts the vascular system of the trees and
eventually leads to tree death (Jagoueix, Sandrine, Joseph Marie
Bov[eacute], and Monique Garnier. ``PCR detection of the two
<> liberobacter species associated with greening disease of
citrus.'' Molecular and cellular probes 10.1 (1996): 43-50.).
Currently, no known adequate cure exists for citrus greening (Kobori,
Youichi, et al. ``Dispersal of adult Asian citrus psyllid, Diaphorina
citri Kuwayama (Homoptera: Psyllidae), the vector of citrus greening
disease, in artificial release experiments.'' Applied entomology and
zoology 46.1 (2011): 27-30.). Trees infected with citrus greening
exhibit symptoms that include blotchy yellow leaves and misshapen,
poorly developed green fruit with aborted seeds and bitter taste
(Graca, JV da. ``Citrus greening disease.'' Annual Review of
Phytopathology 29.1 (1991): 109-136.). However, identification of the
disease can be difficult because
[[Page 1342]]
symptoms resemble nutrient deficiencies (Li, Wenbin, John S. Hartung,
and Laurene Levy. ``Quantitative real-time PCR for detection and
identification of Candidatus Liberibacter species associated with
citrus huanglongbing.'' Journal of microbiological methods 66.1 (2006):
104-115.).
Citrus greening is vectored by the Asian citrus psyllid (Diaphorina
citri) (French, J. V., C. J. Kahlke, and J. V. Da Gra[ccedil]a. ``First
record of the Asian citrus psylla, Diaphorina citri Kuwayama
(Homoptera: Psyllidae) in Texas.'' Subtropical Plant Science 53 (2001):
14-15.). There are pesticides available that, if applied correctly, can
help minimize the spread of the disease by controlling the psyllid
(Grafton-Cardwell, Elizabeth E., Lukasz L. Stelinski, and Philip A.
Stansly. ``Biology and management of Asian citrus psyllid, vector of
the huanglongbing pathogens.'' Annual review of entomology 58 (2013):
413-432.). Properly applied pesticides may be the best current option
growers have to help minimize the spread of the disease. However, even
if pesticides are applied properly and infected trees are removed from
commercial orchards, there are other factors that make control and
eradication of the disease problematic. Disease control is complicated
by delay of disease symptom appearance in infected trees (Stokstad,
Erik. ``Dread citrus disease turns up in California, Texas.'' Science
336.6079 (2012): 283-284.). Therefore, a tree may be infected and the
disease may spread to other trees before disease presence is
identified. Disease eradication can be challenging due to adjacent or
nearby abandoned or improperly managed groves, and yard trees in
residential areas (Tiwari, Siddharth, et al. ``Incidence of Candidatus
Liberibacter asiaticus infection in abandoned citrus occurring in
proximity to commercially managed groves.'' Journal of economic
entomology 103.6 (2010): 1972-1978.). Trees in these areas can serve as
reservoirs for the disease inoculum. Although the Asian citrus psyllid
can only fly relatively short distances, it can be carried greater
distances by wind (Hall, D. G., and M. G. Hentz. ``Seasonal flight
activity by the Asian citrus psyllid in east central Florida.''
Entomologia experimentalis et applicata 139.1 (2011): 75-85.).
Therefore, extreme wind events such as hurricanes and tornados may also
exacerbate the spread of citrus greening.
Citrus greening was first discovered in Florida in August 2015 and
since spread to nearly all counties in Florida with citrus (Brlansky,
R. H., et al. ``2006 Florida citrus pest management guide:
Huanglongbing (citrus greening).'' UF/IFAS Extension (2012).). The
Asian citrus psyllid was first detected in Texas in 2001 (French, J.
V., C. J. Kahlke, and J. V. Da Gra[ccedil]a. ``First record of the
Asian citrus psylla, Diaphorina citri Kuwayama (Homoptera: Psyllidae)
in Texas.'' Subtropical Plant Science 53 (2001): 14-15.). The presence
of the psyllid in Texas has resulted in quarantines restricting
movement of citrus plant material and citrus nursery stock. Citrus
greening research is currently occurring, including 2014 Farm Bill
funding which authorized approximately $125 million of the USDA
Specialty Crop Research Initiative toward citrus health research over
the next five years. USDA Farm Service Agency (FSA) does currently
provide assistance to cover the replacement and establishment of
infected trees through its Tree Assistance Program.
