Notwithstanding the provisions of section 1441 of this title, price support to cooperators for each crop of upland cotton, beginning with the 1961 crop, for which producers have not disapproved marketing quotas shall be at such level not more than 90 per centum of the parity price therefor nor less than the minimum level prescribed below as the Secretary determines appropriate after consideration of the factors specified in section 1421(b) of this title. For the 1961 crop the minimum level shall be 70 per centum of the parity price therefor, and for each subsequent crop the minimum level shall be 65 per centum of the parity price therefor: Provided, That the price support for the 1965 crop shall be a national average support price which reflects 30 cents per pound for Middling one-inch cotton. Price support in the case of noncooperators and in case marketing quotas are disapproved shall be as provided in section 1441(d)(3) and (5) 1 of this title.
If producers have not disapproved marketing quotas, the Secretary shall provide additional price support on the 1964 and 1965 crops of upland cotton to cooperators on whose farms the acreage planted to upland cotton for harvest does not exceed the farm domestic allotment established under section 1350 of this title. Such additional support shall be at a level up to 15 per centum in excess of the basic level of support established under subsection (a) and shall be provided on the normal yield of the acreage planted for harvest within the farm domestic allotment. For purposes of this subsection, an acreage on the farm which the Secretary finds was not planted to cotton in 1965 because of flood, drought, or other natural disaster shall be deemed by the Secretary to be an actual acreage of cotton planted on the farm for harvest, provided such acreage is not subsequently devoted to any price supported crop for 1965.
In order to keep upland cotton to the maximum extent practicable in the normal channels of trade, any additional price support under subsection (b) of this section may be carried out through the simultaneous purchase of cotton at the support price therefor under subsection (b) and the sale of such cotton at the support price therefor under subsection (a) or similar operations, including loans under which the cotton would be redeemable by payment of the amount for which the cotton would be redeemable if the loan thereon had been made at the support price for such cotton under subsection (a), or payments-in-kind through the issuance of certificates which the Commodity Credit Corporation shall redeem for cotton under regulations issued by the Secretary. If such additional support is provided through the issuance of payment-in-kind certificates, such certificates shall have a value per pound of cotton equal to the difference between the level of support established under subsection (a) and the level of support established under subsection (b). The corporation may, under regulations prescribed by the Secretary, assist the producers and persons receiving payment-in-kind certificates under this section and section 1348 of this title, in the marketing of such certificates at such time and in such manner as the Secretary determines will best effectuate the purposes of the program authorized by this section and such section 1348. In the case of any certificate not presented for redemption within thirty days of the date of its issuance, reasonable costs of storage and other carrying charges as determined by the Secretary for the period beginning thirty days after its issuance and ending with the date of its presentation for redemption shall be deducted from the value of the certificate.
(1) Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, if producers have not disapproved marketing quotas, price support and diversion payments shall be made available for the 1966 through 1970 crops of upland cotton as provided in this subsection.
(2) Price support for each such crop of upland cotton shall be made available to cooperators through loans at such level, not exceeding a level which will reflect for Middling one-inch upland cotton at average location in the United States 90 per centum of the estimated average world market price for Middling one-inch upland cotton for the marketing year for such crop, as the Secretary determines will provide orderly marketing of cotton during the harvest season and will retain an adequate share of the world market for cotton produced in the United States taking into consideration the factors specified in section 1421(b) of this title: Provided, That the national average loan rate for the 1966 crop shall reflect 21 cents per pound for Middling one-inch upland cotton.
shall not be less than 65 per centum or more than 90 per centum of the parity price for cotton as of the month in which the payment rate provided for by this paragraph is announced. Such payments shall be made on the quantity of cotton determined by multiplying the projected farm yield by the acreage planted to cotton within the farm domestic acreage allotment: Provided, That any such farm planting not less than 90 per centum of such domestic acreage allotment shall be deemed to have planted the entire amount of such allotment. An acreage on a farm in any such year which the Secretary finds was not planted to cotton because of drought, flood, or other natural disaster shall be deemed to be planted to cotton for purposes of payments under this subsection if such acreage is not subsequently devoted to any other crop for which there are marketing quotas or voluntary adjustment programs in effect.
