61898 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 224 / Thursday, November 20, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

Executive Order 12866 and Regulatory

Flexibility Act

This rule has been reviewed under

Executive Order 12866. For this action

the Office of Management and Budget

has waived its review process required

by Executive Order 12866.

This interim rule amends the Medfly

regulations by removing an area in Polk

County, FL, from quarantine for Medfly.

This action affects the interstate

movement of regulated articles from this

area. There are approximately 31 small

entities that could be affected, including

7 fruit stands, 10 food stores, 1

transporter, 9 commercial growers, and

4 processing plants.

These small entities comprise less

than 1 percent of the total number of

similar small entities operating in the

State of Florida. In addition, most of

these small entities sell regulated

articles primarily for local intrastate, not

interstate movement, and the sale of

these articles would not be affected by

this interim rule.

Therefore, this action should have a

minimal economic effect on the small

entities operating in the area of Polk

County that has been quarantined

because of Medfly. We anticipate that

the economic impact of lifting the

quarantine, though positive, will be no

more significant than was the minimal

impact of its imposition.

Under these circumstances, the

Administrator of the Animal and Plant

Health Inspection Service has

determined that this action will not

have a significant economic impact on

a substantial number of small entities.

Executive Order 12372

This program/activity is listed in the

Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance

under No. 10.025 and is subject to

Executive Order 12372, which requires

intergovernmental consultation with

State and local officials. (See 7 CFR part

3015, subpart V.)

Executive Order 12988

This rule has been reviewed under

Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice

Reform. This rule: (1) Preempts all State

and local laws and regulations that are

inconsistent with this rule; (2) has no

retroactive effect; and (3) does not

require administrative proceedings

before parties may file suit in court

challenging this rule.

Paperwork Reduction Act

This rule contains no new

information collection or recordkeeping

requirements under the Paperwork

Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501

et seq.).

List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 301

Agricultural commodities, Plant

diseases and pests, Quarantine,

Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements, Transportation.

Accordingly, 7 CFR part 301 is

amended as follows:

PART 301—DOMESTIC QUARANTINE

NOTICES

1. The authority citation for part 301

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 147a, 150bb, 150dd,

150ee, 150ff, 161, 162, and 164–167; 7 CFR

2.22, 2.80, and 371.2(c).

2. In § 301.78–3, paragraph (c), the

entry for Florida is revised to read as

follows:

§ 301.78–3 Quarantined areas.

* * * * *

(c) * * *

FLORIDA

Hillsborough County. That portion of

Hillsborough County beginning at the

intersection of I–75 and the

Hillsborough/Pasco County line; then

west along the Hillsborough/Pasco

County line to the section line dividing

sections 5 and 6, T. 27 S., R. 18 E.; then

south along the section line dividing

sections 5 and 6, T. 27 S., R. 18 E. to

Veterans Expressway; then south along

Veterans Expressway to Erhlich Road;

then west along Erhlich Road to Gunn

Highway; then north along Gunn

Highway to Mobley Road; then west

along Mobley Road to Racetrack Road;

then southwest along Racetrack Road to

the Pinellas/Hillsborough County line;

then south along the Pinellas/

Hillsborough County line to I–275; then

east along I–275 to the western most

land mass at the eastern end of the

Howard Franklin Bridge; then along an

imaginary line along the shoreline of the

Old Tampa Bay, Tampa Bay, and

Hillsborough Bay (including the

Interbay Peninsula, Davis Island,

Harbour Island, Hooker’s Point, and Port

Sutton) to the northern shoreline of the

Alafia River’s extension; then east along

the northern shoreline of the Alafia

River to I–75; then north along I–75 to

the point of beginning.

Done in Washington, DC, this 14th day of

November 1997.

Craig A. Reed,

Acting Administrator, Animal and Plant

Health Inspection Service.

[FR Doc. 97–30506 Filed 11–19–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410–34–P

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Federal Crop Insurance Corporation

7 CFR Parts 416 and 457

Pea Crop Insurance Regulations; and

Common Crop Insurance Regulations,

Green Pea Crop Insurance Provisions

AGENCY: Federal Crop Insurance

Corporation, USDA.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: The Federal Crop Insurance

Corporation (FCIC) finalizes specific

crop provisions for the insurance of

green peas. The provisions will be used

in conjunction with the Common Crop

Insurance Policy Basic Provisions,

which contain standard terms and

conditions common to most crops. The

intended effect of this action is to

provide policy changes to better meet

the needs of the insured, separate green

peas and dry peas into separate crop

insurance provisions, include the

current pea crop insurance regulations

with the Common Crop Insurance

Policy for ease of use and consistency of

terms, and to restrict the effect of the

current pea crop insurance regulations

to the 1997 and prior crop years.

EFFECTIVE DATES: December 22, 1997.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Louise Narber, Insurance Management

Specialist, Research and Development,

Product Development Division, Federal

Crop Insurance Corporation, United

States Department of Agriculture, 9435

Holmes Road, Kansas City, MO 64131,

telephone (816) 926–7730.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Executive Order No. 12866

The Office of Management and Budget

(OMB) has determined this rule to be

exempt for the purposes of Executive

Order No. 12866, and, therefore, this

rule has not been reviewed by OMB.

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

Under the Paperwork Reduction Act

of 1995 [44 U.S.C. chapter 35],

collections of information have been

approved by the Office of Management

and Budget (OMB) under control

number 0563–0053.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of

1995

Title II of the Unfunded Mandates

Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public

Law 104–4, 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
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 224 / Thursday, November 20, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 61899

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 the UMRA.

Executive Order No. 12612

It has been determined under section

6(a) of Executive Order No. 12612,

Federalism, that this rule does not have

sufficient federalism implications to

warrant the preparation of a Federalism

Assessment. The provisions contained

in this rule will not have a substantial

direct effect on states or their political

subdivisions, or on the distribution of

power and responsibilities among the

various levels of government.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

This regulation will not have a

significant economic impact on a

substantial number of small entities.

The amount of work required of

insurance companies will not increase

because the information used to

determine eligibility is already

maintained at their office and the other

information required is already being

gathered as a result of the present

policy. No additional actions are

required as a result of this action on the

part of either the producer or the

reinsured company. Additionally, the

regulation does not require any action

on the part of the small entities than is

required on the part of the large entities.

Therefore, this action is determined to

be exempt from the provisions of the

Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C.

605), and no Regulatory Flexibility

Analysis was prepared.

Federal Assistance Program

This program is listed in the Catalog

of Federal Domestic Assistance under

No. 10.450.

Executive Order No. 12372

This program is not subject to the

provisions of Executive Order No.

12372, which require intergovernmental

consultation with State and local

officials. See the Notice related to 7 CFR

part 3015, subpart V, published at 48 FR

29115, June 24, 1983.

Executive Order No. 12988

This final rule has been reviewed in

accordance with Executive Order No.

12988 on civil justice reforms. The

provisions of this rule will not have a

retroactive effect prior to the effective

date. The provisions of this rule will

preempt State and local laws to the

extent such State and local laws are

inconsistent herewith. The

administrative appeal provisions

published at 7 CFR part 11 must be

exhausted before any action for judicial

review may be brought.