The current Texas Citrus Fruit Crop Insurance Provisions may appear
to provide some level of protection against production loss from citrus
greening, but the current policy is unlikely to allow loss payment for
citrus greening. The current policy language requires linkage of
production loss from insects and disease to another underlying covered
cause of loss. For example, a hurricane may occur that could prevent or
otherwise negatively impact control measures by spreading the disease
to outbreak levels. However, it is unlikely that citrus greening would
trigger an indemnity under this scenario because citrus greening
symptom latency is unlikely to satisfy the policy provision in section
9 of the Crop Provisions allowing an indemnity payment only for losses
occurring within the insurance period. Therefore, if a hurricane
spreads the disease into a grove and symptoms do not appear until the
next crop year, the current policy would not cover production loss
because the insured cause of loss (i.e., hurricane) that prevented or
impacted control measures occurred outside the insurance period in
which production loss occurred.
Specifically, under circumstances that prevented the proper
application of control measures or caused properly applied control
measures to be ineffective, it is unlikely that losses in a given year
would exceed the deductible under the current policy due to slow
disease progression. For example, if excess precipitation prevented or
rendered ineffective proper pesticide application, the production loss
from trees infected by this event are unlikely to exceed the deductible
for the current crop year, even if the highest coverage level was
selected. In addition, even if events happened in successive years, the
Crop Provisions also authorize underwriting controls that require
acreage adjustment when trees are removed or the guarantee to be
reduced for existing damage. These underwriting controls would likely
prevent or reduce losses due to citrus greening from exceeding the
deductible in most situations. Although it may be possible, under some
circumstances, that indemnities due to citrus greening could be
triggered, the current policy provides subjective or little assurance
of protection against citrus greening for the reasons stated above.
When changes to the Texas Citrus Fruit Crop Provisions are
finalized, FCIC intends to conduct a full rate review to examine the
impact of all policy changes combined with past loss experience, which
could increase or decrease premium rates. However, if the proposed
language covered citrus greening, FCIC would likely have to increase
premium rates to account for this risk, with additional rate increases
possible based on loss experience to maintain actuarial soundness under
section 506(n)(2) (7 U.S.C. 1506(n)(2)) of the Federal Crop Insurance
Act (FCIA or the Act). The benefit of the coverage may not be perceived
by growers to be worth the additional premium cost because underwriting
controls necessary to protect program integrity are unlikely to allow
citrus greening indemnities in most scenarios. Consequently, allowing
such coverage may require Approved Insurance Providers to explain
underwriting controls precluding indemnity payment when the insured
believed it had coverage against citrus greening. In addition, if
citrus greening indemnities became widespread and underwriting controls
were insufficient to limit indemnities, premium rates could increase
rapidly. Texas citrus producers have expressed concern to FCIC about
citrus greening coverage contributing to increasing premium rates. FCIC
plans to exclude citrus greening as an insurable cause of loss through
the Special Provisions to protect program integrity and prevent adverse
impacts on the crop insurance delivery system for Texas citrus fruit
policies.
7. Section 11 (``Duties in the Event of Damage or Loss'')--FCIC
proposes to revise section 11 by adding a new paragraph (a),
designating the introductory paragraph as (b), and redesignating
paragraphs (a) and (b) as (b)(1) and (b)(2) respectively. FCIC proposes
the new paragraph (a) to clarify that, in accordance with section 14 of
the Basic Provisions, the insured
[[Page 1343]]
must leave representative samples for appraisal purposes. The Basic
Provisions stipulate representative samples must be left if required by
the Crop Provisions or the Special Provisions. Representative samples
are necessary to appraise damaged production for indemnity claim
purposes. FCIC also proposes new paragraph (a) will state that in lieu
of the requirements of section 14(c)(3) of the Basic Provisions, the
Approved Insurance Provider will determine which trees must remain
unharvested so that the Approved Insurance Provider may inspect these
trees in accordance with FCIC procedures. Section 14(c)(3) of the Basic
Provisions states that unless otherwise specified in the Crop
Provisions or Special Provisions, the samples of the crop in each field
in the unit must be 10 feet wide and extend the entire length of the
rows, if the crop is planted in rows, or if the crop is not planted in
rows, the longest dimension of the field. These requirements in the
Basic Provisions are not appropriate for crops insured under these Crop
Provisions. Therefore, FCIC intends the proposed revision to allow FCIC
to issue crop specific guidance for the insurance provider to use to
instruct the insured on which trees must remain unharvested.