(4) The Secretary shall make diversion payments in cash or in kind in addition to the price support payments authorized in paragraph (3) to cooperators who reduce their cotton acreage by diverting a portion of their cotton acreage allotment from the production of cotton to approved conservation practices to the extent prescribed by the Secretary: Provided, That no reduction below the domestic acreage allotments established under section 1350 of this title shall be prescribed: Provided further, That payment under this paragraph shall be made available for diverting to conserving uses that part of the acreage allotment which must be diverted from cotton in order that the producer may qualify as a cooperator. The rate of payment for acreage required to be diverted in order to qualify as a cooperator shall not be less than 25 per centum of the parity price for upland cotton as of the month in which such rate is announced. The rate of payment for additional acreage diverted shall be such rate as the Secretary determines to be fair and reasonable, but shall not exceed 40 per centum of such parity price. Payment at each applicable rate shall be made on the quantity of cotton determined by multiplying the acreage diverted from the production of cotton at such rate by the projected farm yield. In addition to the foregoing payment, if any, payment at the rate applicable for acreage required to be diverted to qualify as a cooperator shall be made to producers on small farms as defined in section 1428(b) of this title who do not exceed their farm acreage allotments on a quantity of cotton determined by multiplying an acreage equal to 35 per centum of such farm acreage allotment by the projected farm yield.
(5) The Secretary may make not to exceed 50 per centum of the payments under this subsection to producers in advance of determination of performance and the balance of such payments shall be made at such time as the Secretary may prescribe.
(6) Where the farm operator elects to participate in the diversion program authorized in this subsection and no acreage is planted to cotton on the farm, diversion payments shall be made at the rate established under paragraph (4) for acreage required to be diverted to qualify as a cooperator on the quantity of cotton determined by multiplying that part of the farm acreage allotment required to be diverted to qualify as a cooperator by the projected farm yield, and the remainder of such allotment may be released under the provisions of section 1344(m)(2) of this title. The acreage on which payment is made under this paragraph shall be regarded as planted to cotton for purposes of establishing future State, county, and farm acreage allotments, and farm bases.
(7) Payments in kind under this subsection shall be made through the issuance of certificates which the Commodity Credit Corporation shall redeem for cotton under regulations issued by the Secretary at a value per pound equal to not less than the current loan rate therefor. The Corporation may, under regulations prescribed by the Secretary, assist the producers in the marketing of such certificates at such times and in such manner as the Secretary determines will best effectuate the purposes of the program authorized by this subsection.
(8) Payments under this subsection shall be conditioned on the farm having an acreage of approved conservation uses equal to the sum of (i) the reduction in cotton acreage required to qualify for such payments (hereinafter called "diverted acreage"), and (ii) the average acreage of cropland on the farm devoted to designated soil-conserving crops or practices, including summer fallow and idle land, during a base period prescribed by the Secretary: Provided, That the Secretary may permit all or any part of such diverted acreage to be devoted to the production of guar, sesame, safflower, sunflower, castor beans, mustard seed, crambe, plantago ovato, and flaxseed, if he determines that such production is necessary to provide an adequate supply of such commodities, is not likely to increase the cost of the price support program, and will not adversely affect farm income, subject to the condition that payment under paragraph (4) or (6) with respect to diverted acreage devoted to any such crop shall be at a rate determined by the Secretary to be fair and reasonable, taking into consideration the use of such acreage for the production of such crops, but in no event shall the payment exceed one-half the rate which otherwise would be applicable if such acreage were devoted to conservation uses.
