6138 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 28 / Tuesday, February 11, 1997 / Proposed Rules

pruning debris has not been removed from

the orchard;

(4) Wildlife;

(5) Earthquake;

(6) Volcanic eruption;

(7) An insufficient number of chilling

hours to effectively break dormancy; or

(8) Failure of the irrigation water supply,

if caused by an insured peril that occurs

during the insurance period.

(b) In addition to the causes of loss

excluded in section 12 (Causes of Loss) of the

Basic Provisions (§ 457.8), we will not insure

against damage or loss of production due to:

(1) Disease or insect infestation, unless

adverse weather:

(i) Prevents the proper application of

control measures or causes properly applied

control measures to be ineffective; or

(ii) Causes disease or insect infestation for

which no effective control mechanism is

available;

(2) Rejection of the crop by the packing

house due to being undersized, immature,

overripe, or mechanically damaged; or

(3) Inability to market the plums for any

reason other than actual physical damage

from an insurable cause 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.

10. Duties In The Event of Damage or Loss.

In addition to the requirements of section

14 (Duties in the Event of Damage or Loss)

of the Basic Provisions (§ 457.8), the

following will apply:

(a) You must notify us within 3 days of the

date harvest should have started if the crop

will not be harvested.

(b) You must notify us at least 15 days

before any production from any unit will be

sold by direct marketing. We will conduct an

appraisal that will be used to determine your

production to count for production that is

sold by direct marketing. If damage occurs

after this appraisal, we will conduct an

additional appraisal. These appraisals, and

any acceptable records provided by you, will

be used to determine your production to

count. Failure to give timely notice that

production will be sold by direct marketing

will result in an appraised amount of

production to count of not less than the

production guarantee per acre if such failure

results in our inability to make the required

appraisal.

(c) 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

immediately if damage is discovered during

harvest, so that we may inspect the damaged

production.

(d) 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 notify

us and such failure results in our inability to

inspect the damaged production, we may

consider all such production to be

undamaged and include it as production to

count.

11. 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 acceptable

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 for

each varietal group, if applicable, by its

respective production guarantee;

(2) Multiplying the results in section

11(b)(1) by the respective price election for

each varietal group, if applicable;

(3) Totaling the results in section 11(b)(2);

(4) Multiplying the total production to be

counted of each varietal group, if applicable,

(see section 11(c)) by the respective price

election;

(5) Totaling the results in section 11(b)(4);

(6) Subtracting the results in section

11(b)(5) from the results in section 11 (b)(3);

and

(7) Multiplying the result in section

11(b)(6) by your share.

(c) The total production to count (in lugs)

from all insurable acreage on the unit will

include:

(1) All appraised production as follows:

(i) Not less than the production guarantee

per acre for acreage:

(A) That is abandoned;

(B) That is sold by direct marketing

directly if you fail to meet the requirement

contained in section 10;

(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) Unharvested production; and

(iv) Potential production on insured

acreage that you intend to abandon or no

longer care for, if you and we agree on the

appraised amount of production. Upon such

agreement, the insurance period for that

acreage will end. If you do not agree with our

appraisal, we may defer the claim only if you

agree to continue to care for the crop. We will

then make another appraisal when you notify

us of further damage or that harvest is general

in the area unless you harvested the crop, in

which case we will use the harvested

production. If you do not continue to care for

the crop, our appraisal made prior to

deferring the claim will be used to determine

the production to count; and

(2) All harvested production from the

insurable acreage:

(i) That is packed and sold as fresh fruit

and meets the California Marketing Order

grade requirements, as amended, in effect for

the applicable crop year;

(ii) That is packed and sold as fresh fruit

but does not meet the grade requirements

specified in section 11(c)(2)(i) due to

insurable causes. Such production will be

adjusted by:

(A) Dividing the value per lug of this

production by the highest price election

available for the applicable varietal group;

and

(B) Multiplying the resulting factor, if less

than 1.0, by the number of lugs of such

plums.

(iii) That is damaged and is, or could be,

marketed for any use other than fresh packed

plums. Such production will be adjusted by:

(A) Multiplying the number of tons of such

production by the value per ton of the

damaged plums or $50.00, whichever is

greater; and

(B) Dividing that result by the highest price

election available for the applicable varietal

group.

12. Written agreement.

Designated terms of this policy 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

12(e);

(b) The application for a written agreement

must contain all 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 variety,

the guarantee, premium rate, and price

election;

(d) Each 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 written agreement

submitted after the sales closing date may be

approved if, after 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, DC, on February 6,

1997.

Kenneth D. Ackerman,

Manager, Federal Crop Insurance

Corporation.

[FR Doc. 97–3330 Filed 2–10–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410–FA–P

Agricultural Marketing Service

7 CFR Part 980

[Docket No. FV96–980–1 PR]

Vegetables; Import Regulations;

Reopening of Comment Period for

Filing Written Comments on Removal

of Banana and Fingerling Types of

Potatoes and Exemption of Potatoes

for Potato Salad From the Potato

Import Regulation

AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service,

USDA.

ACTION: Proposed rule; reopening

comment period.

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that

the comment period on the proposed

removal of banana and fingerling types

of potatoes and exemption of potatoes

for potato salad from the potato import
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 28 / Tuesday, February 11, 1997 / Proposed Rules 6139

1Although currently the range of risk-based

assessments for BIF-assessable and SAIF-assessable

deposits is the same, a higher assessment payable

to the Financing Corporation must be paid on SAIFassessable deposits. Thus, the overall assessment is

higher for SAIF-assessable deposits than for BIFassessable deposits.

regulation is reopened until March 13,

1997.