FCIC proposes to revise the newly designated paragraph 11(b)(2) to
clarify that if the insured intends to claim an indemnity on any unit,
the insured must notify the Approved Insurance Provider at least 15
days prior to the beginning of harvest, or within 24 hours if damage is
discovered during harvest, so the Approved Insurance Provider may have
an opportunity to inspect the unit. This change provides a required
timeframe for reporting damage and is consistent with revisions to
other perennial crop policies, such as the Arizona-California Citrus
Crop Insurance Provisions.
8. Section 12 (``Settlement of Claim'')--FCIC proposes to revise
paragraph 12(b) by removing the phrase ``crop, or variety if
applicable'' and inserting the phrase ``combination of commodity type
and intended use'' in its place. FCIC proposes this change because
``commodity type'' listed in the actuarial documents will coincide with
the current crop names and the price elections for each combination of
commodity type and intended use will determine insurance elections for
the unit.
FCIC proposes to revise paragraph 12(d) to clarify the provision
applies only to citrus fruit insured with an intended use of juice.
FCIC proposes this change to clarify the applicable citrus fruit type
subcategory for applying this adjustment. Fresh and juice are currently
type designations in the actuarial documents. However, for the 2018
crop year for citrus fruit groups insured under the Texas Citrus Fruit
Crop Insurance Provisions, FCIC plans to expand the type category in
the actuarial documents to include additional subcategories such as
commodity type and intended use. Fresh and juice designations will be
contained in the intended use category.
FCIC proposes to revise paragraph 12(e) by removing the fresh fruit
terminology and replacing it with the intended use of fresh
terminology. FCIC proposes this change because the fresh fruit option
will be identified in the actuarial documents under the intended use
category. The fresh fruit option will be elected by reporting the
intended use of fresh. Therefore, to provide consistency with terms
used in actuarial documents, FCIC proposes to remove the fresh fruit
terminology and replace this terminology with intended use of fresh.
FCIC also proposes to revise paragraph 12(e) by revising the
calculation for adjusting production to count for fruit insured as
fresh that is not marketable as fresh due to insured causes of loss.
The current provision states to use the local market price for the week
before damage occurred, but does not specify procedures if a local
market price is not available. FCIC publishes an annual bulletin that
provides prices for settling claims because local market prices are not
available for a portion of the year when processing plants are idle.
FCIC proposes to revise the calculation to require the number of tons
of damaged citrus to be multiplied by a Fresh Fruit Factor contained in
the Special Provisions. The Fresh Fruit Factor will represent the ratio
of the value of damaged fruit to the value of undamaged fresh fruit.
The Fresh Fruit Factor will be determined using historical prices and
other available data as applicable. This proposed change will provide
consistency in the loss adjustment process, prevent delays in claims,
and lessen the burden on the Approved Insurance Providers and FCIC.
List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 457
Crop insurance, Texas citrus fruit, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
Proposed Rule
Accordingly, as set forth in the preamble, the Federal Crop
Insurance Corporation proposes to amend 7 CFR part 457 effective for
the 2018 and succeeding crop years as follows:
PART 457--COMMON CROP INSURANCE REGULATIONS
0
1. The authority citation for 7 CFR part 457 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 7 U.S.C. 1506(l), 1506(o).
