[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 26 (Thursday, February 7, 2008)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 7190-7199]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-2190]



[[Page 7190]]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Federal Crop Insurance Corporation

7 CFR Part 457

RIN 0563-AC01


Common Crop Insurance Regulations; Florida Citrus Fruit Crop 
Provisions

AGENCY: Federal Crop Insurance Corporation, USDA.

ACTION: Final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Federal Crop Insurance Corporation (FCIC) finalizes the 
Florida Citrus Fruit Crop Provisions. The intended effect of this 
action is to restrict the effect of the current Florida Citrus Fruit 
Crop Insurance Provisions to the 2008 and prior crop years and replace 
with new crop provisions to better meet the needs of the insured 
producers. The changes will apply for the 2009 and succeeding crop 
years.

DATES: Effective Date: March 10, 2008.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: William Klein, Risk Management, 
Specialist, Product Management, Product Administration and Standards 
Division, Risk Management Agency, United States Department of 
Agriculture, 6501 Beacon Drive, Stop 0812, Room 421, Kansas City, MO 
64133-4676, telephone (816) 926-7730.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Executive Order 12866

    This rule has been determined to be non-significant for the 
purposes of Executive Order 12866 and, therefore, it has not been 
reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB).

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

    Pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. chapter 
35), the collections of information in this rule have been approved by 
OMB under control number 0563-0053 through June 30, 2008.

E-Government Act Compliance

    FCIC is committed to complying with the E-Government Act, 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.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

    FCIC certifies that this regulation will not have a significant 
economic impact 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, or a notice of loss and production information to 
determine 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 
small entities are given the same opportunities to manage their risks 
through the use of crop insurance. A Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 
has not been prepared since this regulation does not have an impact on 
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.

Executive Order 12372

    This program is not subject to the provisions of Executive Order 
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 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 
under the terms of the crop insurance policy, the administrative appeal 
provisions published at 7 CFR part 11 must be exhausted before any 
action for judicial review of any determination or action by FCIC 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.

Background

    On October 13, 2006, FCIC published a notice of proposed rulemaking 
in the Federal Register at 71 FR 60439-60444 to revise 7 CFR Sec.  
457.107 Florida Citrus Fruit Crop Insurance Provisions. Following 
publication of the proposed rule, the public was afforded 60 days to 
submit written comments and opinions. Five sets of comments, for a 
total of 52 comments, were received from insurance providers, trade 
associations, an insurance service organization, and other interested 
parties. The comments received and FCIC's responses are as follows:
    Comment: An insurance service organization and an insurance 
provider commented that while it was not specifically mentioned in the 
proposed rule, the preamble should be deleted in the typeset policy, as 
in other recently revised policies, since the order of priority is 
covered in the Basic Provisions.
    Response: FCIC agrees with the commenter and will remove the 
preamble containing the order of priority when the Florida Citrus Fruit 
policy is issued.
    Comment: An insurance service organization and an insurance 
provider commented that the new terms in the definitions section, 
``Citrus fruit crop'' and ``citrus fruit crop type (fruit type),'' both 
contain the words ``citrus fruit.'' They further commented that FCIC 
should consider if the term ``citrus fruit'' or even ``marketable 
citrus fruit'' should be defined.

[[Page 7191]]

    Response: The policy specifically lists certain fruits designated 
as citrus fruits, and contained within a citrus fruit crop, such as 
early and mid-season oranges, grapefruit, tangelos and tangerines, etc. 
The reference to citrus fruit in such definition is to designate 
separate fruit and, as appropriate, to allow other types of fruit to be 
specified in the Special Provisions as a new citrus fruit crop or 
within an existing citrus fruit crop. Further, since citrus fruit is a 
common term, it will be given in common meaning. However, the insurable 
citrus fruit will be determined in accordance with the policy 
provisions. With respect to the term ``marketable citrus fruit,'' like 
many other fruit crops, it is not solely a grading standard or single 
criterion that determines whether the crop is marketable. It depends on 
a variety of factors that may change. Therefore, it is not practical to 
define the term. Instead, FCIC has included criteria in section 10 that 
will be used to determine whether the citrus fruit is marketable. 
Therefore, no change has been made.
    Comment: An insurance service organization noted that FCIC added a 
new definition, ``fruit type,'' in the proposed rule. They questioned 
if there would ever be more than one kind of citrus fruit within a 
fruit type.
    Response: FCIC redesignated the former ``citrus fruit type'' as 
``citrus fruit crop,'' and the different fruit within a crop as 
``citrus fruit types'' for clarity. For example, citrus fruit crop 
includes Citrus I, Citrus II, Citrus III, etc. Citrus fruit types for 
such citrus fruit crops would include early and mid-season oranges for 
Citrus I, late season oranges for Citrus II, and grapefruit for Citrus 
III, etc. At this time, there is no further subdivision of citrus fruit 
types and no current plans to further subdivide citrus fruit types.
    Comment: An insurance service organization commented they were 
concerned about the addition of the new item (9) under the definition 
``citrus fruit crop'' in section 1, allowing coverage for, ``Any other 
citrus fruit crop designated in the Special Provisions.'' They 
expressed their concern with this proposed additional crop, citing 
existing difficulties with a similar catch-all category of grapes in 
California. They requested the opportunity to work closely with the 
applicable RMA Regional Office in any proposed development of such 
additional citrus fruit crops before they are added in the Special 
Provisions. In addition, if this catch-all category is added, they 
questioned whether it would be identified as ``Citrus IX'' to be 
consistent with the other ``crop'' numbers, or would there be multiple 
additional citrus fruit crops added in the Special Provisions. The 
commenter also questioned how the crop or crops will be identified for 
data processing purposes and how many there might end up being.
    Response: FCIC agrees with the commenter regarding a prefix of 
``Citrus IX'' for ``Any other fruit crop designated in the Special 
Provisions,'' and has revised the provision accordingly. Given the 
constant changes in agriculture and the development of new types and 
varieties, having a category that would allow other citrus fruit crops 
to be added in the Special Provisions provides the flexibility to 
quickly provide insurance for a particular citrus fruit in the future, 
if warranted. RMA will work with Regional Offices and insurance 
providers when making a decision on adding any citrus fruit crop to the 
Special Provisions. If fruit crops are added in the future, they may or 
may not contain more than one fruit type depending on the fruit crop to 
be insured. However, if they contain more than one citrus fruit type, 
they will be identified for data processing purposes in the same manner 
as current citrus fruit crops containing multiple citrus fruit types. 
At this time, FCIC has no plans to add another citrus fruit crop to the 
Special Provisions.
    Comment: An insurance service organization and an insurance 
provider recommended RMA include a list, in the Special Provision, of 
the citrus varieties that fall under the citrus ``crops'' and more 
specifically under crop types i.e., early, mid-season and late oranges, 
because while the varieties may be known in the citrus industry they 
may not be as well known by crop insurance agents and adjusters.
    Response: The insurable citrus fruit crops and fruit types are 
identified in the definitions section and in the Special Provisions. 
FCIC does not require reporting down to the variety level. Further, 
when a new orange variety is developed it is categorized by the 
Cooperate State Research Education and Extension Service as early, mid-
season or late-season. This information is made available to the 
industry, i.e. growers, buyers, trade associations, the extension 
service, and Florida Agricultural Statistics Service (FASS). Therefore, 
no change is made.
    Comment: An insurance service organization recommended FCIC 
consider deleting ``crop'' in the new definition ``Citrus fruit crop 
type (fruit type).'' They suggest it would be less confusing if it were 
changed to ``Citrus fruit type.'' They further asked that FCIC consider 
replacing the last phrase ``* * * shown as Roman Numerals I through 
VIII'' with the words, ``* * * defined above.''
    Response: The commenter is correct that the term ``citrus fruit 
type'' is less confusing and revised the provision accordingly. The 
definition also makes it clear that the citrus fruit type is one of the 
citrus fruit listed in the Special Provisions or in the definition of 
citrus fruit crop.
    Comment: An insurance service organization and an insurance 
provider recommended adding the term ``Marketable citrus fruit'' since 
it is used throughout the crop provisions.
    Response: Marketability is situational based on damage to the fruit 
and whether the fruit is to be utilized as fresh fruit or juice. 
Further, the marketable standards may be different for the different 
categories defined as a ``citrus fruit crop.'' Therefore, it would be 
difficult to create a single definition. It makes more sense to specify 
the criteria used to make such determinations of marketability in 
section 10, pertaining to the settlement of the claims. No change has 
been made.
    Comment: An insurance service organization and an insurance 
provider expressed concern with the way the definition ``Potential 
production'' is written. They believe that item number (3) under 
``Including citrus fruit'' which addresses citrus fruit ``* * * lost or 
damaged from either an insured or uninsured cause'' could result in 
confusion due to items shown under ``But not including citrus fruit.'' 
In particular, they cite under ``But not including citrus fruit'' item 
(1) ``Was lost before insurance attached for any crop year'' and item 
(2) ``Was lost by normal dropping * * *.'' They believe these two could 
be considered contradictory compared to item (3) under ``Including 
citrus fruit,'' ``Was lost or damaged from either an insured or 
uninsured cause * * *.'' They suggested adding the language ``* * * 
except as excluded below'' to item (3) under ``Including citrus 
fruit,''
    Response: Including both the reference to production lost or 
damaged due to uninsured causes as ``potential production'' appears 
contradictory to those provisions that are not included as ``potential 
production,'' such as production lost before the insurance attached or 
normal dropping, which are also uninsured causes. The suggested change 
should help clarify when such production is included as ``potential 
production'' and when it is not. Therefore, item (3) is revised to be 
prefaced with ``Except as provided below.''