Environmental Evaluation

This action is not expected to have a

significant impact on the quality of the

human environment, health, and safety.

Therefore, neither an Environmental

Assessment nor an Environmental

Impact Statement is needed.

National Performance Review

This regulatory action is being taken

as part of the National Performance

Review Initiative to eliminate

unnecessary or duplicative regulations

and improve those that remain in force.

Background

On Thursday, May 1, 1997, FCIC

published a proposed rule in the

Federal Register at 62 FR 23680 to add

to the Common Crop Insurance

Regulations (7 CFR part 457), a new

section, 7 CFR 457.137, Green Pea Crop

Insurance Provisions. The new

provisions will be effective for the 1998

and succeeding crop years. These

provisions will replace and supersede

the current provisions for insuring green

peas found at 7 CFR part 416 (Pea Crop

Insurance Regulations). FCIC also

amends 7 CFR part 416 to limit its effect

to the 1997 and prior crop years.

Following publication of the proposed

rule, the public was afforded 30 days to

submit written comments and opinions.

A total of 58 comments were received

from an insurance service organization,

a reinsured company, a crop insurance

agent, and a food corporation. The

comments received, and FCIC’s

responses are as follows:

Comment: An insurance service

organization recommended that several

definitions common to most crops be

put into the Basic Provisions.

Response: The Basic Provisions,

which are currently in the regulatory

review process, will include definitions

of commonly used terms, and this rule

will be revised to delete these

definitions when the Basic Provisions

are published as a final rule.

Comment: An insurance service

organization recommended that the

sentence in the definition of ‘‘bypassed

acreage’’ that states ‘‘Bypassed acreage

upon which an indemnity is payable

will be considered to have a zero yield

for Actual Production History (APH)

purposes’’ be deleted since it is

addressed elsewhere and does not

belong in the definition.

Response: FCIC has deleted the

second sentence from, and revised, the

definition of bypassed acreage.

Provisions have been added in section

3 to explain bypassed acreage when

determining approved yield.

Comment: An insurance service

organization questioned whether dry

pea varieties were shell type or pod type

peas.

Response: The definition of green

peas specifies that it may be shell or pod

type. The definition of ‘‘dry peas’’ has

been revised to clarify the distinction

between green and dry peas.

Comment: An insurance service

organization recommended that the

definition of ‘‘final planting date’’ be

revised to delete the phrase ‘‘for the full

production guarantee’’ since the late

planting provisions are not applicable.

Response: The proposed

recommendation has not been made

because late planting coverage will be

available if allowed by the Special

Provisions and the producer provides

written approval from the processor by

the acreage reporting date that it will

accept the production from the late

planted acreage.

Comment: An insurance service

organization and a reinsured company

expressed concern with the definition of

‘‘good farming practices’’ which makes

reference to ‘‘cultural practices

generally in use in the county * * *

recognized by the Cooperative State

Research, Education, and Extension

Service as compatible with agronomic

and weather conditions in the county.’’

The commenters questioned whether

cultural practices that are not explicitly

recognized (or possibly known) by the

Cooperative State Research, Education,

and Extension Service might exist. The

commenters indicated that the term

‘‘county’’ in the definition of ‘‘good

farming practice’’ should be changed to

‘‘area.’’ The insurance service

organization also recommended adding

the word ‘‘generally’’ before ‘‘recognized

by the Cooperative State Research,

Education, and Extension Service

* * *.’’

Response: The Cooperative State

Research, Education, and Extension

Service (CSREES) recognizes farming

practices that are considered acceptable

for producing green peas. If a producer

is following practices currently not

recognized as acceptable by the

CSREES, such recognition can be sought

by interested parties. Use of the term

‘‘generally’’ will only create an

ambiguity and make the definition more

difficult to administer. Although the

cultural practices recognized by the

CSREES may only pertain to specific

areas within a county, the actuarial

documents are on a county basis.

Therefore, no change has been made.

Comment: An insurance service

organization questioned if the definition
61900 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 224 / Thursday, November 20, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

of ‘‘peas’’ was intended to include both

‘‘dry’’ and ‘‘green’’ peas.

Response: The definition of ‘‘peas’’

includes both green and dry peas. The

definition of ‘‘peas’’ has been revised to

include green or dry peas.

Comment: An insurance service

organization recommended that the

definition of ‘‘replanting’’ be clarified by

inserting ‘‘green pea’’ between the last

two words (‘‘successful’’ and ‘‘crop’’) of

the sentence.

Response: To be consistent with

language contained in the proposed rule

of the Basic Provisions, FCIC has

revised the definition to clarify that

‘‘replanting’’ is performing the cultural

practices necessary to prepare the land

to replace the seed of the damaged or

destroyed crop and then replacing the

seed in the insured acreage.

Comment: An insurance service

organization recommended that section

2(c) of the proposed rule clarify whether

optional units are available if the

processor contract stipulates the number

of contracted acres, or only if the

contract does not specify an amount of

production.

Response: FCIC agrees and has

amended section 2(a) to clarify that for

processor contracts that stipulate a

specific amount of production to be

delivered, the basic unit will consist of

all acreage planted to the insured crop

in the county that will be used to fulfill

the processor contract, and optional

units will not be established. The

language in section 2 has also been

revised and reformatted to clearly state

the requirements for both the acreage

based and production based processor

contracts.

Comment: An insurance service

organization, a reinsured company, an

insurance agent, and a food corporation

recommended that unit division by

green pea type remain as an option. The

commenters stated that: (1) Unit

division by early, mid and late-season

green peas is the only unit division

option available in many areas other

than share or farm serial number; (2) it

would complicate loss adjustment if a

claim on an early-season variety had to

be deferred until the late-season variety

was harvested; (3) productivity varies

between types (as has been defined as

requiring a specific amount of heat units

for maturity during a normal growing

season); and (4) growing early and lateseason green peas are two separate

operations. The early-season green peas

are planted in April and early May and

thrive on the cooler temperatures. They

are harvested in June and avoid the heat

of early summer. This early harvest

allows the producer the option of

planting a full season crop after the peas

are harvested. The early-season peas are

lower yielding and are priced less on

processor contracts. Late-season green

peas are full season, higher yielding,

and priced much higher to allow the

producer a return competitive with

other full season crops.

Response: As new varieties of green

peas have been developed and the

original types intermixed, it has become

more and more difficult to define the

type of green pea into which a variety

falls. Due to the need for consistency

among regions and crops, FCIC has

determined to delete units by type for

early, mid, and late season green peas or

by planting date.

Comment: An insurance service

organization and a reinsured company

questioned the distinction between

‘‘shell’’ and ‘‘pod’’ type peas and

questioned what would be

accomplished by providing optional

units by shell or pod type peas. The

commenter also asked how shell and

pod type peas will be identified.