(9) The acreage regarded as planted to cotton on any farm which qualifies for payment under this subsection except under paragraph (6) shall, for purposes of establishing future State, county, and farm acreage allotments and farm bases, be the farm acreage allotment established under section 1344 of this title, excluding adjustments under subsection (m)(2) thereof.
(10) The Secretary shall provide adequate safeguards to protect the interests of tenants and sharecroppers, including provision for sharing diversion payments on a fair and equitable basis under this subsection. The Secretary shall provide for the sharing of price support payments among producers on the farm on the basis of their respective shares in the cotton crop produced on the farm, or the proceeds therefrom, except that in any case in which the Secretary determines that such basis would not be fair and equitable, the Secretary shall provide for such sharing on such other basis as he may determine to be fair and equitable.
(11) In any case in which the failure of a producer to comply fully with the terms and conditions of the programs formulated under this Act preclude the making of payments under this section, the Secretary may, nevertheless, make such payments in such amounts as he determines to be equitable in relation to the seriousness of the default.
(12) Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, if, as a result of limitations hereafter enacted with respect to price support under this subsection, the Secretary is unable to make available to all cooperators the full amount of price support to which they would otherwise be entitled under paragraphs (2) and (3) of this subsection for any crop of upland cotton, (A) price support to cooperators shall be made available for such crop (if marketing quotas have not been disapproved) through loans or purchases at such level not less than 65 per centum nor more than 90 per centum of the parity price therefor as the Secretary determines appropriate; (B) in order to keep upland cotton to the maximum extent practicable in the normal channels of trade, such price support may be carried out through the simultaneous purchase of cotton at the support price therefor and resale at a lower price or through loans under which the cotton would be redeemable by payment of a price therefor lower than the amount of the loan thereon; and (C) such resale or redemption price shall be such as the Secretary determines will provide orderly marketing of cotton during the harvest season and will retain an adequate share of the world market for cotton produced in the United States.
(13) The provisions of section 590h(g) of title 16 (relating to assignment of payments), shall also apply to payments under this subsection.
(14) The Commodity Credit Corporation is authorized to utilize its capital funds and other assets for the purpose of making the payments authorized in this subsection and to pay administrative expenses necessary in carrying out this subsection.
(1) The Secretary shall upon presentation of warehouse receipts reflecting accrued storage charges of not more than 60 days make available for the 1971 through 1977 crops of upland cotton to cooperators nonrecourse loans for a term of ten months from the first day of the month in which the loan is made at such level as will reflect the Middling one-inch upland cotton (micronaire 3.5 through 4.9) at average location in the United States 90 per centum of the average price of American cotton in world markets for such cotton for the three-year period ending July 31 in the year in which the loan level is announced, except that if the loan rate so calculated is higher than the then current level of average world prices for American cotton of such quality, the Secretary is authorized to adjust the current calculated loan rate for cotton to 90 per centum of the then current average world price. The average world price for such cotton for such preceding three-year period shall be determined by the Secretary annually pursuant to a published regulation which shall specify the procedures and the factors to be used by the Secretary in making the world price determination. The loan level for any crop of upland cotton shall be determined and announced not later than November 1 of the calendar year preceding the marketing year for which such loan is to be effective. Notwithstanding the foregoing, if the carryover of upland cotton as of the beginning of the marketing year for any of the 1972 or 1973 crops exceeds 7.2 million bales, producers on any farm harvesting cotton of such crop from an acreage in excess of the base acreage allotment for such farm shall be entitled to loans and purchases only on an amount of the cotton of such crop produced on such farm determined by multiplying the yield used in computing payments for such farm by the base acreage allotment for such farm.