[[Page 7192]]

    Comment: An insurance provider commented that the word ``lost'' is 
vague, yet it is used throughout the definition of ``potential 
production.'' They questioned whether citrus fruit ``lost by normal 
dropping'' should be described as ``lost.'' They recommend either using 
only the term `destroyed', define `lost,' or remove the term `lost' 
completely.
    Response: The commenter is correct that the term ``lost'' is used 
in several different contexts to refer to citrus fruit that is missing 
or destroyed but the common definition of ``lost'' also refers to both 
missing or destroyed. Therefore, the term is not used inappropriately. 
However, to avoid any misperception that lost only means missing, FCIC 
has revised the provisions to refer to missing, damaged or destroyed, 
as appropriate, instead of lost.
    Comment: An insurance service organization recommended that the two 
lists of items under the definition of ``Potential Production'' be 
identified as (a)(1)-(6) for ``fruit including'' and b(1)-(3) for 
``fruit not including'' for easier referencing.
    Response: FCIC has revised the provisions accordingly.
    Comment: An insurance service organization and an insurance 
provider recommended the terms ``buckhorned'' and ``interstock,'' be 
defined because they are used in the definition ``topworked.''
    Response: FCIC agrees with the recommendation and has defined the 
terms ``buckhorned'' and ``interstock,'' consistent with how those 
terms are used in other Crop Provisions.
    Comment: An insurance service organization and an insurance 
provider asked for clarification as to whether a change is intended in 
how basic units are established for Florida Citrus. They commented that 
while there was no explanation of any unit changes in the 
``Background'' portion of the proposed rule, the previously defined 
term ``citrus fruit type'' was changed to ``citrus fruit crop.'' They 
questioned whether this would result in a change in how basic units are 
determined. For example, lemons and limes are part of the Citrus VI 
``crop'' and therefore would be (and have been) part of one basic unit, 
but if it is intended for lemons and limes to qualify as two separate 
basic units, the term needs to be revised to ``citrus fruit type.''
    Response: In the proposed rule, the term ``citrus fruit crop'' 
replaced the term ``citrus fruit type''. This was done to reduce the 
confusion created by defining ``types'' as crops. In conjunction with 
this change, in the proposed rule, FCIC also revised the provisions in 
section 2 regarding units to clarify that basic units will be divided 
into additional basic units by each citrus fruit crop. Therefore, there 
has been no change in the manner in which basic units are established. 
No change has been made.
    Comment: An insurance service organization and an insurance 
provider commented that the changes in section 2, Unit Division, allow 
optional units by non-contiguous land, in addition to optional units by 
section, section equivalent, or FSN. They further commented this is a 
change from the previous language ``Instead of * * *,'' but there is no 
explanation in the ``Background'' as to why this change is proposed. 
Additionally, they noted that if optional units have changed, this 
should be identified in the summary of changes.
    Response: FCIC has made no change in optional unit determination. 
The language changed from ``instead of'' to ``in addition to,'' to be 
consistent with other Crop Provisions. This change does not have any 
substantive effect. Use of the term ``instead of'' or ``in addition 
to'' both mean that optional units may be established by section, 
section equivalent, FSA farm serial number or non-contiguous land. 
While it does not effect how optional units are established, FCIC 
agrees the revision should have been identified and has done so in this 
final rule.
    Comment: An insurance service organization and an insurance 
provider commented that since this is a dollar plan crop, production 
does not have to be reported by a certain date for underwriting 
purposes. They further commented the second sentence in section 3(b) is 
misplaced, since section 10 ``Settlement of Claim'' describes 
responsibilities in a loss situation. They recommended that provisions 
in section 3(b) be revised to state simply ``The production reporting 
requirements contained in section 3 of the Basic Provisions are not 
applicable.'' These provisions would replace the existing crop 
provisions that read, ``In lieu of the production reporting date 
contained in section 3 of the Basic Provisions, potential production 
for each unit will be determined during loss adjustment.''
    Response: FCIC has revised the provision accordingly. However, the 
reference to the determination of potential production is still 
necessary. FCIC has determined the provision belongs in section 6 
``Insured Crop'' and has added a new section 6(e).
    Comment: An insurance service organization commented that unless a 
different deadline applies to coverage changes requested for the 
initial year the revised crop provisions are effective, the opening 
phrase in section 3(e), ``For the 2008 and succeeding crop years * * 
*,'' seems to be unnecessary.
    Response: FCIC has removed the opening phrase in section 3(e) 
accordingly.
    Comment: An insurance provider commented that the current Crop 
Provisions provide for coverage beginning on May 1 while the proposed 
Crop Provisions indicate that coverage will begin on June 1. They 
questioned if it is FCIC's intention not to provide coverage for the 
month of May during the waiting period after insureds had requested 
increased coverage.
    Response: FCIC acknowledges that the proposed rule failed to state 
what, if any coverage, would be applicable for the month of May. 
Further, as stated more fully below in the comments to section 8, there 
may be adverse consequences to producers as a result of this change. As 
a result, FCIC is moving the insurance period back to its original 
dates, with cancellation and termination dates of April 30, and the 
insurance attachment date of May 1. This will avoid any disruption of 
coverage. However, the sales closing date is moved back from April 30 
to April 1 to be consistent with the one-month timeframe between sales 
closing and insurance attachment as provided in the Nursery and Florida 
Fruit tree policies.
    Comment: An insurance provider commented that the Crop Provisions 
are proposed to be effective for the 2008 crop year, and section 3(e) 
is being added to address a 30-day waiting period for coverage changes 
as well as change the insurance period dates, to be consistent with the 
Nursery Crop Provisions and the Florida Fruit Tree Pilot Crop 
Provisions. They further commented the 30-day waiting period is 
difficult to administer and becomes a problem when a loss occurs before 
the waiting period is over.
    Response: As a result of delays in the publication of this final 
rule, the revisions are not expected to take affect until the 2009 crop 
year. FCIC originally proposed to modify the insurance period in the 
proposed rule, establishing a June 1 insurance attachment date, to be 
consistent with the Nursery Crop Provisions and the Florida Fruit Tree 
Pilot Crop Provisions. However, as stated above, this would have 
resulted in a disruption of coverage for a month so FCIC is moving the 
insurance attachment date back to the original May 1 date, with a sales 
closing date of April 1. The 30-day waiting period helps maintain 
program integrity and allows insurance providers ample time to inspect 
the crop when deemed

