Common Crop Insurance Regulations; Texas Citrus Fruit Crop Insurance Provisions, 1337-1345 [2015-32951]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 7 / Tuesday, January 12, 2016 / Proposed Rules
(2) May not be brought later than
December 31 of the 3rd year after the
agency or retirement system final
decision to the insured individual.
(3) Exception: This time limit may be
extended by 31 calendar days after
December 31 of the 3rd year (60
calendar days if overseas) of the date of
the final decision to the insured if the
individual shows that he or she was not
notified of the time limit and was not
otherwise aware of it or that he or she
was unable, due to reasons beyond his
or her control, to make the request
within the time limit.
(d) This section does not change the
rules found in this chapter regarding
FEGLI coverage or premium payments
for an employee while in nonpay status.
(e) If a claimant thinks that he or she
is due money from FEGLI benefits and
that legal action is necessary to get the
money, the claimant must take action in
Federal court against the company that
OPM contracts with to adjudicate
claims, not against OPM.
[FR Doc. 2016–00453 Filed 1–11–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6325–63–P
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
Federal Crop Insurance
Corporation, USDA.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
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.
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:16 Jan 11, 2016
Jkt 238001
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: https://
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 https://
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 https://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 rmaweb.content@rma.usda.gov.
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
https://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.
DATES:
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
1337
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
E:\FR\FM\12JAP1.SGM
12JAP1
1338
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 7 / Tuesday, January 12, 2016 / Proposed Rules
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. § 605).
Federal Assistance Program
This program is listed in the Catalog
of Federal Domestic Assistance under
No. 10.450.
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:16 Jan 11, 2016
Jkt 238001
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
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
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’’
E:\FR\FM\12JAP1.SGM
12JAP1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 7 / Tuesday, January 12, 2016 / Proposed Rules
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
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
Commodity type
Grapefruit .......................................
Grapefruit .......................................
Grapefruit .......................................
Grapefruit .......................................
Grapefruit .......................................
Grapefruit .......................................
Oranges .........................................
Oranges .........................................
Oranges .........................................
Oranges .........................................
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Citrus fruit commodity
Rio Red & Star Ruby ....................
Rio Red & Star Ruby ....................
Ruby Red ......................................
Ruby Red ......................................
All Other ........................................
All Other ........................................
Early & Midseason .......................
Early & Midseason .......................
Late ...............................................
Late ...............................................
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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:16 Jan 11, 2016
Jkt 238001
Frm 00004
Fmt 4702
Citrus fruit group
.............................................
.............................................
.............................................
.............................................
.............................................
.............................................
.............................................
.............................................
.............................................
.............................................
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
PO 00000
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.
Intended use
Fresh
Juice
Fresh
Juice
Fresh
Juice
Fresh
Juice
Fresh
Juice
Sfmt 4702
1339
A.
A.
B.
B.
C.
C.
D.
D.
E.
E.
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.
E:\FR\FM\12JAP1.SGM
12JAP1
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
1340
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 7 / Tuesday, January 12, 2016 / Proposed Rules
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 noncontiguous 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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:16 Jan 11, 2016
Jkt 238001
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
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
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
E:\FR\FM\12JAP1.SGM
12JAP1
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 7 / Tuesday, January 12, 2016 / Proposed Rules
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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:16 Jan 11, 2016
Jkt 238001
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
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
1341
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 Bove,
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
E:\FR\FM\12JAP1.SGM
12JAP1
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
1342
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 7 / Tuesday, January 12, 2016 / Proposed Rules
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
Graca. ‘‘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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:16 Jan 11, 2016
Jkt 238001
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 Graca. ‘‘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
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
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
E:\FR\FM\12JAP1.SGM
12JAP1
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 7 / Tuesday, January 12, 2016 / Proposed Rules
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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:16 Jan 11, 2016
Jkt 238001
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
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
1343
part 457 effective for the 2018 and
succeeding crop years as follows:
PART 457—COMMON CROP
INSURANCE REGULATIONS
1. The authority citation for 7 CFR
part 457 continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 7 U.S.C. 1506(l), 1506(o).