Response: Shell type peas are defined

as green peas that are shelled prior to

eating, canning, or freezing. Pod type

peas are defined as green peas intended

to be eaten without shelling (e.g., snap

peas, snow peas, and Chinese peas). Pod

type and shell type peas are grown for

a different purpose and a different

market. Because of the clear distinction

between these types of peas, the

provisions have been amended to allow

optional unit division for shell type and

pod type green peas.

Comment: An insurance service

organization and a reinsured company

expressed concern that FSA has

consolidated all land under the same

ownership into one Farm Serial Number

wherever possible in the Northeast

states, which serves as a deterrent to the

purchase of buy-up coverage by the

larger, successful producer.

Response: Depending on the

processor contract terms, optional units

are available by section, section

equivalent, FSA Farm Serial Number,

irrigated and non-irrigated practice, or

by shell type and pod type green peas.

Comment: An insurance service

organization recommended revising

section 2(f)(1) of the proposed rule to

read ‘‘You must have provided records

by the production reporting date, which

can be independently verified, * * *.’’

They stated that this would eliminate

the potential for misinterpretation that

the policyholder qualifies for separate

optional units simply by listing them on

the acreage report and having records

available at home.

Response: Producers do not have to

provide records by the production

reporting date. Producers report

production and acreage information by

the production reporting date and only

provide records which can be

independently verified when requested

by the insurance provider. Therefore, no

change has been made.

Comment: A reinsured company

questioned whether verification of

production from an optional unit using

‘‘measurement of stored production,’’ as

specified in section 2(f)(3) of the

proposed rule applies to green peas.

Response: Green peas are not put into

storage before processing. Therefore,

FCIC has removed this provision.

Comment: An insurance service

organization recommended removal of

the opening phrase in section 2(f)(4)(ii)

of the proposed rule that states ‘‘In

addition to, or instead of, establishing

optional units by section, section

equivalent or FSA Farm Serial Number,

* * *’’ since section 2(f)(4) of the

proposed rule specifies that ‘‘Each

optional unit must meet one or more of

the following criteria, * * *.’’

Response: FCIC agrees and has

revised section 2(b)(5) of the final rule

accordingly.

Comment: An insurance service

organization questioned if the standard

language in section 3(a) of the proposed

rule which allows the producer to select

only one price election for all the green

peas in the county insured under this

policy unless the Special Provisions

provide different price elections by

type, in which case the producer may

select one price election for each green

pea type designated in the Special

Provisions, refers to the current early,

mid, and late-season types or to the

shell and pod types specified in the

proposed rule. They also emphasized

that the price election for green peas is

a percentage of the contract price. As

some producers contract with more than

one processor, the contract prices may

be different, and it would not be

possible to limit them to one ‘‘price’’ by

type, only to one ‘‘percentage.’’

Response: FCIC agrees and has

revised section 3(a) to specify

percentages.

Comment: An insurance service

organization recommended that the

provision in section 3(b) of the proposed

rule, that addressed the weight of the

shelled peas as the basis for loss

adjustment calculations, APH yields,

and the guarantee, be moved to section

12(c)(2).

Response: FCIC believes that the

provisions in section 3(b) of the

proposed rule are being misinterpreted.

The harvesting equipment removes the

peas from the pods of shell type peas

prior to delivery to the processor. In

addition, the APH yield and guarantee
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 224 / Thursday, November 20, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 61901

are based on the yield after the

tenderometer reading, grade factor, or

sieve size is taken into consideration.

Therefore, section 3(b) of the proposed

rule has been deleted.

Comment: An insurance service

organization stated that February 15

seems early for the cancellation and

termination dates for Delaware and

Maryland. They stated that the date

table has a March 15 sales closing date

for these states and questioned if the

1998 date would be a month earlier and,

if so, why.

Response: The sales closing date

contained in the Special Provisions for

these states was February 15 for the

1996 and 1997 crop years, not March 15.

That date is set by statute. The

cancellation and termination dates for

all crops are being changed to

correspond with the sales closing date.

Therefore, no change has been made.

Comment: An insurance service

organization stated that language in

section 6 requiring the producer to

provide a copy of the processor contract

no later than the acreage reporting date

could provide a loophole by allowing

producers to wait until acreage

reporting time to decide if they want

coverage.

Response: There is no evidence that

allowing the producer to provide a copy

of the processor contract as late as the

acreage reporting date has resulted in

producers waiting to decide until the

acreage reporting date if they want

coverage. Green pea producers usually

have a processor contract in-force by the

final planting date. The requirement to

provide a copy of the processor contract

with the acreage report is convenient for

the producer. Therefore, no change has

been made.

Comment: An insurance service

organization questioned whether any

processor contract would allow

interplanted green peas or green peas

planted into an established grass or

legume. The commenter further

indicated that consideration should be

given to inserting the language in

section 7(a)(4) of the proposed rule into

the Basic Provisions.

Response: FCIC agrees that processing

green peas has seldom, if ever, been

interplanted with another crop or

planted into an established grass or

legume. However, production practices

are constantly evolving. FCIC chooses to

retain the provisions of section 7(a)(3) of

the final rule to accommodate such

developments if they should occur. In

addition, the interplanted language is

not consistent among the crop policies

and, therefore, will be retained in the

crop provisions.

Comment: An insurance service

organization indicated that language in

section 7(b) that states ‘‘You will be

considered to have a share in the

insured crop if, under the processor

contract, you retain possession of the

acreage on which the green peas are

grown, * * *’’ suggests that only a

landlord would have a share in the

insured crop. The commenter

questioned whether the provision in

section 7(b) is already covered in

sections 7(a)(1) and (3) of the proposed

rule.

Response: The language in section

7(b) was intended to cover producers

who have a crop share agreement, rent,

or own acreage. The word ‘‘possession’’

has been changed to ‘‘control’’ for

clarification. Section 7(a) specifies

requirements for insurance coverage on

the crop, while section 7(b) specifies

requirements for an insurable share in

the crop. Therefore, both provisions are

necessary.

Comment: An insurance service

organization and a reinsured company

questioned whether the provision in

section 9(b), which states that the

insurance period ceases on the date

sufficient production is harvested to

fulfill the producer’s processor contract,

conflicts with the provision in section

12(a), that states ‘‘We will determine

your loss on a unit basis.’’ The

commenters questioned whether

production to count from an appraisal

prior to harvest would be included

when determining fulfillment of the

processor contract. The insurance

service organization questioned whether

the insured would know when enough

production is harvested to fulfill the

processor contract. This commenter

asked if production exceeding the

contracted amount is considered

production to count for APH or loss

adjustment or whether the processor

settlement sheet is the only acceptable

record. The insurance service

organization noted that the provisions

in section 9(b) state ‘‘* * * the

insurance period ends when the

production delivered to the processor

equals the amount of production stated

in the green pea contract.’’ However, the

commenter questioned whether

‘‘delivered to’’ is the same as ‘‘accepted

by’’ the processor.