[[Page 7193]]

appropriate, and if the crop is damaged to notify the insured of the 
status of their insurance on a timely basis.
    Comment: An insurance provider questioned how a loss would be paid 
based on the provisions contained in section 3(e). They provided an 
example where an insured has $1,000 coverage in a previous crop year 
and requests $1,500 coverage for the new crop year. A hail loss occurs 
within 30-day waiting period. They acknowledge the insured is kept at 
$1,000 coverage based on the policy language. If the damage is assessed 
and the insurance provider finds 50 percent hail damage, they 
questioned how they were to reduce coverage. They noted the Florida 
Citrus Fruit policy is a dollar plan and percentage of loss policy. 
They questioned whether they should reduce coverage by 50 percent to 
$500 and still owe the insured $500 multiplied by 50 percent damage, or 
determine that 50 percent of the loss is not covered. Essentially, they 
questioned whether the proposed provisions provide coverage for insured 
losses during the month of May.
    Response: The commenter did not indicate if the crop in the example 
was the current year's crop or the following year's crop, just that the 
loss occurred during the 30-day waiting period. If it was the current 
crop year, and the calendar date for the end of the insurance period 
has not passed, the loss would be indemnified just as in the past, 
based on the liability for that crop year. They would be paid the 
$1,000. If it was the crop set for the next crop year, it would not be 
covered until May 1 under the Final Rule. There would be no indemnity 
for that crop since insurance had not yet attached, and the amount of 
insurance would be reduced to reflect the remaining potential, 
consistent with section 3(f). Insured losses on or after May 1 will be 
covered just as they were in the previous policy.
    Comment: An insurance service organization and an insurance 
provider commented that the provisions in section 3(f) have been added 
to address the crop being damaged prior to the beginning of the 
insurance period and reducing coverage based on the amount of damage. 
They further commented while in theory they agree with this concept, 
there are no procedures in place to address how coverage will be 
reduced. Additionally they commented this has been an issue on all of 
the perennial policies in Florida due to the number of hurricanes that 
have occurred in recent years. Provisions of existing policies have not 
been working as there are no procedures or guidance in place to 
properly implement. If these provisions remain, FCIC will need to 
provide additional guidance as to how the provisions are to be 
implemented.
    Response: Underwriting procedures need to be in place to determine 
the appropriate reduction in the amount of insurance. While section 
3(f) is new, reduction in the amount of insurance was applicable to 
interplanted acreage in the current Crop Provisions, but the 
methodology for determining damage was not specifically addressed in 
FCIC procedure. FCIC will modify the Florida Citrus Fruit Loss 
Adjustment Standards and the underwriting procedures by adding 
instructions for reducing the amount of insurance based on damage 
sustained on the acreage prior to insurance attaching.
    Comment: A trade association commented on the provisions in section 
6(b)(2), which state no fruit is insurable until the trees reach the 
``fifth growing season.'' They noted production practices have changed 
significantly since the rule was put into place and viable production 
is now obtained at a much earlier age. They cited that USDA 
Agricultural Statistics Services considers citrus trees bearing at 
three years of age and, the statistics show the average tree production 
for the age category 3-5 years is 1.22 boxes per tree for early season 
orange varieties and 1.12 boxes per tree for late season orange 
varieties. With an average per acre planting of 120 trees, production 
of 1.22 boxes per tree amounts to more than 146 boxes per acre.
    Response: There is a trend for recently set citrus trees to be 
placed at a higher density pattern for increased production capability. 
However, the statistics provided by the commenter were for age category 
3-5 years. The commenter did not provide statistics separately for 3, 
4, and 5 year old trees. Additionally, statistics were only provided 
for early and late season varieties. This is not sufficient information 
to make a blanket change in insurability of trees at an earlier age. 
However, section 6(b)(2) also allows trees to be insured at an earlier 
age if provided in the Special Provisions or by written agreement. 
Currently, when FCIC determines certain varieties of citrus fruit can 
produce significant fruit at an earlier age, those varieties are 
specified in the Special Provisions. Therefore, producers with trees 
that have the production capability cited by the commenter have access 
to coverage for such trees. No change has been made.
    Comment: A trade association commented that provisions in section 
6(c) state, in part, that a grower may elect to insure or exclude any 
acreage that has a potential production of less than 100 boxes per 
acre, under certain conditions. Therefore, it would be appropriate for 
three-year-old trees, which are capable of producing 50 percent more 
than an apparent minimum standard, to be eligible for coverage. They 
further suggested FCIC consider a modification to section 6(b)(2) to 
read in part ``Produced by citrus trees that have not reached the third 
growing season after being set out * * *'' Based on the current 
requirement that trees be set out prior to May 1 to be considered as a 
growing season, that would in most cases mean trees would be in their 
4th year of growth.
    Response: FCIC needs additional information in order to reduce the 
age of the tree for the purposes of eligibility for insurance under 
these Crop Provisions to the third or fourth growing season after 
setout. Further, as stated above, younger varieties with known higher 
production capabilities will be added to the Special Provisions. 
Further, producers will have access to written agreements. Therefore, 
no change has been made.
    Comment: An insurance provider commented that section 6(b)(3) and 
(4) describes specific citrus fruit types that are not insurable, i.e., 
Meyer Lemons and oranges commonly known as Sour Oranges or Clementines, 
and those of the Robinson tangerine variety. They further commented 
that the citrus fruit crop into which these uninsurable types of citrus 
would fall should be specified in the provisions in order to remove the 
risk of assumption. For example, section 6(b)(4) should read, ``For 
Citrus IV, Robinson tangerine variety * * *''
    Response: FCIC lists only insurable types of citrus under the 
definition ``Citrus fruit crop.'' in section 1. Therefore, it would not 
be appropriate to include uninsurable types in such definition. FCIC 
has added language at the beginning of section 1 to acknowledge that 
some of the varieties designated in section 6 as uninsurable may fall 
within one of the insurable categories of citrus fruit crops in section 
1. The phrase ``Except as provided in section 6,'' is meant to 
reference citrus fruit that is not insurable, but does not to do so by 
citrus fruit crop. FCIC has also added a new section 6(b)(6) that 
states that any citrus fruit type not included in the Special 
Provisions or within the definition of ``citrus fruit crop'' is also 
uninsurable. This will further clarify the provisions.
    Comment: An insurance service organization commented that the 
provisions in section 7(a), ``* * * interplanted with another citrus 
fruit crop * * *'' have been revised to ``* * *

