Page 61 - MFB State Annual Meeting 2018 -- RESOLUTIONS BOOK

1.2.12. Loss calculations utilizing quality standards recognized in the marketplace;
1.2.13. Actual Production History (APH) not being affected when a crop is unable to be planted and prevented planting payments are accepted;
1.2.14. APH reflecting actual yield with no reduction for quality losses;
1.2.15. In any early harvest situation, provisions within APH to allow for a percentage per
day increase until the traditional harvest
window is reached for sugar beets.
1.2.16. Alteration of crop insurance grain quality adjustments to
reflect USDA grain inspection standards. When verifying crop quality loss adjustments, sampling and inspection conducted by state or federally licensed elevators grading to a "marketable" quality product should be accepted proof of loss;
1.2.17. Revising loss adjustment procedures for aflatoxin/vomitoxin by multiplying the Quality Adjustment Factor (QAF) by the crop insurance price instead of bushels delivered;
1.2.18. Updating planting dates and replanting dates to better reflect variety maturity, growing season length, Land Grant University or processor recommendations, geographic areas and weather conditions. We also support flexibility to allow the secretary of agriculture to adjust planting and harvest dates, with loss protection for changing those dates provided to private companies. All crop acreage reporting dates should be a minimum of 30 days after the actual planting date;
1.2.19. Payment reduction of 65 percent for haying and grazing a cover crop before October 1st on prevented planting acres;
1.2.20. Changes to RMA qualifications of a beginning farmer from 5 years to coincide with Farm Service Agency (FSA) qualification of 10 years;
1.2.21. Special provisions for seed crops requiring pollinator rows for seed production;
1.2.22. Removing mandatory harvest requirements from federal crop insurance claim provisions;
1.2.23. Planting and harvesting technologies being accepted for compliance for crop insurance unit designation;
1.2.24. Coordination of rules between the RMA and the FSA to allow for proper differentiation between irrigated and non-irrigated tracts within a farm;
1.2.25. Federal crop insurance recognizing FSA figures and maps;
1.2.26. Changes to RMA standards that allow more than one tract, in
lieu of more than one FSA farm serial number, to qualify for
Enterprise Units;
1.2.27. A crop insurance program which offers replant benefits that
accurately reflect actual cost of replanting the damaged crop;
1.2.28. Simplifying application, reporting and claim procedures by
promoting flexibility in the process and communication
between agents, adjusters, FSA and others;
1.2.29. A program which requires consistent interpretation and implementation of all federal crop insurance provisions,
especially Prevented Planting provisions;
1.2.30. Allowing acreage reporting revisions based on accurate FSA
certification;
1.2.31. Timely adjustment and payment of claims;
1.2.32. RMA requiring approved insurance providers (AIP) to
compensate a producer in the amount of 18 percent Annual Percentage Rate (APR), should the company not settle a claim within 60 days;
1.2.33. The APH staying with the land;
1.2.34. Requiring RMA claim guidelines to take into consideration
economic justification when Best Management Practices are used to determine treatment thresholds and timeliness of applications;
1.2.35. Having RMA change the test weight "reduction in value" discount in corn back to original regional levels;
1.2.36. The exclusion of crop losses caused by other parties' negligence in the calculation of APHs;
AFBF Policies – Page 5