0
2. Amend 7 CFR 457.119 as follows:
0
a. In the introductory text by removing ``2000'' and adding ``2018'' in
its place;
0
b. By removing the undesignated paragraph immediately preceding section
1;
0
c. In section 1:
0
i. By adding in alphabetical order the definitions of ``citrus fruit
commodity,'' ``citrus fruit group,'' ``commodity type,'' and ``intended
use'';
0
ii. By removing the definitions of ``crop,'' ``local market price,''
and ``varieties'';
0
iii. In the definition of ``crop year'' by removing the term ``citrus''
and adding the term ``insured'' in its place;
0
iv. In the definition of ``direct marketing'' by adding the term
``insured'' directly preceding the term ``crop'' in the second
sentence;
0
v. In the definition of ``excess rain'' by adding the term ``insured''
directly preceding the term ``crop'';
0
vi. By revising the definitions of ``excess wind,'' ``interplanted,''
and ``production guarantee (per acre)''; and
0
d. In section 2 by revising paragraphs (a) and (c);
0
e. In section 3:
0
i. In the introductory paragraph by removing the phrase ``(Insurance
Guarantees, Coverage Levels, and Prices for Determining Indemnities)''
immediately following the words ``section 3'';
0
ii. By revising paragraphs (a) and (b);
0
iii. In paragraph (d) introductory text by removing the term ``type''
and adding the phrase ``commodity type and intended use'' in its place;
0
iv. In paragraph (d)(4) by removing the phrase ``perennial crop, and
anytime'' and replacing it with the phrase ``agricultural commodity and
any time'';
0
v. In paragraph (d)(4)(i) by removing the phrase ``crop, and type'' and
adding the phrase ``agricultural commodity and commodity type,'' in its
place;
0
vi. By redesignating paragraphs (e) and (f) as (f) and (g)
respectively;
0
vii. By designating the undesignated paragraph following paragraph
(d)(4)(iii) as paragraph (e);
0
viii. By revising the newly designated paragraph (e);
0
ix. In the newly designated paragraph (f) add a comma following the
term ``provisions'' and remove the comma following the term ``trees'';
and
[[Page 1344]]
0
x. By revising the newly designated paragraph (g);
0
f. In section 4 by removing the phrase ``(Contract Changes)''
immediately following the words ``section 4'';
0
g. In section 5 by removing the phrase ``(Life of Policy, Cancellation,
and Termination)'' immediately following the words ``section 2'';
0
h. In section 6 by removing the phrase ``(Annual Premium)'' immediately
following the words ``section 7'';
0
i. In section 7 by:
0
i. Designating the undesignated introductory paragraph as paragraph (a)
and redesignating paragraphs (a) through (f) as (a)(1) through (6)
respectively;
0
ii. Revising the newly designated paragraph (a);
0
iii. In the newly designated paragraph (a)(2) by removing the term
``are'' and adding the phrase ``is grown on trees'' in its place;
0
iv. In the newly designated paragraph (a)(3) by removing the term
``are'' and adding the term ``is'' in its place;
0
v. Adding a new paragraph (b);
0
j. Revise section 8;
0
k. In section 9:
0
i. In paragraph (a) by removing the phrase ``(Insurance Period)''
immediately following the words ``section 11'';
0
ii. In paragraph (a)(1) by adding a hyphen between the terms ``10'' and
``day'' and by adding the term ``insured'' immediately preceding the
phrase ``crop or to determine the condition of the grove.''; and
0
iii. In paragraph (b) by removing the phrase ``(Insurance Period)''
immediately following the words ``section 11'';
0
l. In section 10:
0
i. In paragraph (a) by removing the phrase ``(Causes of Loss)''
immediately following the words ``section 12'';
0
ii. In paragraph (a)(7) by removing the word ``or'';
0
iii. In paragraph (a)(8) by removing the period and adding ``; or'' in
its place;
0
iv. By adding a new paragraph (a)(9); and
0
v. By revising paragraph (b);
0
m. In section 11:
0
i. By redesignating paragraph (a) as (b)(1); and
0
ii. By redesignating paragraph (b) as (b)(2) and revising the newly
designated paragraph (b)(2);
0
iii. By designating the undesignated introductory paragraph as
paragraph (b) introductory text;
0
iv. By adding a new paragraph (a);
0
v. In the newly designated paragraph (b) by removing the phrase
``(Duties in the Event of Damage or Loss)'' immediately following the
words ``section 14'';
0
n. In section 12:
0
i. By revising paragraph (b)(1);
0
ii. In paragraph (b)(2) by removing the phrase ``crop, or variety, if
applicable'' and adding the phrase ``combination of commodity type and
intended use'' in its place;
0
iii. In paragraph (b)(4) by removing the phrase ``variety, if
applicable,'' and adding the phrase ``combination of commodity type and
intended use'' in its place;
0
iv. In paragraph (c)(1)(iv) by removing the term ``crop'' in all three
places it appears and adding the term ``insured crop'' in its place;
and
0
v. In paragraph (d) by adding the phrase ``insured with an intended use
of juice'' after the phrase ``Any citrus fruit'';
0
vi. By revising paragraph (e).