Response: Section 9(b) does not

conflict with section 12(a). For

processor contracts based on a stated

amount of production, FCIC is only

insuring the contract amount and the

producer can only obtain basic units by

processor contract. Therefore, once the

contract is fulfilled, insurance ceases on

the unit and there is no payable loss. If

the contract is not fulfilled and there is

still unharvested production, any

insurable cause of loss is covered. With

respect to the issue of production from

appraised acreage, such production will

not count toward fulfillment of the

processor contract, although it may be

used to determine production to count

for the unit or the producer’s approved

yield if the acreage is not bypassed due

to an insurable cause of loss that renders

such production unacceptable to the

processor. With respect to when the

producer would know when the

processor contract was fulfilled, records

are kept as production is delivered to

the processor. Therefore, the producer

can determine when the contract was

fulfilled. All production from the unit,

including any excess of the amount

stated in the contract, will be

considered as production to count when

determining the producer’s approved

yield. For the purposes of loss

adjustment, the amount shown on the

settlement sheet, plus any appraised

production that was not bypassed due to

an insurable cause that rendered the

production unacceptable to the

processor, will be included as

production to count. FCIC has revised

section 9(b) to clarify that insurance

ceases when the contract is fulfilled if

the processor contract stipulates a

specific amount of production.

Comment: An insurance service

organization stated that September 15 is

too early for the end of insurance

coverage for dry peas and that the

change to September 30 must be

incorporated into the dry pea provisions

as well.

Response: The dry pea and green pea

provisions are now separate provisions

with different dates. The insured crop

under these provisions is green peas. If

the green peas will be harvested as dry

peas, insurance coverage will end on

September 30 but only if notice was

provided in accordance with section

11(d).

Comment: An insurance service

organization stated that they received

one comment stating that the provision

in section 10(a)(1)(ii) of the proposed

rule, which states that abnormally hot or

cold temperatures that result in

bypassed acreage because an

unexpected number of acres over a large

producing area are ready for harvest at

the same time, and the total production

is beyond the normal capacity of the

processor to timely harvest or process,

should be eliminated because it

provides a loophole that can easily be

abused when the processor has

contracted too many acres.

Response: The comment does reveal

an opportunity for an abuse. Therefore,

the provision has been clarified.
61902 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 224 / Thursday, November 20, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

Comment: An insurance service

organization questioned the provision in

section 10(a)(4), which states that

insurance is provided against ‘‘Plant

disease on acreage not planted to peas

the previous crop year * * *.’’ The

commenter assumed this would apply

even if a rotation requirement was not

specified in the Special Provisions.

Response: This provision has been

revised to specify that insurance

coverage will be provided against plant

disease on acreage not planted to the

peas the previous crop year unless

provided for in the Special Provisions or

by written agreement, but not damage

due to insufficient or improper

application of disease control measures.

Comment: An insurance service

organization suggested changing the

wording in section 10(a)(8) to eliminate

the reference to 10(a)(1) through (7) and

state ‘‘Failure of the irrigation water

supply, if due to an insured cause of

loss.’’

Response: Referencing 10(a)(1)

through (7) makes it clear that failure of

the irrigation water supply must be due

to these specific causes of loss.

Therefore, no change has been made.

Comment: An insurance service

organization questioned how the

provision in section 10(b)(1)(ii), which

states that insurance coverage is not

provided if acreage is bypassed based on

the availability of a crop insurance

payment, is to be enforced.

Response: The adjuster should be able

to make this determination based on

various factors such as if a harvest

pattern exists that clearly indicates the

processor is bypassing producers with

crop insurance coverage in favor of

producers without crop insurance even

though the quality of the crop is similar.

Language has been added to state that

an indemnity will be denied or have to

be repaid if it is determined that

bypassed acreage was due to the

availability of a crop insurance

payment.

Comment: An insurance service

organization questioned a discrepancy

between section 9(b) of the proposed

rule, which states that insurance ceases

on ‘‘The date you harvested sufficient

production to fulfill your processor

contract,’’ and section 10(b)(5) of the

proposed rule which states that loss of

production will not be insured if ‘‘Due

to damage that occurs to unharvested

production after you deliver the

production required by the processor

contract.’’ The commenter indicated

that this provision is not necessary since

any damage occurring after delivery

would be outside the insurance period

as indicated in section 9(b).

Response: FCIC agrees with the

insurance service organization and has

deleted section 10(b)(5).

Comment: An insurance service

organization stated that the language in

section 11(c) does not address timely

notice if damage is discovered less than

15 days prior to harvest.

Response: FCIC has revised section

11(c) to clarify that an immediate notice

of loss is required if damage is

discovered within 15 days prior to

harvest or during harvest.

Comment: An insurance service

organization stated that section 12(b),

which explains how a claim is settled,

is too wordy and difficult to follow.

Response: This section has been

revised to clarify the settlement of

claims calculation, including the

addition of an example.

Comment: An insurance service

organization indicated that payments by

the processor for bypassed acreage

should be considered to have value to

count as is done with salvaged grains.

Response: There is nothing in this

policy which precludes a producer from

obtaining any other form of insurance

against losses as long as such insurance

is not under the Federal Crop Insurance

Act. Since the processor and producer

contribute to the unharvested acreage

pool, such payment will not be

considered when determining

production to count.

Comment: An insurance service

organization stated that section

12(c)(1)(iii) of the proposed rule should

not allow the insured to defer settlement

and wait for a later, generally lower,

appraisal, especially on crops that have

a short ‘‘shelf life.’’

Response: A later appraisal will only

be necessary if the company and the

insured do not agree on the appraisal or

if the company believes that the crop

needs to be carried further. The

producer must continue to care for the

crop. If the producer does not continue

to care for the crop, the original

appraisal will be used. Therefore, no

change has been made.

Comment: A reinsured company and

an insurance service organization stated

that section 12(c)(2) of the proposed rule

which reads ‘‘The amount of such

production will be determined by

dividing the dollar amount as required

by the contract for the quality and

quantity of the peas delivered to the

processor by the base contract price per

pound;’’ is difficult to understand.

Response: This provision which

specifies the ‘‘dollar amount as required

by the contract for the quality and

quantity of the peas delivered to the

processor * * *’’ accounts for

variations in the contract price for the

tenderometer reading, grade factor, or

sieve size of the delivered peas. The

language has been clarified.

Comment: An insurance service

organization and a reinsured company

questioned if late and prevented

planting provisions would be available

for green peas. A crop insurance agent

and a food corporation stated that late

planting provisions should be available

for green peas. Green pea producers

plant according to heat units to provide

a planting and harvesting schedule so

that a processor can harvest uniformly

during the growing season. Current

varieties planted late can tolerate higher

temperature extremes and do not pose

unreasonable productivity risks nor

does it impact the processor’s ability to

timely harvest and process the green

peas. Producers need a good risk

management program.

Response: A late planting period for

green peas may be appropriate for some

growing areas. Therefore, section 13 is

revised to provide a late planting period

if allowed by the Special Provisions and

the insured provides written approval

from the processor by the acreage

reporting date that it will accept the

production from the late planted

acreage. Prevented planting provisions

will also be added if available in the

Basic Provisions.