[[Page 7194]]

interplanted with another crop * * *''. They further commented this 
suggests a broadening of the provisions to include the interplanting of 
citrus trees with a perennial or annual crop, though the intent is 
unclear since it is not specified in the ``Background'' portion of the 
proposed rule. Additionally, they commented that unless this is an 
intended change, and they are not sure how likely it is for citrus 
trees to be interplanted with non-citrus trees or crops, they believe 
the previous wording is clearer.
    Response: FCIC intended the provisions be broadened to include 
other crops that may be interplanted with citrus. This could include 
tropicals interplanted in a citrus grove. To make the provisions 
clearer FCIC has modified the language to read ``* * * interplanted 
with another fruit type or another crop * * *''. A conforming change 
has also been made in section 3(d) so that the references to 
interplanting are consistent.
    Comment: A trade association commented that the provisions in 
section 8(a)(1) of the proposed rule change the date coverage begins 
from April 30 (actually May 1) to June 1. They further commented that 
while they agree it is beneficial to growers to have tree and fruit 
insurance dates as similar as possible, moving the coverage date for 
fruit later in the growing season as proposed will have negative 
effects on producers' risk management. Additionally, they noted in some 
years citrus growers have an uncovered risk when the bloom is damaged 
by a peril and in fact, they currently have as much as 3 months when 
fruit set is not covered even with the current dates. They expressed 
concern about hail damage to a citrus crop in May, which would not be 
covered for their insureds. Finally, they concluded a later coverage 
date means growers will be without coverage for a longer period of time 
on a crop already set on the tree, and recommend FCIC retain the 
current April 30 sales closing date and May 1 insurance attachment 
date.
    Response: FCIC received a number of similar comments regarding the 
date insurance attaches, and has determined it will remain as May 1. 
Thus, the new policy has the same insurance attachment date as the 
current policy and retains the same period of risk as the current 
policy. However, the sales closing date is set one month prior to 
insurance attachment, now on April 1, consistent with the 30-day period 
between the sales closing and insurance attachment for Florida Fruit 
Tree and Nursery policies. FCIC has determined the April 1 sales 
closing date is acceptable, based on feedback from insurance providers, 
insureds, and the industry. Further, as stated above, the 30-day 
waiting period is necessary to protect program integrity.
    Comment: An insurance service organization and several insurance 
providers commented that because of the proposed changes in the 
coverage dates, this would result in a gap in coverage since the 
current policy's coverage for 2007 would have ended a month before the 
2008 policy coverage would begin. They believe that unless it is 
intended that carryover policyholders have no coverage for the month of 
May, the policy provisions need to address how carryover coverage will 
be handled during that month. Further, if the gap in coverage is 
intended, it needs to be made very clear in the summary of changes to 
be provided to carryover policyholders. Otherwise, it does not seem 
necessary to specify ``* * * beginning with the 2008 crop year * * *'' 
since these Crop Provisions will not be effective prior to that crop 
year. A commenter stated that language needs to be added to these 
provisions to address the issue of damage occurring during May, so both 
insured's and insurance providers understand whether there is coverage 
during the month of May.
    Response: As stated above, based on a number of comments addressed 
the additional risk insureds would bear due to no coverage for the 
month of May, FCIC has modified the date for insurance attachment from 
June 1 back to May 1 based on numerous comments received requesting 
that insurance attachment continue as specified in the current 
provisions. This means there will be no gap in coverage for current 
insureds.
    Comment: An insurance provider commented that the calendar date for 
the end of the insurance period for citrus types already occurs as 
early as January 31, with some dates in February and March. By moving 
the coverage attachment date from May 1 to June 1, the gap in coverage 
has been extended an additional month. They further commented that May 
is a month when hail damage is a primary concern in Florida. 
Additionally they noted fruit trees bloom primarily in March and April, 
and they recognize that damage or loss occurring prior to May 1 is not 
an insurable cause of loss under the current or proposed crop 
provisions. However, they noted that some perennial crop programs 
provide continuous coverage, and wondered whether FCIC has considered 
doing something similar for Florida citrus fruit.
    Response: FCIC has previously explored providing ``bloom 
coverage,'' i.e., year around coverage, with growers and grower groups. 
After several discussions, they concluded they favor the current policy 
where coverage attaches only to fruit on the tree. Determining damage 
or loss based on a reduction of blooms was considered problematic 
because only a small percentage of blooms actually set fruit. 
Additionally, FCIC has paid minimal indemnities for hail losses on a 
new crop during the month of May. The primary causes of loss, frost or 
freeze and hurricane damage, have not occurred in May. Further, as 
stated above, based on the comments, FCIC has decided to retain the May 
1 insurance attachment date.
    Comment: An insurance service organization and an insurance 
provider commented that FCIC should clarify that section 8(a)(1)(i) 
applies to new applicants and 8(a)(1)(ii) to carryover policyholders. 
They further recommended section 8(a)(1)(i) be prefaced with ``For new 
applications * * *'', and section 8(a)(1)(ii) be prefaced with ``For 
carryover insureds * * *.''
    Response: While section 8(a)(1)(i) applies primarily to new 
applicants it could also apply to inspections performed on acreage of 
carryover insureds no longer meeting insurability requirements. The 
commenter is correct that section 8(a)(1)(ii) applies only to carryover 
insureds. Therefore, FCIC will revise the provisions to specifically 
identify whether they apply to new or carryover policies for 
clarification.
    Comment: A Regional Office and trade association commented with 
regard to section 8(a)(2). One commenter stated that they previously 
recommended the end of the insurance period for Navels and Orlando 
Tangelos be changed to January 31. However, a closer look at the 
maturity date of these fruit types shows harvesting of Orlando Tangelos 
typically continues into early February. To accommodate this additional 
picking time, they recommend the end of insurance period for Navels and 
Orlando Tangelos be changed to the first week in February.
    Response: Based on additional research, FCIC has determined it is 
appropriate to extend the calendar date for the end of the insurance 
period to February 7 for Navel Oranges and Orlando Tangelos. This 
modification addresses the important balance between a date late enough 
to cover the fruit through normal picking, but not so late as to pose 
an unacceptable risk.
    Comment: A trade association commented that there were changes