is less than the established price of 38 cents per pound in the case of the 1974 and 1975 crops, 38 cents per pound adjusted to reflect any change during the calendar year 1975 in the index of prices paid by farmers for production items, interest, taxes, and wage rates in the case of the 1976 crop, and the established price for the 1976 crop adjusted to reflect any change during the calendar year 1976 in such index in the case of the 1977 crop: Provided, That any increase that would otherwise be made in the established price to reflect a change in the index of prices paid by farmers shall be adjusted to reflect any change in (i) the national average yield per acre of cotton for the three calendar years preceding the year for which the determination is made, over (ii) the national average yield per acre of cotton for the three calendar years preceding the year previous to the one for which the determination is made. If the Secretary determines that the producers on a farm are prevented from planting any portion of the allotment to cotton because of drought, flood, or other natural disaster, or condition beyond the control of the producer, the rate of payment for such portion shall be the larger of (A) the foregoing rate, or (B) one-third of the established price. If the Secretary determines that, because of such a disaster or condition, the total quantity of cotton which the producers are able to harvest on any farm is less than 662/3 percent of the farm base acreage allotment times the average yield established for the farm, the rate of payment for the deficiency in production below 100 percent shall be the larger of (A) the foregoing rate, or (B) one-third of the established price. The payment rate with respect to any producer who (i) is on a small farm (that is, a farm on which the base acreage allotment is ten acres or less, or on which the yield used in making payments times the farm base acreage allotment is five thousand pounds or less, and for which the base acreage allotment has not been reduced under section 1350(f) of this title, (ii) resides on such farm, and (iii) derives his principal income from cotton produced on such farm, shall be increased by 30 per centum; but, notwithstanding paragraph (3), such increase shall be made only with respect to his share of cotton actually harvested on such farm within the quantity specified in paragraph (3).
(3) Such payments shall be made available for a farm on the quantity of upland cotton determined by multiplying the acreage planted within the farm base acreage allotment for the farm for the crop by the average yield established for the farm: Provided, That payments shall be made on any farm planting not less than 90 per centum of the farm base acreage allotment on the basis of the entire amount of such allotment. For purposes of this paragraph, an acreage on the farm which the Secretary determines was not planted to cotton because of drought, flood, other natural disaster, or a condition beyond the control of the producer shall be considered to be an acreage planted to cotton. The average yield for the farm for any year shall be determined on the basis of the actual yields per harvested acre for the three preceding years, except that the 1970 farm projected yield shall be substituted in lieu of the actual yields for the years 1968 and 1969: Provided, That the actual yields shall be adjusted by the Secretary for abnormal yields in any year caused by drought, flood, or other natural disaster: Provided further, That the average yield established for the farm for any year shall not be less than the yield used in making payments for the preceding year if the total cotton production on the farm in such preceding year is not less than the yield used in making payments for the farm for such preceding year times the farm base acreage allotment for such preceding year (for the 1970 crop, the farm domestic allotment).
(4)(A) The Secretary shall provide for a set aside of cropland if he determines that the total supply of agricultural commodities will, in the absence of such a set-aside, likely be excessive taking into account the need for an adequate carryover to maintain reasonable and stable supplies and prices and to meet a national emergency. If a set-aside of cropland is in effect under this paragraph (4), then as a condition of eligibility for loans and payments on upland cotton the producers on a farm must set aside and devote to approved conservation uses an acreage of cropland equal to (i) such percentage of the farm base acreage allotment for the farm as may be specified by the Secretary (not to exceed 28 per centum of the farm base acreage allotment), plus, if required by the Secretary, (ii) the acreage of cropland on the farm devoted in preceding years to soil conserving uses, as determined by the Secretary. The Secretary is authorized for the 1974 through 1977 crops to limit the acreage planted to upland cotton on the farm in excess of the farm base acreage allotment to a percentage of the farm base acreage allotment. The Secretary shall permit producers to plant and graze on set-aside acreage sweet sorghum, and the Secretary may permit, subject to such terms and conditions as he may prescribe, all or any of the set-aside acreage to be devoted to hay and grazing or the production of guar, sesame, safflower, sunflower, castor beans, mustard seed, crambe, plantago ovato, flaxseed, triticale, oats, rye, or other commodity, if he determines that such production is needed to provide an adequate supply, is not likely to increase the cost of the price-support program, and will not adversely affect farm income.