DATES: Comments must be received by

March 13, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Interested persons are

invited to submit written comments

concerning this proposal. Comments

must be sent in triplicate to the Docket

Clerk, Fruit and Vegetable Division,

AMS, USDA, room 2525–S, P.O. Box

96456, Washington, DC 20090–6456,

Fax Number (202) 720–5698. All

comments should reference the docket

number and the date and page number

of this issue of the Federal Register and

will be available for public inspection in

the Office of the Docket Clerk during

regular business hours.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tom

Tichenor, Marketing Order

Administration Branch, F&V, AMS,

USDA, room 2525–S, P.O. Box 96456,

Washington, DC 20090–6456: telephone:

(202) 720–6862. Small businesses may

request information on compliance with

this proposed regulation by contacting:

Jay Guerber, Marketing Order

Information Branch, Fruit and Vegetable

Division, AMS, USDA, P.O. Box 96456,

room 2525–S, Washington, DC 20090–

6456; telephone: (202) 720–2491; Fax

number: (202) 720–5698.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A

proposed rule was issued on December

23, 1996, and published in the Federal

Register (61 FR 67499). The proposed

rule would: (1) Remove banana/

fingerling potatoes from provisions of

the potato import regulation (import

regulation) and; (2) reclassify potatoes

used to make fresh potato salad as

potatoes for processing. The comment

period ended January 22, 1997.

The National Potato Council (Council)

requested that additional time be

provided for interested persons to

analyze the proposed rule. The Council

stated that members of the industry

need additional time to review all

available information before making

final comments on the proposed rule.

Reopening the comment period to

March 13, 1997, would allow the

Council and other interested persons

more time to review the proposed rule,

perform a more complete analysis, and

submit any written comments.

This delay should not substantially

add to the time required to complete

this rulemaking action. Accordingly, the

period in which to file written

comments is reopened until March 13,

1997. This notice is issued pursuant to

the Agricultural Marketing Agreement

Act of 1937.

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 601–674.

Dated: February 5, 1997.

Robert C. Keeney,

Director, Fruit and Vegetable Division.

[FR Doc. 97–3285 Filed 2–10–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410–02–P

FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE

CORPORATION

12 CFR Part 312

RIN 3064–AC01

Prevention of Deposit Shifting

AGENCY: Federal Deposit Insurance

Corporation (FDIC).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: The proposed rule would

implement a new statute to prevent the

shifting of deposits insured under the

Savings Association Insurance Fund

(SAIF) to deposits insured under the

Bank Insurance Fund (BIF) for the

purpose of evading the assessment rates

applicable to SAIF deposits.

DATES: Written comments must be

received by the FDIC on or before April

14, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Written comments are to be

addressed to the Office of the Executive

Secretary, Federal Deposit Insurance

Corporation, 550 17th Street, NW.,

Washington, DC 20429. Comments may

be hand-delivered to Room F–402, 1776

F Street, NW., Washington, DC 20429,

on business days between 8:30 a.m. and

5 p.m. (FAX number: (202) 898–3838;

Internet address: comments@FDIC.gov).

Comments will be available for

inspection in the FDIC Public

Information Center, room 100, 801 17th

Street, NW., Washington, DC, between

9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. on business

days.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Joseph A. DiNuzzo, Counsel, (202) 898–

7349; Richard J. Osterman, Senior

Counsel, (202) 898–3523, Legal

Division; or George Hanc, Associate

Director, Division of Research and

Statistics, (202) 898-8719, Federal

Deposit Insurance Corporation,

Washington, DC 20429.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. The Proposed Rule

A. The Funds Act and the Deposit

Shifting Statute

The Deposit Insurance Funds Act of

1996 (Funds Act) was enacted as part of

the Economic Growth and Regulatory

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1996,

Public Law 104–208, 110 Stat. 3009 et

seq., sections 2701–2711, and became

effective September 30, 1996. The

Funds Act provides for the

capitalization of the SAIF through a

special assessment on all depository

institutions that hold SAIF-assessable

deposits. Pursuant to this requirement,

the FDIC recently issued a final rule

imposing a special assessment on

institutions holding SAIF-assessable

deposits in an amount sufficient to

increase the SAIF reserve ratio (SAIF

reserve ratio) to the designated reserve

ratio (DRR) of 1.25 percent as of October

1, 1996. 61 FR 53834 (Oct. 16, 1996), to

be codified at 12 CFR 327.41.

Another provision of the Funds Act,

entitled ‘‘Prohibition on Deposit

Shifting’’ (deposit shifting statute),

requires the Comptroller of the

Currency, the Board of Directors of the

FDIC, the Board of Governors of the

Federal Reserve System, and the

Director of the Office of Thrift

Supervision (federal banking agencies)

to take ‘‘appropriate actions’’ to prevent

insured depository institutions and

holding companies from ‘‘facilitating or

encouraging’’ the shifting of deposits

from SAIF-assessable deposits to BIFassessable deposits for the purpose of

evading the assessments applicable to

SAIF-assessable deposits.1 Funds Act,

section 2703(d). The ‘‘appropriate

actions’’ suggested in the deposit

shifting statute are: denial of

applications, enforcement actions and

the imposition of entrance and exit fees.

The statute also specifies that its

provisions shall not be construed to

prohibit conduct or activity by any

insured depository institution that is

undertaken in the ‘‘ordinary course of

business’’ and is not directed towards

depositors of an insured depository

institution affiliate of the insured

institution.

The statute authorizes the FDIC to

issue regulations, including regulations

defining terms used in the statute, to

prevent the shifting of deposits. The

deposit shifting statute terminates on

the earlier of December 31, 1999, or the

date on which the last savings

association ceases to exist.

B. Need for a Regulation on Deposit

Shifting

The issuance of a regulation would

provide guidance to the industry on the

meaning and impact of the deposit

shifting statute. This is particularly

important in light of the relationship of

the deposit shifting statute to section