[[Page 7195]]

made to the end of the insurance period in section 8(a)(2), and it is 
essential these dates do not exclude coverage when appropriate. They 
expressed concern that some earlier dates contained in the proposed 
rule would put some growers at risk of having paid premiums on policies 
yet have the insurance end before harvest is complete. They further 
commented harvest begins at different times from one year to the next 
based on date of bloom and whether maturity is early or late for that 
year. The trade association commented that it is appropriate the rule 
consider the latest harvest dates for fruit types. The trade 
association polled harvesters in Florida, and reviewed Ag Statistics 
Service data for the past 4 years on the highest percent of crop 
remaining on dates they recommended. They asked that the calendar date 
for the end of the insurance period be changed, based on percent of 
fruit remaining on the trees later in the season for the following 
fruit types; Early and Navel Oranges and Orlando Tangelos and 
Tangerines, February 28, Murcott Honey Oranges May 15, and Grapefruit 
and Late Season Oranges July 31.
    Response: In determining the calendar date for the end of the 
insurance period, FCIC must find a balance between normal picking dates 
and good farming practices, versus not timely picking fruit, or leaving 
mature fruit on the tree in order to obtain a higher price. If FCIC 
were to set the end of the insurance period for a date when the last 
fruit for the fruit type is picked it could be weeks beyond the 
recommended final picking date. Additionally, a producer may leave the 
crop on the tree hoping for higher prices or conversely allowing a loss 
because the amount of insurance is greater than the market price. Fruit 
left on the tree beyond the optimal picking date is at much greater 
risk of damage or loss. For example, extending the date of Grapefruit 
and Late Season Oranges to July 31 exposes FCIC to an unacceptable risk 
of damage or loss due to the hurricane peril. However, based on 
additional research, FCIC has determined it can modify the calendar 
date for the end of the insurance period without incurring unacceptable 
risks as follows: Early and Navel Oranges and Orlando Tangelos and 
Tangerines, February 7; and Murcott Honey Oranges, May 15. RMA retained 
the current date for the end of the insurance period for Grapefruit and 
Late Season Oranges, June 30. Research shows these fruit types are, or 
should be, harvested by this date.
    Comment: An insurance provider recommended language be added to 
replace sections 8(b)(1) and (2) to address situations where an 
existing insured acquires additional citrus acreage after the acreage 
reporting date. They added that an insurance provider should be able to 
add such acreage to an existing policy upon completion of an acceptable 
inspection of the added acreage, assuming the added acreage is not 
insured under an existing citrus policy. If the added acreage is 
already insured on an existing citrus policy, this provision should 
stipulate that a transfer of coverage and right to an indemnity can be 
completed to continue the existing coverage on the added acreage. They 
further commented this has been an issue in previous years and the FCIC 
has indicated they would try to address this coverage issue when the 
provisions were revised.
    Response: Since no changes to section 8(b) were proposed, the 
proposed changes would be substantive in nature, and the public was not 
provided an opportunity to comment on the recommended changes, the 
recommendations cannot be incorporated in the final rule. No change has 
been made.
    Comment: An insurance service organization and an insurance 
provider commented that currently the sales closing and acreage 
reporting dates are the same for Florida Citrus, so the situations 
addressed in sections 8(b)(1) and (2), acquiring or relinquishing an 
insurable share on or before the acreage reporting date, should not 
come up unless those dates will be changed. They commented that section 
8(b)(1) could be removed. They further commented the procedure in 
8(b)(2) regarding use of the Transfer of Right to an Indemnity could be 
applied to cases when the insurable share changes hands after the 
acreage reporting date.
    Response: Since no changes to section 8(b) were proposed, the 
proposed changes would be substantive in nature, and the public was not 
provided an opportunity to comment on the recommended changes, the 
recommendations cannot be incorporated in the final rule. No change has 
been made.
    Comment: An insurance service organization and an insurance 
provider recommended that the insured cause of loss in section 9(a) be 
clarified as ``Fire, due to natural causes, unless * * *'' or ``Fire, 
if caused by lightning * * *,'' as contained in the proposed revisions 
to the Tobacco Crop Provisions.
    Response: Section 12 of the Basic Provisions already clearly states 
all causes of loss listed in the Crop Provisions must be due to a 
naturally occurring event. If this provision were changed for this 
policy or just for this cause of loss, it could create the mistaken 
impression that the other insurable causes do not have to be natural 
occurring. No change has been made.
    Comment: An insurance service organization and an insurance 
provider commented that they had concern with the proposed addition in 
section 9(a) of ``Diseases, only if specified in the Special 
Provisions'' to the list of insured causes of loss. They further 
commented that certain diseases may cause a decline in yields, and the 
condition of the citrus trees, over a period of years but it would be 
difficult to know how to account for this when underwriting the cause 
of loss, and for developing loss adjustment procedures. Additionally 
they recommended that if this cause of loss is retained, either delete 
``only'' or precede it with ``but,'' to read ``Diseases, but only if 
specified * * *.''
    Response: FCIC has added this provision to provide flexibility to 
the Florida Citrus Fruit Crop Provisions in the event a disease 
manifests itself and FCIC determines it can be insured on an 
actuarially sound basis, with the proper underwriting and loss 
adjustment. Given the potential delay of several years to revise the 
policy through the rulemaking process, this provision will give the 
producer a chance to receive needed coverage on a more timely basis. 
However, FCIC will not specify a new disease in the Special Provisions 
without significant research regarding the feasibility and prudence of 
adding the disease. Further, FCIC does not plan on adding any diseases 
to the Special Provisions at this time. FCIC agrees that the addition 
of the word ``but'' before ``only,'' makes it consistent with the 
definition of diseases in other policies, and has revised the provision 
accordingly.
    Comment: An insurance provider commented that adding disease as a 
cause of loss if specified in the Special Provisions causes them a 
great deal of concern from both the underwriting and loss adjustment 
standpoint. For example, if the FCIC were to add trestasia as a cause 
of loss, they asked how they would work a loss on groves losing 
production each year resulting from this type of disease. They further 
commented this disease causes a decline in condition of trees and 
yields, and it would be very difficult to underwrite and adjust for 
this type of disease. They added that citrus greening is another new 
disease that would result in similar problems and issues.
    Response: As specified in the above response, FCIC has added 
``Diseases, but