(B) To assist in adjusting the acreage of commodities to desirable goals, the Secretary may make land diversion payments, in addition to the payments authorized in subsection (e)(2), to producers on a farm who, to the extent prescribed by the Secretary, devote to approved conservation uses an acreage of cropland on the farm in addition to that required to be so devoted under subsection (e)(4)(A). The land diversion payments for a farm shall be at such rate or rates as the Secretary determines to be fair and reasonable taking into consideration to the diversion undertaken by the producers and the productivity of the acreage diverted. The Secretary shall limit the total acreage to be diverted under agreements in any county or local community so as not to adversely affect the economy of the county or local community.
(5) The upland cotton program formulated under this section shall require the producer to take such measures as the Secretary may deem appropriate to protect the set-aside acreage and the additional diverted acreage from erosion, insects, weeds, and rodents. Such acreage may be devoted to wildlife food plots or wildlife habitat in conformity with standards established by the Secretary in consultation with wildlife agencies. The Secretary may in the case of programs for the 1974 through 1977 crops, pay an appropriate share of the cost of practices designed to carry out the purposes of the foregoing sentences. The Secretary may provide for an additional payment on such acreage in an amount determined by the Secretary to be appropriate in relation to the benefit to the general public if the producer agrees to permit, without other compensation, access to all or such portion of the farm as the Secretary may prescribe by the general public, for hunting, trapping, fishing, and hiking, subject to applicable State and Federal regulations.
(6) If the operator of the farm desires to participate in the program formulated under this section, he shall file his agreement to do so no later than such date as the Secretary may prescribe. Loans and purchases on upland cotton and payments under this section shall be made available to the producers on such farm only if producers set aside and devote to approved soil conserving uses an acreage on the farm equal to the number of acres which the operator agrees to set aside and devote to approved soil conserving uses, and the agreement shall so provide. The Secretary may, by mutual agreement with the producer, terminate or modify any such agreement entered into pursuant to this subsection (e)(6) if he determines such action necessary because of an emergency created by drought or other disaster or in order to alleviate a shortage in the supply of agricultural commodities.
(7) The Secretary shall provide adequate safeguards to protect the interests of tenants and sharecroppers, including provision for sharing on a fair and equitable basis, in payments under this section.
(8) In any case in which the failure of a producer to comply fully with the terms and conditions of the program formulated under this section precludes the making of loans, purchases, and payments, the Secretary may, nevertheless, make such loans, purchases, and payments in such amounts as he determines to be equitable in relation to the seriousness of the default.
(9) The Secretary is authorized to issue such regulations as he determines necessary to carry out the provisions of this subchapter.
(10) The Secretary shall carry out the program authorized by this section through the Commodity Credit Corporation.
(11) The provisions of section 590h(g) of title 16 (relating to assignment of payments), shall apply to payments under this subsection.
(1) For purposes of this subsection, extra long staple cotton means cotton which is produced from pure strain varieties of the Barbadense species or any hybrid thereof, or other similar types of extra long staple cotton, designated by the Secretary, having characteristics needed for various end uses for which American upland cotton is not suitable and grown in irrigated cotton-growing regions of the United States designated by the Secretary or other areas designated by the Secretary as suitable for the production of such varieties or types and which is ginned on a roller-type gin or, if authorized by the Secretary, ginned on another type gin for experimental purposes.