2. Amend 7 CFR 457.119 as follows:
a. In the introductory text by
removing ‘‘2000’’ and adding ‘‘2018’’ in
its place;
■ b. By removing the undesignated
paragraph immediately preceding
section 1;
■ c. In section 1:
■ i. By adding in alphabetical order the
definitions of ‘‘citrus fruit commodity,’’
‘‘citrus fruit group,’’ ‘‘commodity type,’’
and ‘‘intended use’’;
■ ii. By removing the definitions of
‘‘crop,’’ ‘‘local market price,’’ and
‘‘varieties’’;
■ iii. In the definition of ‘‘crop year’’ by
removing the term ‘‘citrus’’ and adding
the term ‘‘insured’’ in its place;
■ iv. In the definition of ‘‘direct
marketing’’ by adding the term
‘‘insured’’ directly preceding the term
‘‘crop’’ in the second sentence;
■ v. In the definition of ‘‘excess rain’’ by
adding the term ‘‘insured’’ directly
preceding the term ‘‘crop’’;
■ vi. By revising the definitions of
‘‘excess wind,’’ ‘‘interplanted,’’ and
‘‘production guarantee (per acre)’’; and
■ d. In section 2 by revising paragraphs
(a) and (c);
■ e. In section 3:
■ i. In the introductory paragraph by
removing the phrase ‘‘(Insurance
Guarantees, Coverage Levels, and Prices
for Determining Indemnities)’’
immediately following the words
‘‘section 3’’;
■ ii. By revising paragraphs (a) and (b);
■ iii. In paragraph (d) introductory text
by removing the term ‘‘type’’ and adding
the phrase ‘‘commodity type and
intended use’’ in its place;
■ iv. In paragraph (d)(4) by removing the
phrase ‘‘perennial crop, and anytime’’
and replacing it with the phrase
‘‘agricultural commodity and any time’’;
■ 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;
■ vi. By redesignating paragraphs (e)
and (f) as (f) and (g) respectively;
■ vii. By designating the undesignated
paragraph following paragraph (d)(4)(iii)
as paragraph (e);
■ viii. By revising the newly designated
paragraph (e);
■ ix. In the newly designated paragraph
(f) add a comma following the term
‘‘provisions’’ and remove the comma
following the term ‘‘trees’’; and
■
■
E:\FR\FM\12JAP1.SGM
12JAP1
1344
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 7 / Tuesday, January 12, 2016 / Proposed Rules
x. By revising the newly designated
paragraph (g);
■ f. In section 4 by removing the phrase
‘‘(Contract Changes)’’ immediately
following the words ‘‘section 4’’;
■ g. In section 5 by removing the phrase
‘‘(Life of Policy, Cancellation, and
Termination)’’ immediately following
the words ‘‘section 2’’;
■ h. In section 6 by removing the phrase
‘‘(Annual Premium)’’ immediately
following the words ‘‘section 7’’;
■ i. In section 7 by:
■ i. Designating the undesignated
introductory paragraph as paragraph (a)
and redesignating paragraphs (a)
through (f) as (a)(1) through (6)
respectively;
■ ii. Revising the newly designated
paragraph (a);
■ iii. In the newly designated paragraph
(a)(2) by removing the term ‘‘are’’ and
adding the phrase ‘‘is grown on trees’’
in its place;
■ iv. In the newly designated paragraph
(a)(3) by removing the term ‘‘are’’ and
adding the term ‘‘is’’ in its place;
■ v. Adding a new paragraph (b);
■ j. Revise section 8;
■ k. In section 9:
■ i. In paragraph (a) by removing the
phrase ‘‘(Insurance Period)’’
immediately following the words
‘‘section 11’’;
■ 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
■ iii. In paragraph (b) by removing the
phrase ‘‘(Insurance Period)’’
immediately following the words
‘‘section 11’’;
■ l. In section 10:
■ i. In paragraph (a) by removing the
phrase ‘‘(Causes of Loss)’’ immediately
following the words ‘‘section 12’’;
■ ii. In paragraph (a)(7) by removing the
word ‘‘or’’;
■ iii. In paragraph (a)(8) by removing the
period and adding ‘‘; or’’ in its place;
■ iv. By adding a new paragraph (a)(9);
and
■ v. By revising paragraph (b);
■ m. In section 11:
■ i. By redesignating paragraph (a) as
(b)(1); and
■ ii. By redesignating paragraph (b) as
(b)(2) and revising the newly designated
paragraph (b)(2);
■ iii. By designating the undesignated
introductory paragraph as paragraph (b)
introductory text;
■ iv. By adding a new paragraph (a);
■ 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’’;
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
■
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:16 Jan 11, 2016
Jkt 238001
n. In section 12:
i. By revising paragraph (b)(1);
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;
■ 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;
■ 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
■ v. In paragraph (d) by adding the
phrase ‘‘insured with an intended use of
juice’’ after the phrase ‘‘Any citrus
fruit’’;
■ vi. By revising paragraph (e).
The revisions and additions read as
follows:
■
■
■
§ 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
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
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
E:\FR\FM\12JAP1.SGM
12JAP1
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 7 / Tuesday, January 12, 2016 / Proposed Rules
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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:16 Jan 11, 2016
Jkt 238001
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.
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
1345
(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
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA–2015–8131; Directorate
Identifier 2015–NM–073–AD]
RIN 2120–AA64
Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing
Company Airplanes
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM).
AGENCY:
We propose to supersede
Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2008–05–
06, which applies to certain The Boeing
Company Model 737–100, –200, –300,
–400, and –500 series airplanes. AD
2008–05–06 currently requires
repetitive inspections for fatigue
cracking in the longitudinal floor beam
web, upper chord, and lower chord
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\12JAP1.SGM
12JAP1
Agencies
[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: https://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 https://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 https://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 rmaweb.content@rma.usda.gov.
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 https://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