[[Page 7196]]

only if specified in the Special Provisions'' as a cause of loss to 
provide flexibility to the Florida Citrus Fruit Crop Provisions. 
However, no disease will be added to the Special Provisions unless the 
disease can be properly rated, underwritten and adjusted.
    Comment: A trade association commented that they commend FCIC for 
the addition of ``Diseases, but only if specified in the Special 
Provisions,'' but are still concerned that damaging windstorms, which 
have not been classified by the National Weather Service as hurricanes, 
are not recognized as a legitimate peril. They commented that the 
weather conditions in Florida lend themselves to occasional high 
density windstorms, some even reaching a wind speed of hurricane force, 
but are formed either too rapidly to receive a hurricane designation or 
have wind gusts too brief to achieve a hurricane designation, but which 
are as damaging to fruit as a named hurricane. They concluded that for 
the fruit insurance policy in Florida to be an effective risk 
management tool and to fully meet the needs of those it is designed to 
serve, these unnamed storms with damaging wind intensity must be 
classified as a cause of loss in the policy.
    Response: The commenter is correct that there may be winds that do 
not meet the definition of a hurricane or tornado that could damage the 
crop. Therefore, FCIC is including excess wind as a cause of loss but 
only if it causes damage to the extent that citrus fruit from Citrus 
IV, V, VII, and VIII is unmarketable as fresh fruit. FCIC has also 
added a definition of ``excess wind'' consistent with the definition in 
the Texas Citrus Fruit Crop Provisions.
    Comment: An insurance service organization questioned whether the 
rewording of the parenthetical phrase in section 10(b)(2) of the 
proposed rule is an improvement over the current language. They 
suggested another alternative: ``* * * The percent of damage will be 
the amount of citrus fruit damaged by an insured cause, converted to 
boxes, and divided by the undamaged potential production.''
    Response: FCIC believes the provisions contained in the proposed 
rule are clear and therefore, no change has been made.
    Comment: An insurance service organization and an insurance 
provider asked that FCIC consider adding instructions to section 
10(b)(4) to address situations when the result to this point is 
negative instead of positive. They questioned whether there would be 
any need in completing the rest of the steps, and if there would be no 
indemnity due in such a case.
    Response: FCIC has revised the provision to add language that 
states that if the result of section 10(b)(3) is negative, no indemnity 
will be due.
    Comment: An insurance service organization recommended FCIC 
rearrange the first sentence in the example in 10(b)(6) to read ``* * * 
assume a 55-acre unit sustains late season damage,'' instead of ending 
``* * * on the 55 acres * * *'', which could suggest the unit contains 
more than ``the 55 acres'' that are damaged.
    Response: FCIC has modified the provisions accordingly.
    Comment: An insurance service organization recommended FCIC refer 
to the ``* * * level for the citrus crop * * *'' instead of ``citrus 
type'' in section 10(b)(6) since the choice of level is on a citrus 
crop basis, unless the ``type'' reference is related to the ``amount of 
insurance'' at the beginning of the sentence.
    Response: The reference is related to the amount of insurance at 
the beginning of the sentence. In order to clarify, FCIC has modified 
the provisions by adding ``, for the citrus crop, fruit type, and age 
of trees'' after `` based on the 75 percent coverage level''.
    Additionally, FCIC requested input regarding the possible addition 
of Asiatic Citrus Canker (ACC) as a cause of loss. An insurance service 
organization commented they believe their members would oppose this 
since it has been problematic as a cause of loss in the Florida Fruit 
Tree Pilot policy. An insurance provider commented they are strongly 
opposed to providing coverage for ACC under the fruit policy. They 
believe the ACC disease is so widespread it is creating a multitude of 
problems with the Florida Fruit Tree Pilot Crop Provisions and they 
have concerns with it being covered in these provisions as well. 
Additionally, ACC coverage has been removed from the Florida Fruit Tree 
policy effective for the 2008 crop year.
    In addition to the changes described above, FCIC has made minor 
editorial changes and the following changes:
    1. Removed the paragraph immediately preceding section 1 which 
refers to the order of priority in the event of conflict. This same 
information is contained in the Basic Provisions. Therefore, it is 
duplicative and has been removed in the Crop Provisions.
    2. Added the provisions, ``unless specified otherwise in the 
Special Provisions'' in section 8(a)(2) to allow greater flexibility in 
modifying the calendar date for the end of the insurance period. Given 
the rapid advances in technology, which could affect the insurance 
period, the policy needs the ability to respond quickly.

List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 457

    Crop insurance, Florida Citrus Fruit Crop Provisions.

Final Rule

0
Accordingly, as set forth in the preamble, the Federal Crop Insurance 
Corporation amends 7 CFR part 457, Common Crop Insurance Regulations, 
for the 2008 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) and 1506(p).


0
2. Revise Sec.  457.107 to read as follows:


Sec.  457.107  Florida Citrus Fruit Crop Insurance Provisions.

    The Florida Citrus Fruit Crop Insurance Provisions for the 2009 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: Florida Citrus Fruit Crop Insurance 
Provisions

1. Definitions

    Amount of insurance (per acre). The dollar amount determined by 
multiplying the Reference Maximum Dollar Amount shown on the actuarial 
documents for each fruit type and age of trees, within a citrus fruit 
crop, times the coverage level percent that you elect, times your 
share.
    Box. A standard field box as prescribed in the State of Florida 
Citrus Fruit Laws or contained in standards issued by FCIC.
    Buckhorn. To prune any limb at a diameter of at least three inches 
for citrus.
    Citrus fruit crop. Except as otherwise provided in section 6, any 
of the following:
    (1) Citrus I--Early and mid-season oranges;
    (2) Citrus II--Late oranges juice;
    (3) Citrus III--Grapefruit for which freeze damage will be adjusted 
on a juice basis;
    (4) Citrus IV--Tangelos and Tangerines;
    (5) Citrus V--Murcott Honey Oranges (also known as Honey 
Tangerines) and Temple Oranges;

[[Page 7197]]

    (6) Citrus VI--Lemons and Limes;
    (7) Citrus VII--Grapefruit for which freeze damage will be adjusted 
on a fresh fruit basis, and late oranges fresh;
    (8) Citrus VIII--Navel Oranges; and
    (9) Citrus IX--Any other citrus fruit crop designated in the 
Special Provisions.
    Citrus fruit type (fruit type). Any of the separate citrus fruit 
listed in the Special Provisions and contained within one of the citrus 
fruit crops designated as Citrus I through IX.
    Excess wind. A natural movement of air that has sustained speeds 
exceeding 58 miles per hour recorded at the U.S. Weather Service 
reporting station operating nearest to the grove at the time of damage.
    Freeze. The formation of ice in the cells of the fruit caused by 
low air temperatures.
    Harvest. The severance of mature citrus fruit from the tree by 
pulling, picking, shaking, or any other means, or collecting the 
marketable citrus fruit from the ground.
    Hurricane. A windstorm classified by the U.S. Weather Service as a 
hurricane.
    Interstock. The area of the tree that is grafted to a rootstock. 
For example, the rootstock may be Sour Orange, and the interstock 
grapefruit, and the grafted scion Valencia orange.
    Potential production. The amount, converted to boxes, of citrus 
fruit that would have been produced had damage not occurred.
    (a) Including citrus fruit that:
    (1) Was harvested before damage occurred;
    (2) Remained on the tree after damage occurred;
    (3) Except as provided in (b), was missing, damaged, or destroyed 
from either an insured or uninsured cause;
    (4) Was marketed or could be marketed as fresh citrus fruit;
    (5) Was harvested prior to inspection by us; or
    (6) Was harvested within 7 days after a freeze;
    (b) Not including citrus fruit that:
    (1) Was missing, damaged, or destroyed before insurance attached 
for any crop year;
    (2) Was damaged or destroyed by normal dropping; or
    (3) Any tangerines that normally would not meet the 210 pack size 
(2 and \4/16\ inch minimum diameter) under United States Standards by 
the end of the insurance period for tangerines.
    Scion. A detached living portion of a plant joined to a stock in 
grafting.
    Top worked. A buckhorned citrus tree with a new scion grafted onto 
the interstock.