(2) The Secretary shall, upon presentation of warehouse receipts reflecting accrued storage charges of not more than sixty days, make available to producers nonrecourse loans for a term of ten months from the first day of the month in which the loan is made at a level which is not less than 85 percent of the simple average price received by producers of extra long staple cotton, as determined by the Secretary, during 3 years of the 5-year period ending July 31 in the year in which the loan level is announced, excluding the year in which the average price was the highest and the year in which the average price was the lowest in such period..2 If authorized by the Secretary, nonrecourse loans provided for in this subsection may, upon request of the producer during the tenth month of the loan period for the cotton, be made available for an additional term of eight months. The loan level for any crop of extra long staple cotton shall be determined and announced by the Secretary not later than December 1 of the calendar year preceding the marketing year for which such loan is to be effective and such level shall not thereafter be changed.
is less than the established price per pound times, in each case, the farm program acreage for extra long staple cotton (determined in accordance with paragraph (5)(A), but in no event on a greater acreage than the acreage actually planted to extra long staple cotton for harvest), multiplied by the farm program payment yield for extra long staple cotton (determined in accordance with paragraph (4)).
(B) The established price for each crop of extra long staple cotton shall be 120 per centum of the loan level determined for such crop under paragraph (2) of this subsection.
(C) If the Secretary establishes an acreage limitation program for a crop of extra long staple cotton in accordance with paragraph (5)(A) and determines that deficiency payments will likely be made for such crop of extra long staple cotton under subparagraph (A) of this paragraph, the Secretary may make available advance deficiency payments for such crop to producers who agree to participate in the acreage limitation program. Such advance payments shall be made available to producers as soon as practicable after the producer files a notice of intention to participate in such acreage limitation program and in such amount as the Secretary determines appropriate to encourage adequate participation in such program, except that such amount shall not exceed an amount determined by multiplying (i) the estimated farm program acreage for the crop, by (ii) the farm program payment yield for the crop, by (iii) 50 per centum of the projected payment rate, as determined by the Secretary. In any case in which the deficiency payment payable to a producer for a crop, as finally determined by the Secretary under subparagraph (A) of this paragraph, is less than the amount paid to the producer as an advance deficiency payment under this paragraph, the producer shall refund an amount equal to the difference between the amount advanced and the amount finally determined by the Secretary to be payable to the producer. If the Secretary determines that no deficiency payments are due producers on a crop, the producer who received advanced payments on such crop shall refund such payments. If a producer fails to comply with the requirements under the acreage limitation program after obtaining an advance deficiency payment under this paragraph, the producer shall immediately repay the amount of the advance, plus interest thereon in such amount as the Secretary shall prescribe.
(4) The farm program payment yield for each crop of extra long staple cotton shall be determined on the basis of the actual yields per harvested acre on the farm for the preceding three years, except that the actual yields shall be adjusted by the Secretary for abnormal yields in any year caused by drought, flood, or other natural disaster, or other condition beyond the control of the producers. In case farm yield data for one or more years are unavailable or there was no production, the Secretary shall provide for appraisals to be made on the basis of actual yields and program payment yields for similar farms in the area for which data are available. Notwithstanding the foregoing provisions of this paragraph in the determination of yields, the Secretary shall take into account the actual yields proved by the producer, and neither such yields nor the farm program payment yield established on the basis of such yields shall be reduced under other provisions of this paragraph. If the Secretary determines it necessary, the Secretary may establish national, State, or county program payment yields on the basis of historical yields, as adjusted by the Secretary to correct for abnormal factors affecting such yields in the historical period, or, if such data are not available, on the Secretary's estimate of actual yields for the crop year involved. If national, State, or county program payment yields are established, the farm program payment yields shall balance to the national, State, or county program payment yields.