Comment: An insurance service

organization and a reinsured company

recommended removal of the

requirement that written agreements be

renewed each year if there are no

significant changes to the farming

operation. The insurance service

organization stated that section 14(d)

should perhaps refer to the date

specified in the agreement instead of

limiting the agreement for one year. An

insurance service organization

recommended that section 14 be put

into the Basic Provisions.

Response: Written agreements are

intended to supplement policy terms or

permit insurance in unusual situations

that require modification of the

otherwise standard insurance

provisions. If such practices continue

year to year, they should be

incorporated into the policy or Special

Provisions. It is important to minimize

written agreement exceptions to assure

that the insured is well aware of the

specific terms of the policy. Therefore,

no change will be made to the

requirement that written agreements be

renewed each year. FCIC has proposed

that the Written Agreement provisions

be included in the Basic Provisions.

In addition to the changes described

above, FCIC has made minor editorial

changes and has amended Green Pea

Crop Insurance Provisions as follows:
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 224 / Thursday, November 20, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 61903

1. Amended and clarified the

paragraph preceding section 1 to

include the Catastrophic Risk Protection

Endorsement.

2. Section 1—Added a definition of

‘‘approved yield,’’ and amended the

definitions of ‘‘base contract price,’’

‘‘bypassed acreage,’’ ‘‘pod type,’’

‘‘processor,’’ ‘‘processor contract,’’

‘‘replanting,’’ and ‘‘shell type’’ for

clarity. The definition of ‘‘practical to

replant’’ is amended to clarify that it

will not be considered practical to

replant unless the acreage can produce

at least 75 percent of the approved yield

and the processor agrees in writing that

it will accept the production from the

replanted acreage. The definition of

‘‘processor contract’’ is amended to

clarify that multiple contracts with the

same processor that specify amounts of

production will be considered as a

single processor contract unless the

contracts are for different types of green

peas.

3. Section 2—Removed the reference

to ‘‘written agreement’’ in section 2(b) of

the proposed rule and added ‘‘written

agreement’’ in section 2(b)(5) of the final

rule to clarify which provisions may be

revised by written agreement.

4. Section 7—Removed section 7(a)(2)

of the proposed rule. This provision is

not necessary since section 7(a)(3) of the

proposed rule stated that the green peas

must be grown under, and in

accordance with, the requirements of a

processor contract. If grown under a

processor contract, the green peas will

be canned or frozen. Section 7(c) is

amended for clarity.

5. Section 9(a)(2)—Clarified that the

insurance period ends when the green

peas should have been harvested but

were not harvested.

6. Section 10—Amended section 10(a)

for clarity. Section 10(b) is reformatted

and amended for clarity. Also, removed

section 10(b)(3) of the proposed rule

which stated ‘‘Due to green peas not

being timely harvested unless such

delay in harvesting is solely and directly

due to an insured cause of loss;’’

because it is unnecessary.

7. Section 11—Clarified that the

insured must give notice of loss within

3 days after the date harvest should

have started if the acreage will not be

harvested. The insured must also

provide documentation stating why the

acreage was bypassed.

8. Section 12—A new section 12(c)(3)

of the final rule is added to clarify that

appraised production will include all

harvested production from any other

insurable units that have been used to

fill the processor contract for a unit.

Section 12(d) of the proposed rule is

deleted because of duplication with

section 12(c)(2).

9. Section 14—Clarified that only

terms of this policy that are specifically

designated for the use of written

agreements may be altered by written

agreement if the listed conditions are

met.

List of Subjects in 7 CFR Parts 416 and

457

Crop insurance, Green pea, Pea crop

insurance regulations.

Final Rule

Accordingly, for the reasons set forth

in the preamble, the Federal Crop

Insurance Corporation hereby amends 7

CFR parts 416 and 457, as follows:

PART 416—PEA CROP INSURANCE

REGULATIONS FOR THE 1986

THROUGH 1997 CROP YEARS

1. The authority citation for 7 CFR

part 416 is revised to read as follows:

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 1506(l), 1506(p).

2. The part heading is revised to read

as set forth above.

3. The subpart heading ‘‘SubpartRegulations for the 1986 and

Succeeding Crop Years’’ is removed.

4. Section 416.7 is amended by

revising the introductory text of

paragraph (d) to read as follows:

§ 416.7 The application and policy.

* * * * *

(d) The application is found at

subpart D of part 400, General

Administrative Regulations (7 CFR

400.37, 400.38). The provisions of the

Pea Insurance Policy for the 1986

through 1997 crop years are as follows:

* * * * *

PART 457—COMMON CROP

INSURANCE REGULATIONS;

REGULATIONS FOR THE 1994 AND

SUBSEQUENT CONTRACT YEARS

5. The authority citation for 7 CFR

part 457 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 1506(l), 1506(p).

6. Section 457.137 is added to read as

follows:

§ 457.137 Green pea crop insurance

provisions.

The Green Pea Crop Insurance

Provisions for the 1998 and succeeding

crop years are as follows:

FCIC policies:

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF

AGRICULTURE

Federal Crop Insurance Corporation

Reinsured policies:

(Appropriate title for insurance provider)

Both FCIC and reinsured policies

Green Pea Crop Provisions

If a conflict exists among the policy

provisions the order of priority is as follows:

(1) the Catastrophic Risk Endorsement, if

applicable; (2) the Special Provisions; (3)

these Crop Provisions; and (4) the Basic

Provisions (§ 457.8) with (1) controlling (2),

etc.

1. Definitions.

Approved yield. The yield determined in

accordance with 7 CFR part 400, subpart G.

Base contract price. The price stipulated in

the processor contract for the tenderometer

reading, grade factor, or sieve size that is

designated in the Special Provisions, if

applicable, without regard to discounts or

incentives that may apply.

Bypassed acreage. Land on which

production is ready for harvest but the

processor elects not to accept such

production so it is not harvested.

Combining (vining). Separating pods from

the vines and, in the case of shell peas,

separating the peas from the pod for delivery

to the processor.

Days. Calendar days.

Dry peas. Green peas that have matured to

the dry form for use as food, feed, or seed.

FSA. The Farm Service Agency, an agency

of the United States Department of

Agriculture, or a successor agency.

Final planting date. The date contained in

the Special Provisions for the insured crop by

which the crop must initially be planted in

order to be insured for the full production

guarantee.

Good farming practices. The cultural

practices generally in use in the county for

the crop to make normal progress toward

maturity and produce at least the yield used

to determine the production guarantee and

are those required by the green pea processor

contract with the processing company, and

recognized by the Cooperative State

Research, Education, and Extension Service

as compatible with agronomic and weather

conditions in the county.

Green peas. Shell type and pod type peas

that are grown under a processor contract to

be canned or frozen and sold for human

consumption.

Harvest. Combining (vining) of the peas.

Interplanted. Acreage on which two or

more crops are planted in a manner that does

not permit separate agronomic maintenance

or harvest of the insured crop.

Irrigated practice. A method of producing

a crop by which water is artificially applied

during the growing season by appropriate

systems and at the proper times, with the

intention of providing the quantity of water

needed to produce at least the yield used to

establish the irrigated production guarantee

on the irrigated acreage planted to the

insured crop.