The revisions and additions read as follows:
Sec. 457.119 Texas citrus fruit crop insurance provisions.
* * * * *
1. Definitions
Citrus fruit commodity. Includes the following:
(a) Oranges;
(b) Grapefruit; and
(c) Any other citrus fruit designated as a ``citrus fruit
commodity'' in the actuarial documents.
Citrus fruit group. A designation in the Special Provisions used to
identify combinations of citrus fruit commodity types and intended uses
within a citrus fruit commodity that may be grouped together for the
purposes of electing coverage levels and identifying the insured crop.
Commodity type. A specific subcategory of a citrus fruit commodity
having a characteristic or set of characteristics distinguishable from
other subcategories of the same citrus fruit commodity.
* * * * *
Excess wind. A natural movement of air that has sustained speeds
exceeding 58 miles per hour (50 knots) recorded at the U.S. National
Weather Service reporting station or any other weather reporting
station identified in the Special Provisions operating nearest to the
insured acreage at the time of damage.
* * * * *
Intended use. The insured's expected end use or disposition of the
commodity at the time the commodity is reported. Insurable intended
uses will be specified in the Special Provisions.
Interplanted. In lieu of the definition contained in section 1 of
the Basic Provisions, acreage on which two or more agricultural
commodities are planted in any form of alternating or mixed pattern and
at least one of these agricultural commodities constitutes an insured
crop under these Crop Provisions.
Production guarantee (per acre). In lieu of the definition
contained in section 1 of the Basic Provisions, the production
guarantee will be determined by stage as follows:
* * *
(b) Second stage production guarantee. The quantity of citrus (in
tons) determined by multiplying the yield determined in accordance with
section 3(e) of these Crop Provisions by the coverage level percentage
you elect.
* * * * *
2. Unit Division
(a) Basic units will be established for each insured crop in
accordance with section 1 of the Basic Provisions.
* * * * *
(c) Optional units may be established by either of the following,
but not both:
(1) In accordance with section 34(c) of the Basic Provisions,
except as provided in section 2(b) of these Crop Provisions; or
(2) Non-contiguous land.
3. Insurance Guarantees, Coverage Levels, and Prices for Determining
Indemnities
In addition to the requirements of section 3 of the Basic
Provisions:
(a) You may select only one price election and coverage level for
each insured crop.
(1) The price election you choose for each insured crop need not
bear the same percentage relationship to the maximum price offered by
us for each insured crop. For example, if you choose one hundred
percent (100%) of the maximum price election for one insured crop
(e.g., the citrus fruit group for early and midseason oranges), you may
choose seventy-five percent (75%) of the maximum price election for
another insured crop (e.g., the citrus fruit group for late oranges).
(2) If separate price elections are available by commodity type or
intended use within an insured crop, the price elections you choose
within the insured crop must have the same percentage relationship to
the maximum price offered by us for each other commodity type or
intended use within the insured crop. For example, if separate price
elections are available for commodity type ruby red grapefruit with an
intended use of fresh, and commodity type ruby red grapefruit with an
intended use of juice, and you
[[Page 1345]]
choose one hundred percent (100%) of the price election for commodity
type ruby red grapefruit with an intended use of fresh, you must also
choose one hundred percent (100%) of the price election for commodity
type ruby red grapefruit with an intended use of juice.
(b) The production guarantee per acre is progressive by stage and
increases from the first stage production guarantee to the second stage
production guarantee. The stages are as follows:
(1) The first stage extends from the date insurance attaches
through April 30 of the calendar year of normal bloom.