2. Unit Division

    (a) A basic unit, as defined in section 1 of the Basic Provisions, 
will be divided into additional basic units by each citrus fruit crop 
designated in the Special Provisions.
    (b) Provisions in the Basic Provisions that allow optional units by 
irrigated and non-irrigated practices are not applicable.
    (c) In addition to establishing optional units by section, section 
equivalent, or FSA farm serial number, optional units may be 
established if each optional unit is located on 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 coverage level for each citrus fruit 
crop shown in section 1 of these Crop Provisions, or designated in the 
Special Provisions, that you elect to insure. If different amounts of 
insurance are available for fruit types within a citrus fruit crop, you 
must select the same coverage level for each fruit type. For example, 
if you choose the 75 percent coverage level for one fruit type, you 
must also choose the 75 percent coverage level for all other fruit 
types within that citrus fruit crop.
    (b) The production reporting requirements contained in section 3 of 
the Basic Provisions are not applicable.
    (c) For the first year of insurance for acreage interplanted with 
another fruit type or another crop, and any time the planting pattern 
of such acreage is changed, you must report, by the sales closing date, 
the following:
    (1) The age and fruit type of the interplanted citrus trees, as 
applicable;
    (2) The planting pattern; and
    (3) Any other information we request in order to establish your 
amount of insurance.
    (d) We will reduce acreage or the amount of insurance or both, as 
necessary, based on our estimate of the effect of the interplanted 
fruit type or another crop on the insured fruit type. If you fail to 
notify us of any circumstance that may reduce the acreage or amount of 
insurance, we will reduce the acreage or amount of insurance or both as 
necessary any time we become aware of the circumstance.
    (e) For carryover policies:
    (1) Any changes to your coverage must be requested on or before the 
sales closing date;
    (2) Requested changes will take effect on May 1, the first day of 
the crop year, unless we reject the requested increase based on our 
inspection, or because a loss occurs on or before April 30 (Rejection 
can occur at any time we discover loss has occurred on or before April 
30); and
    (3) If the increase is rejected, coverage will remain at the same 
level as the previous crop year.
    (f) If your citrus fruit was damaged prior to the beginning of the 
insurance period, your amount of insurance (per acre) will be reduced 
by the amount of damage that occurred.

4. Contract Changes

    In accordance with section 4 of the Basic Provisions, the contract 
change date is January 31 preceding the cancellation date.

5. Cancellation and Termination Dates

    In accordance with section 2 of the Basic Provisions, the 
cancellation and termination dates are April 30.

6. Insured Crop

    (a) In accordance with section 8 of the Basic Provisions, the crop 
insured will be all acreage of each citrus fruit crop that you elect to 
insure, in which you have a share, that is grown in the county shown on 
the application, and for which a premium rate is quoted in the 
actuarial documents.
    (b) In addition to the citrus fruit not insurable in section 8 of 
the Basic Provisions, we do not insure any citrus fruit:
    (1) That cannot be expected to mature each crop year within the 
normal maturity period for the fruit type;
    (2) Produced by citrus trees that have not reached the fifth 
growing season after being set out, unless otherwise provided in the 
Special Provisions or by a written agreement to insure such citrus 
fruit (In order for the year of set out to be considered as a growing 
season, citrus trees must be set out on or before April 30 of the 
calendar year);
    (3) Of ``Meyer Lemons'' and oranges commonly known as ``Sour 
Oranges'' or ``Clementines'';
    (4) Of the Robinson tangerine variety, for any crop year in which 
you have elected to exclude such tangerines from insurance (You must 
elect this exclusion prior to the crop year for which the exclusion is 
to be effective, except that for the first crop year you must elect 
this exclusion by the later of the sales closing date or the time you 
submit the application for insurance);
    (5) That is produced on citrus trees that have been topworked until 
the third crop year after topworking. The Special Provisions will 
specify the appropriate rate class for trees insurable following 
topworking, but that have not reached full production; or

[[Page 7198]]

    (6) Of any fruit type not specified as insurable in the Special 
Provisions or within the definition of ``citrus fruit crop.''
    (c) Prior to the date insurance attaches, and upon our approval, 
you may elect to insure or exclude from insurance any insurable citrus 
acreage that has a potential production of less than 100 boxes per 
acre. If you elect to:
    (1) Insure such acreage, we will consider the potential production 
to be 100 boxes per acre when determining the amount of loss; or
    (2) Exclude such acreage, we will disregard the acreage for all 
purposes related to this policy.
    (d) In addition to the provisions in section 6 of the Basic 
Provisions, if you fail to notify us of your election to insure or 
exclude citrus acreage, and the potential production from such acreage 
is 100 or more boxes per acre, we will determine the percent of damage 
on all of the insurable acreage for the unit, but will not allow the 
percent of damage for the unit to be increased by including such 
acreage.
    (e) Potential production will be determined during loss adjustment.

7. Insurable Acreage

    In lieu of the provisions in section 9 of the Basic Provisions that 
prohibit insurance attaching to a crop planted with another crop:
    (a) Citrus fruit from trees interplanted with another fruit type or 
another crop is insurable unless we inspect the acreage and determine 
it does not meet the requirements contained in your policy.
    (b) If the citrus fruit is from trees interplanted with another 
fruit type or another crop, acreage will be prorated according to the 
percentage of the acres occupied by each of the interplanted fruit 
types or crops (For example, if grapefruit have been interplanted with 
oranges on 100 acres and the grapefruit trees are on 50 percent of the 
acreage, grapefruit will be considered planted on 50 acres and oranges 
will be considered planted on 50 acres).
    (c) The combination of the citrus fruit acreage and the 
interplanted crop acreage cannot exceed the physical amount of acreage.