Nurse crop (companion crop). A crop

planted into the same acreage as another

crop, that is intended to be harvested

separately, and which is planted to improve

growing conditions for the crop with which

it is grown.

Peas. Green or dry peas.

Planted acreage. Land in which seed has

been placed by a machine appropriate for the

insured crop and planting method, at the
61904 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 224 / Thursday, November 20, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

correct depth, into a seedbed that has been

properly prepared for the planting method

and production practice. Peas must initially

be placed in rows. Acreage planted in any

other manner will not be insurable unless

otherwise provided by the Special Provisions

or by written agreement.

Pod type. Green peas genetically developed

to be eaten without shelling (e.g., snap peas,

snow peas, and Chinese peas).

Practical to replant. In lieu of the

definition of ‘‘practical to replant’’ contained

in section 1 of the Basic Provisions, practical

to replant is defined as our determination,

after loss or damage to the insured crop,

based on factors including, but not limited to,

moisture availability, condition of the field,

time to crop maturity, and marketing

window, that replanting the insured crop

will allow the crop to attain maturity prior

to the calendar date for the end of the

insurance period. It will not be considered

practical to replant unless the replanted

acreage can produce at least 75 percent of the

approved yield, and the processor agrees in

writing that it will accept the production

from the replanted acreage.

Price election. In lieu of the definition of

‘‘Price election’’ contained in section 1 of the

Basic Provisions, price election is defined as

the price per pound stated in the processor

contract (contracted price) for the

tenderometer reading, grade factor, or sieve

size contained in the Special Provisions.

Processor. Any business enterprise

regularly engaged in canning or freezing

green peas for human consumption, that

possesses all licenses and permits for

processing green peas required by the state in

which it operates, and that possesses

facilities, or has contractual access to such

facilities, with enough equipment to accept

and process contracted green peas within a

reasonable amount of time after harvest.

Processor contract. A written agreement

between the producer and a processor,

containing at a minimum:

(a) The producer’s commitment to plant

and grow green peas, and to deliver the green

pea production to the processor;

(b) The processor’s commitment to

purchase all the production stated in the

processor contract; and

(c) A base contract price.

Multiple contracts with the same processor

that specify amounts of production will be

considered as a single processor contract

unless the contracts are for different types of

green peas.

Production guarantee (per acre).—The

number of pounds determined by

multiplying the approved actual production

history yield per acre by the coverage level

percentage you elect. For shell type peas, the

weight will be determined after shelling.

Replanting. Performing the cultural

practices necessary to prepare the land to

replace the seed of the damaged or destroyed

crop and then replacing the seed in the

insured acreage.

Shell type. Green peas genetically

developed to be shelled prior to eating,

canning or freezing.

Timely planted. Planted on or before the

final planting date designated in the Special

Provisions for the insured crop in the county.

Written Agreement. A written document

that alters designated terms of this policy in

accordance with section 14.

2. Unit Division.

For processor contracts that stipulate:

(a) The amount of production to be

delivered:

(1) In lieu of the definition of unit in

section 1 of the Basic Provisions, a basic unit

will consist of all acreage planted to the

insured crop in the county that will be used

to fulfill the processor contract;

(2) There will be no more than one basic

unit for each processor contract;

(3) In accordance with section 12, all

production from any basic unit in excess of

the amount under contract will be included

as production to count if such production is

applied to any other basic unit for which the

contracted amount has not been fulfilled; and

(4) Optional units will not be established.

(b) The number of acres to be planted:

(1) Unless limited by the Special

Provisions, a unit as defined in section 1 of

the Basic Provisions (basic unit) may be

divided into optional units if, for each

optional unit, you meet all the conditions of

this section. Basic units may not be divided

into optional units on any basis other than

as described in this section;

(2) If you do not comply fully with these

provisions, we will combine all optional

units that are not in compliance with these

provisions into the basic unit from which

they were formed. We will combine the

optional units at any time we discover that

you have failed to comply with these

provisions. If failure to comply with these

provisions is determined to be inadvertent,

and the optional units are combined into a

basic unit, that portion of the additional

premium paid for the optional units that

have been combined will be refunded to you;

(3) All optional units you selected for the

crop year must be identified on the acreage

report for that crop year;

(4) The following requirements must be

met for each optional unit:

(i) You must have records, which can be

independently verified, of planted acreage

and production for each optional unit for at

least the last crop year used to determine

your production guarantee;

(ii) You must plant the crop in a manner

that results in a clear and discernible break

in the planting pattern at the boundaries of

each optional unit; and

(iii) You must maintain records of

marketed production from each optional unit

maintained in such a manner that permits us

to verify the production from each optional

unit, or the production from each unit must

be kept separate until loss adjustment is

completed by us; and

(5) Each optional unit must meet one or

more of the following criteria, as applicable,

unless otherwise specified by written

agreement:

(i) Optional Units by Section, Section

Equivalent, or FSA Farm Serial Number:

Optional units may be established if each

optional unit is located in a separate legally

identified section. In the absence of sections,

we may consider parcels of land legally

identified by other methods of measure, such

as Spanish grants, as the equivalent of

sections for unit purposes. In areas that have

not been surveyed using sections or their

equivalent systems or in areas where such

systems exist but boundaries are not readily

discernible, each optional unit must be

located in a separate farm identified by a

single FSA Farm Serial Number.

(ii) Optional Units on Acreage Including

Both Irrigated and Non-Irrigated Practices:

Optional units may be based on irrigated

acreage and non-irrigated acreage if both are

located in the same section, section

equivalent, or FSA Farm Serial Number. To

qualify as separate irrigated and non-irrigated

optional units, the non-irrigated acreage may

not continue into the irrigated acreage in the

same rows or planting pattern. The irrigated

acreage may not extend beyond the point at

which the irrigation system can deliver the

quantity of water needed to produce the yield

on which the guarantee is based, except the

corners of a field in which a center-pivot

irrigation system is used will be considered

as irrigated acreage if separate acceptable

records of production from the corners are

not provided. If the corners of a field in

which a center-pivot irrigation system is used

do not qualify as a separate non-irrigated

optional unit, they will be a part of the unit

containing the irrigated acreage. Nonirrigated acreage that is not a part of a field

in which a center-pivot irrigation system is

used may qualify as a separate optional unit

provided that all requirements of this section

are met.

(iii) Optional Units on Acreage Including

Both Shell Type Green Peas and Pod Type

Green Peas: Optional units may be

established based on shell type green peas

and pod type green peas. To qualify as

separate shell type and pod type optional

units, the shell type acreage may not

continue into the pod type acreage in the

same rows or planting pattern.

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

for all the green peas in the county insured

under this policy unless the Special

Provisions provide different price elections

by type. The percentage of the maximum

price election you choose for one type will

be applicable to all other types insured under

this policy.

(b) The appraised production from

bypassed acreage that could have been

accepted by the processor will be included

when determining your approved yield.

(c) Acreage that is bypassed because it was

damaged by an insurable cause of loss will

be considered to have a zero yield when

determining your approved yield.