(5)(A)(i) Notwithstanding any other provision of this subsection, the Secretary may establish a limitation on the acreage planted to extra long staple cotton if the Secretary determines that the total supply of extra long staple cotton, in the absence of such limitation, will be excessive taking into account the need for an adequate carryover to maintain reasonable and stable prices and to meet a national emergency. Such limitation shall be achieved by applying a uniform percentage reduction (including a zero percentage reduction) to the acreage base for each extra long staple cotton-producing farm. Producers who knowingly produce extra long staple cotton in excess of the permitted acreage for the farm shall be ineligible for extra long staple cotton loans and payments with respect to that farm. The acreage base for any farm for the purpose of determining any reduction required to be made for any year as a result of a limitation under this subparagraph shall be the average acreage planted on the farm to extra long staple cotton for harvest in the three crop years immediately preceding the year prior to the year for which the determination is made. For the purpose of the preceding sentence, acreage planted to extra long staple cotton for harvest shall include any acreage which the producers were prevented from planting to extra long staple cotton or other nonconserving crops in lieu of extra long staple cotton because of drought, flood, or other natural disaster or other condition beyond the control of the producers. The Secretary may make adjustments to reflect established crop-rotation practices and to reflect such other factors as the Secretary determines should be considered in determining a fair and equitable base. There is hereby established for the 1984, 1985, and 1986 crops an acreage base reserve equal to 5 per centum of the total of the farm acreage bases established for the crop under the foregoing provisions of this subparagraph. Such reserve shall be in addition to the total of the farm acreage bases and shall be used by the county committees, in accordance with regulations of the Secretary, for making adjustments of farm acreage bases to correct inequities and prevent hardship, and for establishing bases for farms on which no extra long staple cotton was planted during the preceding four years. A number of acres on the farm determined by dividing (i) the product obtained by multiplying the number of acres required to be withdrawn from the production of extra long staple cotton times the number of acres actually planted to such commodity, by (ii) the number of acres authorized to be planted to such commodity under the limitation established by the Secretary, shall be devoted to conservation uses, in accordance with regulations issued by the Secretary, which will assure protection of such acreage from weeds and wind and water erosion. The number of acres so determined is hereafter in this subsection referred to as "reduced acreage". The Secretary may permit, subject to such terms and conditions as the Secretary may prescribe, all or any part of the reduced acreage to be devoted to sweet sorghum, hay and grazing, or the production of guar, sesame, safflower, sunflower, castor beans, mustard seed, crambe, plantago ovato, flaxseed, triticale, rye, or other commodity, if the Secretary determines that such production is needed to provide an adequate supply of such commodities, is not likely to increase the cost of the price support program, and will not affect farm income adversely. The individual farm program acreage shall be the actual acreage planted on the farm to extra long staple cotton for harvest within the permitted extra long staple cotton acreage for the farm as established under this paragraph.
(ii) Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, the Secretary shall ensure, under such terms and conditions as may be prescribed by the Secretary, that the total of the crop acreage bases established on a farm which is enrolled in a production adjustment program for any commodity shall not be increased as a result of the application of the provisions set forth in paragraph (13)(C), as extended for the 1989 and 1990 crop.
(B) The Secretary may make land diversion payments to producers of extra long staple cotton, whether or not an acreage limitation program for extra long staple cotton is in effect, if the Secretary determines that such land diversion payments are necessary to assist in adjusting the total national acreage of extra long staple cotton to desirable goals. Such land diversion payments shall be made to producers who, to the extent prescribed by the Secretary, devote to approved conservation uses an acreage of cropland on the farm in accordance with land diversion contracts entered into by the Secretary with such producers. The amounts payable to producers under land diversion contracts may be determined through the submission of bids for such contracts by producers in such manner as the Secretary may prescribe or through such other means as the Secretary determines appropriate. In determining the acceptability of contract offers, the Secretary shall take into consideration the extent of the diversion to be undertaken by the producers and the productivity of the acreage diverted. The Secretary shall limit the total acreage to be diverted under agreements in any county or local community so as not to affect adversely the economy of the county or local community.
(C) The reduced acreage and the diverted acreage may be devoted to wildlife food plots or wildlife habitat in conformity with standards established by the Secretary in consultation with wildlife agencies. The Secretary may pay an appropriate share of the cost of practices designed to carry out the purpose of the foregoing sentence. The Secretary may provide for an additional payment on such acreage in an amount determined by the Secretary to be appropriate in relation to the benefit to the general public if the producer agrees to permit, without other compensation, access to all or such portion of the farm, as the Secretary may prescribe, by the general public, for hunting, trapping, fishing, and hiking, subject to applicable State and Federal regulations.