(2) The second stage extends from May 1 of the calendar year of
normal bloom until the end of the insurance period.
* * * * *
(e) We will reduce the yield used to establish your production
guarantee, as necessary, based on our estimate of the effect of any
circumstance that may reduce your yields from previous levels. Examples
of these circumstances that may reduce yield may include, but are not
necessarily limited to, interplanted agricultural commodities; tree
removal, topping, hedging, or pruning of trees; damage; and change in
practices. If the circumstance occurred:
(1) Before the beginning of the insurance period and you notify us
by the production reporting date, the yield used to establish your
production guarantee will be reduced for the current crop year
regardless of whether the circumstance was due to an insured or
uninsured cause of loss;
(2) After the beginning of the insurance period and you notify us
by the production reporting date, the yield used to establish your
production guarantee will be reduced for the current crop year only if
the potential reduction in the yield used to establish your production
guarantee is due to an uninsured cause of loss; or
(3) Before or after the beginning of the insurance period and you
fail to notify us by the production reporting date, an amount equal to
the reduction in the yield will be added to the production to count
calculated in section 12(c) of these Crop Provisions due to uninsured
causes. We will reduce the yield used to establish your production
guarantee for the subsequent crop year to reflect any reduction in the
productive capacity of the trees or in the yield potential of the
insured acreage.
* * * * *
(g) In lieu of the provisions in section 3 of the Basic Provisions
that require reporting your production for the previous crop year, for
each crop year you must report your production from two crop years ago
(e.g., on the 2018 crop year production report, you will provide your
2016 crop year production).
* * * * *
7. Insured Crop
(a) In accordance with section 8 of the Basic Provisions, the
insured crop will be each citrus fruit group you elect to insure and
for which a premium rate is provided by the actuarial documents:
* * * * *
(b) For each insured crop, administrative fees will be assessed in
accordance with section 6 of the Catastrophic Risk Protection
Endorsement and section 7 of the Basic Provisions.
8. Insurable Acreage
In lieu of the provisions in section 9 of the Basic Provisions that
prohibit insurance attaching to an insured crop interplanted with
another agricultural commodity, interplanted acreage is uninsurable,
except that a citrus fruit group interplanted with another perennial
agricultural commodity is insurable unless we inspect the acreage and
determine it does not meet the requirements contained in your policy.
* * * * *
10. Causes of Loss
* * * * *
(a) * * *
(9) Insects and plant disease, unless excluded or otherwise
restricted through the Special Provisions, provided the loss of
production is not due to damage resulting from insufficient or improper
application of control measures as recommended by agricultural experts.
(b) In addition to the causes of loss excluded in section 12 of the
Basic Provisions, we will not insure against damage or loss of
production due to the inability to market the citrus for any reason
other than actual physical damage from an insurable cause of loss
specified in this section. For example, we will not pay you an
indemnity if you are unable to market due to quarantine, boycott, or
refusal of any person to accept production.
11. Duties in the Event of Damage or Loss
(a) In accordance with the requirements of section 14 of the Basic
Provisions, you must leave representative samples. In lieu of the
requirements of section 14(c)(3) of the Basic Provisions, we will
determine which trees must remain unharvested so that we may inspect
them in accordance with FCIC procedures.
(b) * * *
(2) If you intend to claim an indemnity on any unit, you must
notify us at least 15 days prior to the beginning of harvest, or within
24 hours if damage is discovered during harvest, so we may have an
opportunity to inspect the unit. You must not sell or dispose of the
damaged crop until after we have given you written consent to do so. If
you fail to meet the requirements of this section, all such production
will be considered undamaged and included as production to count.
12. Settlement of Claim
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(1) Multiplying the insured acreage for each combination of
commodity type and intended use by its respective production guarantee;
* * * * *
(e) Any citrus fruit insured with an intended use of fresh that is
not marketable as fresh fruit due to insurable causes will be adjusted
by multiplying the number of tons of such citrus fruit by the
applicable Fresh Fruit Factor contained in the Special Provisions.
* * * * *
Signed in Washington, DC, on December 24, 2015.
Brandon Willis,
Manager, Federal Crop Insurance Corporation.
[FR Doc. 2015-32951 Filed 1-11-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-08-P