4. Contract Changes.

In accordance with section 4 of the Basic

Provisions, the contract change date is

November 30 preceding the cancellation

date.

5. Cancellation and Termination Dates.

In accordance with section 2 of the Basic

Provisions, the cancellation and termination

dates are:
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 224 / Thursday, November 20, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 61905

CANCELLATION AND TERMINATION

State Dates

Delaware and Maryland .............. Feb. 15.

All other states ............................ Mar. 15.

6. Report of Acreage.

In addition to the provisions of section 6

of the Basic Provisions, you must provide a

copy of all processor contracts to us on or

before the acreage reporting date.

7. Insured Crop.

(a) In accordance with section 8 of the

Basic Provisions, the crop insured will be all

the shell type and pod type green peas in the

county for which a premium rate is provided

by the actuarial documents:

(1) In which you have a share;

(2) That are grown under, and in

accordance with, the requirements of a

processor contract executed on or before the

acreage reporting date and are not excluded

from the processor contract at any time

during the crop year; and

(3) That are not (unless allowed by the

Special Provisions or by written agreement):

(i) Interplanted with another crop;

(ii) Planted into an established grass or

legume; or

(iii) Planted as a nurse crop.

(b) You will be considered to have a share

in the insured crop if, under the processor

contract, you retain control of the acreage on

which the green peas are grown, you are at

risk of loss, and the processor contract

provides for delivery of green peas under

specified conditions and at a stipulated base

contract price.

(c) A commercial green pea producer who

is also a processor may establish an insurable

interest if the following requirements are

met:

(1) The producer must comply with these

Crop Provisions;

(2) Prior to the sales closing date, the Board

of Directors or officers of the processor must

execute and adopt a resolution that contains

the same terms as an acceptable processor

contract. Such resolution will be considered

a processor contract under this policy; and

(3) Our inspection reveals that the

processing facilities comply with the

definition of a processor contained in these

Crop Provisions.

8. Insurable Acreage.

In addition to the provisions of section 9

of the Basic Provisions:

(a) Any acreage of the insured crop that is

damaged before the final planting date, to the

extent that the majority of producers in the

area would normally not further care for the

crop, must be replanted unless we agree that

it is not practical to replant; and

(b) We will not insure any acreage that

does not meet the rotation requirements, if

applicable, contained in the Special

Provisions.

9. Insurance Period.

In lieu of the provisions contained in

section 11 of the Basic Provisions, regarding

the end of the insurance period, insurance

ceases at the earlier of:

(a) The date the green peas:

(1) Were destroyed;

(2) Should have been harvested but were

not harvested;

(3) Were abandoned; or

(4) Were harvested;

(b) The date you harvest sufficient

production to fulfill your processor contract

if the processor contract stipulates a specific

amount of production to be delivered;

(c) Final adjustment of a loss; or

(d) September 15 of the calendar year in

which the insured green peas would

normally be harvested; or

(e) September 30 of the calendar year in

which the insured peas would normally be

harvested if you provide notice to us that the

insured crop will be harvested as dry peas

(see section 11(d)).

10. Causes of Loss.

In accordance with the provisions of

section 12 of the Basic Provisions:

(a) Insurance is provided only against the

following causes of loss that occur during the

insurance period:

(1) Adverse weather conditions, including:

(i) Excessive moisture that prevents

harvesting equipment from entering the field

or that prevents the timely operation of

harvesting equipment; and

(ii) Abnormally hot or cold temperatures

that cause an unexpected number of acres

over a large producing area to be ready for

harvest at the same time, affecting the timely

harvest of a large number of such acres or the

processing of such production is beyond the

capacity of the processor, either of which

causes the acreage to be bypassed.

(2) Fire;

(3) Insects, but not damage due to

insufficient or improper application of pest

control measures;

(4) Plant disease but only on acreage not

planted to peas the previous crop year. (In

certain instances, contained in the Special

Provisions or in a written agreement, acreage

planted to peas the previous year may be

covered. Damage due to insufficient or

improper application of disease control

measures is not covered);

(5) Wildlife;

(6) Earthquake;

(7) Volcanic eruption; or

(8) Failure of the irrigation water supply,

if due to a cause of loss contained in section

10(a)(1) through (7) that occurs during the

insurance period.

(b) In addition to the causes of loss

excluded by section 12 of the Basic

Provisions, we will not insure any loss of

production due to:

(1) Bypassed acreage because of:

(i) The breakdown or non-operation of

equipment or facilities; or

(ii) The availability of a crop insurance

payment. We may deny any indemnity

immediately in such circumstance or, if an

indemnity has been paid, require you to

repay it to us with interest at any time

acreage was bypassed due to the availability

of a crop insurance payment or;

(2) Your failure to follow the requirements

contained in the processor contract.

11. Duties In The Event of Damage or Loss.

In addition to the notices required by

section 14 of the Basic Provisions, you must

give us notice:

(a) Not later than 48 hours after:

(1) Total destruction of the green peas on

the unit; or

(2) Discontinuance of harvest on a unit on

which unharvested production remains.

(b) Within 3 days after the date harvest

should have started on any acreage that will

not be harvested unless we have previously

released the acreage. You must also provide

acceptable documentation of the reason the

acreage was bypassed. Failure to provide

such documentation will result in our

determination that the acreage was bypassed

due to an uninsured cause of loss. If the crop

will not be harvested and you wish to destroy

the crop, you must leave representative

samples of the unharvested crop for our

inspection. The samples must be at least 10

feet wide and extend the entire length of each

field in each unit. The samples must not be

destroyed until the earlier of our inspection

or 15 days after notice is given to us;

(c) At least 15 days prior to the beginning

of harvest if you intend to claim an

indemnity on any unit, or immediately if

damage is discovered during the 15 day

period or during harvest, so that we may

inspect any damaged production. If you fail

to notify us and such failure results in our

inability to inspect the damaged production,

we will consider all such production to be

undamaged and include it as production to

count. You are not required to delay harvest;

and

(d) Prior to the time the green peas would

normally be harvested if you intend to

harvest the green peas as dry peas.

12. Settlement of Claim.

(a) We will determine your loss on a unit

basis. In the event you are unable to provide

separate, acceptable production records:

(1) For any optional units, we will combine

all optional units for which such production

records were not provided; or

(2) For any basic units, we will allocate any

commingled production to such units in

proportion to our liability on the harvested

acreage for the units.

(b) In the event of loss or damage covered

by this policy, we will settle your claim by:

(1) Multiplying the insured acreage by its

respective production guarantee, by type if

applicable;

(2) Multiplying each result of section

12(b)(1) by the respective price election, by

type if applicable;

(3) Totaling the results of section 12(b)(2)

if there are more than one type;

(4) Multiplying the total production to

count (see section 12(c)), for each type if

applicable, by its respective price election;

(5) Totaling the results of section 12(b)(4)

if there are more than one type;

(6) Subtracting the results of section

12(b)(4) from the results of section 12(b)(2) if

there is only one type or subtracting the

results of section 12(b)(5) from the result of

section 12(b)(3) if there are more than one

type; and

(7) Multiplying the result of section

12(b)(6) by your share.

