Opinion ID: 493940
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: issues

Text: 6 We are confronted in this case with a narrow and specific question of statutory construction. As noted above, subsection (C) of sections 1444d(b)(2) and 1445b-1(b)(2) of the 1981 Agriculture Act provides that farmers shall not be eligible for mandatory disaster payments if crop insurance is available to them under the Federal Crop Insurance Act with respect to their feed grain [or wheat] acreage (citation omitted). We are asked to decide whether this statutory language renders those South Dakota farmers who were prevented by spring floods from planting their 1984 wheat and feed grain crops ineligible for mandatory disaster payments because all-risk crop insurance was offered for sale during that same year throughout the state of South Dakota. To answer this, we must first determine the proper interpretation of the term available in subsection (C) of sections 1444d(b)(2) and 1445b-1(b)(2). 7 In essence, the Secretary interprets the term available to mean the offering for sale of any type of crop insurance in the farmers' home county, regardless of whether the insurance offered covered the farmers' losses. The Secretary maintains that because the government offered some type of crop insurance to the appellant South Dakota farmers who experienced prevented planting losses in 1984, crop insurance was available to them under the meaning of subsection (C) of sections 1444d(b)(2) and 1445b-1(b)(2), even though that insurance, all-risk crop insurance, did not cover appellants' losses resulting from their inability to plant their crops due to a natural disaster. The Secretary thus concludes that the appellant farmers are ineligible for the mandatory disaster payments provided to farmers suffering prevented planting losses under subsection (A) of sections 1444d(b)(2) and 1445b-1(b)(2). 8 The farmers interpret the term available more narrowly to mean the government's offer for sale in the farmers' home county of a type of crop insurance that actually covered the risk causing their losses. Specifically, the farmers assert that because the crop insurance offered for sale in South Dakota in 1984--all-risk crop insurance--did not cover the risk of a natural disaster preventing them from planting their crops, crop insurance was not available to them under the meaning of subsection (C) of sections 1444d(b)(2) and 1445b-1(b)(2). The farmers recognize that specific risk insurance, which would have covered their losses, was authorized by Congress in the 1980 amendments to the Federal Crop Insurance Act. They argue, however, that because this type of insurance was not offered for sale in any South Dakota county in 1984, it was also not available to them under the meaning of subsection (C). Accordingly, the farmers argue that, because no crop insurance was available to them, they are eligible for the mandatory disaster payments provided for prevented planting losses under subsection (A) of sections 1444d(b)(2) and 1445b-1(b)(2). 9 We conclude, after careful study, that the Secretary's interpretation is not consistent with either the language or the legislative history of the 1981 Agriculture Act. 10