8. Insurance Period

    (a) In accordance with the provisions of section 11 of the Basic 
Provisions:
    (1) Coverage begins on May 1 of each crop year, unless:
    (i) For new or carryover policies, as applicable, we inspect the 
acreage and determine it does not meet the requirements for 
insurability contained in your policy (You must provide any information 
we require for the fruit type, so we may determine the condition of the 
grove to be insured); or
    (ii) For carryover policies, you report additional citrus acreage, 
or a greater share, such that the amount of insurance will increase by 
more than 10 percent and we notify you all or a part of your citrus 
acreage is not insurable.
    (2) The calendar date for the end of the insurance period for each 
crop year, unless specified otherwise in the Special Provisions, is:
    (i) February 7 for early and navel oranges, Orlando tangelos and 
tangerines;
    (ii) February 28 for all other tangelos;
    (iii) March 31 for mid-season and temple oranges;
    (iv) April 30 for lemons, limes;
    (v) May 15 for murcott honey oranges; and
    (vi) June 30 for grapefruit and late season oranges.
    (b) In addition to the provisions of section 11 of the Basic 
Provisions:
    (1) If you acquire an insurable share in any insurable acreage of 
citrus fruit after coverage begins, but on or before the acreage 
reporting date of any crop year, and if after inspection we consider 
the acreage acceptable, then insurance will be considered to have 
attached to such acreage on the calendar date for the beginning of the 
insurance period.
    (2) If you relinquish your insurable share on any insurable acreage 
of citrus fruit on or before the acreage reporting date of any crop 
year, insurance will not be considered to have attached, no premium 
will be due, and no indemnity payable, for such acreage for that crop 
year unless:
    (i) A transfer of coverage and right to an indemnity, or a similar 
form approved by us, is completed by all affected parties;
    (ii) We are notified by you or the transferee in writing of such 
transfer on or before the acreage reporting date; and
    (iii) The transferee is eligible for crop insurance.

9. Causes of Loss

    (a) In accordance with the provisions of section 12 of the Basic 
Provisions, insurance is provided only against the following causes of 
loss to citrus fruit that occur within the insurance period:
    (1) Fire, unless weeds and other forms of undergrowth have not been 
controlled or pruning debris has not been removed from the grove;
    (2) Freeze;
    (3) Hail;
    (4) Hurricane;
    (5) Tornado;
    (6) Excess wind, but only if it causes the individual citrus fruit 
from Citrus IV, V, VII, and VIII to be unmarketable as fresh fruit; or
    (7) Diseases, but only if specified in the Special Provisions.
    (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:
    (1) Damage to the blossoms or trees; or
    (2) Inability to market the citrus fruit 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. 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) If any citrus fruit within a unit is damaged by an insurable 
cause of loss, we will settle your claim by:
    (1) Calculating the amount of insurance for the unit by multiplying 
the number of acres by the respective dollar amount of insurance per 
acre for each fruit type and multiplying that result by your share;
    (2) Calculating the average percent of damage to the fruit within 
each respective fruit type, rounded to the nearest tenth of a percent 
(0.1%) (To determine the percent of damage, the amount of citrus fruit 
damaged from an insured cause must be converted to boxes and divided by 
the undamaged potential production);
    (3) Subtracting the deductible from the result of section 
(10)(b)(2);
    (4) If the result of section (10)(b)(3) is positive, dividing this 
result by the coverage level percentage (If the result of section 
10(b)(3) is negative, no indemnity will be due);
    (5) Multiplying the result of section (10)(b)(4) by the amount of 
insurance for the unit for the respective fruit type, to determine the 
value of all damage; and
    (6) Totaling all such results of section (10)(b)(5) for all fruit 
types and subtracting any indemnities paid for the current crop year to 
determine the amount payable for the unit. (For example, assume a 55-
acre unit sustains late season damage. No previous damage has occurred 
on the unit during

[[Page 7199]]

the crop year and no fruit has been harvested. The producer elected the 
75 percent coverage level and has a 100 percent share. The amount of 
insurance is $1,180 per acre, based on the 75 percent coverage level, 
for the citrus crop, fruit type, and age of trees. The amount of 
potential production is 24,530 boxes and the amount of damaged 
production is 17,171 boxes. The loss would be calculated as follows:
    1. 55 acres x $1,180 = $64,900 amount of insurance for the unit;
    2. 17,171 / 24,530 = 70 percent average percent of damage;
    3. 70 percent damage - 25 percent deductible (100 percent - 75 
percent) = 45 percent;
    4. 45 percent / 75 percent = 60 percent adjusted damage; and
    5. 60 percent x $64,900 = $38,940 indemnity.
    (c) Citrus fruit crops IV, V, VII, and VIII that are seriously 
damaged by freeze, as determined by a fresh-fruit cut of a 
representative sample of fruit in the unit in accordance with the 
applicable provisions of the State of Florida Citrus Fruit Laws, or 
contained in standards issued by FCIC, and that are not or could not be 
marketed as fresh fruit, will be considered damaged to the following 
extent:
    (1) If less than 16 percent of the fruit in a sample shows serious 
freeze damage, the fruit will be considered undamaged; or
    (2) If 16 percent or more of the fruit in a sample shows serious 
freeze damage, the fruit will be considered 50 percent damaged, except 
that:
    (i) For tangerines of Citrus IV, damage in excess of 50 percent 
will be the actual percent of damaged fruit; and
    (ii) Citrus IV (except tangerines), V, VII, and VIII, if it is 
determined that the juice loss in the fruit exceeds 50 percent, such 
percent will be considered the percent of damage.
    (d) Notwithstanding the provisions of section 10(c) of these crop 
provisions as to citrus fruit of Citrus IV, V, VII, and VIII, in any 
unit that is mechanically separated using the specific-gravity 
(floatation) method into undamaged and freeze-damaged fruit, the amount 
of damage will be the actual percent of freeze-damaged fruit not to 
exceed 50 percent and will not be affected by subsequent fresh-fruit 
marketing. However, the 50 percent limitation on mechanically 
separated, freeze-damaged fruit will not apply to tangerines of Citrus 
IV.
    (e) Any citrus fruit of Citrus I, II, III, and VI damaged by 
freeze, but that can be processed into products for human consumption, 
will be considered as marketable for juice. The percent of damage will 
be determined by relating the juice content of the damaged fruit to:
    (1) The average juice content of the fruit produced on the unit for 
the three previous crop years based on your records, if they are 
acceptable to us; or
    (2) The following juice content, if acceptable records are not 
furnished:
    (i) Citrus I--52 pounds of juice per box;
    (ii) Citrus II--54 pounds of juice per box;
    (iii) Citrus III--45 pounds of juice per box; and
    (iv) Citrus VI--43 pounds of juice per box;
    (f) Any individual citrus fruit on the ground that is not collected 
and marketed will be considered as 100 percent damaged if the damage 
was due to an insured cause.
    (g) Any individual citrus fruit that is unmarketable either as 
fresh fruit or as juice because it is immature, unwholesome, 
decomposed, adulterated, or otherwise unfit for human consumption due 
to an insured cause will be considered as 100 percent damaged.
    (h) Individual citrus fruit of Citrus IV, V, VII, and VIII, that 
are unmarketable as fresh fruit due to serious damage from hail as 
defined in the applicable United States Standards for Grades of Florida 
fruit, or wind damage from a hurricane, tornado or other excess wind 
storms that results in the fruit not meeting the standards for packing 
as fresh fruit, will be considered 100 percent damaged.

11. Late and Prevented Planting

    The late and prevented planting provisions of the Basic Provisions 
are not applicable.

    Signed in Washington, DC, on January 31, 2008.
Eldon Gould,
Manager, Federal Crop Insurance Corporation.
[FR Doc. E8-2190 Filed 2-6-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-08-P