For example:

You have a 100 percent share in 100 acres

of shell type green peas in the unit, with a

guarantee of 4,000 pounds per acre and a

price election of $0.09 per pound. You are
61906 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 224 / Thursday, November 20, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

only able to harvest 200,000 pounds. Your

indemnity would be calculated as follows:

(1) 100 acres × 4,000 pounds = 400,000

pounds guarantee;

(2) 400,000 pounds × $0.09 price election =

$36,000.00 value of guarantee;

(4) 200,000 pounds × $0.09 price election =

$18,000.00 value of production to count;

(6) $36,000.00 ¥ $18,000.00 = $18,000.00

loss; and

(7) $18,000.00 × 100 percent = $18,000.00

indemnity payment.

You also have a 100 percent share in 100

acres of pod type green peas in the same unit,

with a guarantee of 5,000 pounds per acre

and a price election of $0.13 per pound. You

are only able to harvest 450,000 pounds.

Your total indemnity for both shell type and

pod type green peas would be calculated as

follows:

(1) 100 acres × 4,000 pounds = 400,000

pounds guarantee for the shell type, and

100 acres × 5,000 pounds = 500,000

pounds guarantee for the pod type;

(2) 400,000 pounds guarantee × $0.09 price

election = $36,000.00 value of guarantee

for the shell type, and 500,000 pounds

guarantee × $0.13 price election =

$65,000.00 value of guarantee for the pod

type;

(3) $36,000.00 + $65,000.00 = $101,000.00

total value of guarantee;

(4) 200,000 pounds × $0.09 price election =

$18,000.00 value of production to count

for the shell type, and

450,000 pounds × $0.13 = $58,500.00 value

of production to count for the pod type;

(5) $18,000.00 + $58,500.00 = $76,500.00

total value of production to count;

(6) $101,000.00 ¥ $76,500.00 = $24,500.00

loss; and

(7) $24,500.00 loss × 100 percent =

$24,500.00 indemnity payment.

(c) The total production to count, specified

in pounds, from all insurable acreage on the

unit will include:

(1) All appraised production as follows:

(i) Not less than the production guarantee

for acreage:

(A) That is abandoned;

(B) That is put to another use without our

consent;

(C) That is damaged solely by uninsured

causes or;

(D) For which you fail to provide

production records that are acceptable to us.

(ii) Production lost due to uninsured

causes.

(iii) Production on acreage that is bypassed

unless the acreage was bypassed due to an

insured cause of loss which resulted in

production which would not be acceptable

under the terms of the processor contract.

(iv) Potential production on insured

acreage that you intend to put to another use

or abandon, if you and we agree on the

appraised amount of production. Upon such

agreement, the insurance period for that

acreage will end when you put the acreage

to another use or abandon the crop. If

agreement on the appraised amount of

production is not reached:

(A) If you do not elect to continue to care

for the crop, we may give you consent to put

the acreage to another use if you agree to

leave intact, and provide sufficient care for,

representative samples of the crop in

locations acceptable to us (The amount of

production to count for such acreage will be

based on the harvested production or

appraisals from the samples at the time

harvest should have occurred. If you do not

leave the required samples intact, or fail to

provide sufficient care for the samples, our

appraisal made prior to giving you consent to

put the acreage to another use will be used

to determine the amount of production to

count); or

(B) If you elect to continue to care for the

crop, the amount of production to count for

the acreage will be the harvested production,

or our reappraisal if additional damage

occurs and the crop is not harvested.

(2) All harvested green pea production

from the insurable acreage. The amount of

such production will be determined by

dividing the dollar amount paid, payable, or

which should have been paid under the

terms of the processor contract for the quality

and quantity of the peas delivered to the

processor by the base contract price per

pound;

(3) All harvested green pea production

from any of your other insurable units that

have been used to fulfill your processor

contract for this unit; and

(4) All dry pea production from the

insurable acreage if you gave notice in

accordance with section 11(d) for any acreage

you intended to harvest as dry peas. The

harvested or appraised dry pea production

will be multiplied by 1.667 for shell types

and 3.000 for pod types to determine the

green pea production equivalent. No

adjustment for quality deficiencies will be

allowed for dry pea production.

13. Late and Prevented Planting.

Late planting provisions are not applicable

to green peas unless allowed by the Special

Provisions and you provide written approval

from the processor by the acreage reporting

date that it will accept the production from

the late planted acres when it is expected to

be ready for harvest. Prevented planting

coverage will be available if contained in the

Basic Provisions.

14. Written Agreement.

Terms of this policy that are specifically

designated for the use of written agreements

may be altered by written agreement in

accordance with the following:

(a) You must apply in writing for each

written agreement no later than the sales

closing date, except as provided in section

14(e);

(b) The application for a written agreement

must contain all variable terms of the

contract between you and us that will be in

effect if the written agreement is not

approved;

(c) If approved, the written agreement will

include all variable terms of the contract,

including, but not limited to, crop type or

variety, the guarantee, premium rate, and

price election;

(d) Each written agreement will only be

valid for one year (if the written agreement

is not specifically renewed the following

year, insurance coverage for subsequent crop

years will be in accordance with the printed

policy); and

(e) An application for a written agreement

submitted after the sales closing date may be

approved if, after a physical inspection of the

acreage, it is determined that no loss has

occurred and the crop is insurable in

accordance with the policy and written

agreement provisions.

Signed in Washington, D.C., on October 23,

1997.

Kenneth D. Ackerman,

Manager, Federal Crop Insurance

Corporation.

[FR Doc. 97–30514 Filed 11–19–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410–08–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 23

[Docket No. 141CE, Special Condition 23–

ACE–92]

Special Conditions; Cessna Model 525

Citation Jet Airplane

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final special conditions; request

for comments.

SUMMARY: These special conditions are

issued to Rockwell Collins, Inc., 400

Collins Road NE, Cedar Rapids, Iowa

52498 for a Supplemental Type

Certificate (STC) on the Cessna Model

525 Citation Jet airplane. This airplane

will have novel and unusual design

features when compared to the state of

technology envisaged in the applicable

airworthiness standards. These novel

and unusual design features include the

installation of electronic displays for

which the applicable regulations do not

contain adequate or appropriate

airworthiness standards for the

protection of these systems from the

effects of high intensity radiated fields

(HIRF). These special conditions

contain the additional safety standards

that the Administrator considers

necessary to establish a level of safety

equivalent to the airworthiness

standards applicable to these airplanes.

EFFECTIVE DATE: The effective date of

these special conditions is November

20, 1997. Comments must be received

on or before December 22, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Comments may be mailed

in duplicate to: Federal Aviation

Administration, Office of the Assistant

Chief Counsel, ACE–7, Attention: Rules

Docket Clerk, Docket No. 141CE, Room

1558, 601 East 12th Street, Kansas City,

Missouri 64106. All comments must be

marked: Docket No. 141CE. Comments

may be inspected in the Rules Docket