(6) An operator of a farm desiring to participate in the program conducted under paragraph (5) shall execute an agreement with the Secretary providing for such participation not later than such date as the Secretary may prescribe. The Secretary may, by mutual agreement with the producers on the farm, terminate or modify any such agreement if the Secretary determines such action necessary because of an emergency created by drought or other disaster or to prevent or alleviate a shortage in the supply of agricultural commodities.
(7) The Secretary shall provide for the sharing of payments made under this subsection for any farm among the producers on the farm on a fair and equitable basis.
(8) The Secretary shall provide adequate safeguards to protect the interests of tenants and sharecroppers.
(9) If the failure of a producer to comply fully with the terms and conditions of the program formulated under this subsection precludes the making of loans and payments, the Secretary may, nevertheless, make such loans and payments in such amounts as the Secretary determines to be equitable in relation to the seriousness of the failure. The Secretary may authorize the county and State committees established under section 590h(b) of title 16 to waive or modify deadlines and other program requirements in cases in which lateness or failure to meet such other requirements does not affect adversely the operation of the program.
(10) The Secretary may issue such regulations as the Secretary determines necessary to carry out the provisions of this subsection.
(11) The Secretary shall carry out the program authorized by this subsection through the Commodity Credit Corporation.
(12) The provisions of section 590h(g) of title 16 (relating to assignment of payments) shall apply to payments made under this subsection.
(13)(A) Compliance on a farm with the terms and conditions of any other commodity program or compliance with crop acreage base requirements for any other commodity may not be required as a condition of eligibility for loans or payments under this section.
(B) The Secretary may not require producers on a farm, as a condition of eligibility for loans or payments under this section for the farm, to comply with the terms and conditions of the extra long staple cotton program with respect to any other farm operated by the producers.
(14) In order to encourage and assist producers in the orderly ginning and marketing of their extra long staple cotton production, the Secretary shall make recourse loans available to such producers on seed cotton in accordance with authority vested in the Secretary under the Commodity Credit Corporation Charter Act [15 U.S.C. 714 et seq.].
(15) References made in sections 1422, 1423, 1426,3 1427, and 1431 of this title to the terms "support price", "level of support", and "level of price support" shall be considered to apply as well to the level of loans for extra long staple cotton under this subsection; and references to the terms "price support", "price support operations", and "price support program" in such sections and in section 1421(a) of this title shall be considered as applying as well to the loan operations for extra long staple cotton under this subsection.
(16) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, this subsection shall not be applicable to the 1996 and subsequent crops of extra long staple cotton.
Section 1441(d) of this title, referred to in subsec. (a), was redesignated section 1441(c) of this title by Pub. L. 108–357, title VI, §612(b)(4), Oct. 22, 2004, 118 Stat. 1524 .
This Act, referred to in subsecs. (d)(1), (11), (12) and (h)(5)(A)(ii), is act Oct. 31, 1949, ch. 792, 63 Stat. 1051 , as amended, known as the Agricultural Act of 1949, which is classified principally to this chapter (§1421 et seq.). For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Short Title note set out under section 1421 of this title and Tables.
The Commodity Credit Corporation Charter Act, referred to in subsec. (h)(14), is act June 29, 1948, ch. 704, 62 Stat. 1070 , as amended, which is classified generally to subchapter II (§714 et seq.) of chapter 15 of Title 15, Commerce and Trade. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Short Title note set out under section 714 of Title 15 and Tables.
Section 1426 of this title, referred to in subsec. (h)(15), was repealed by Pub. L. 104–127, title I, §171(b)(2)(I), Apr. 4, 1996, 110 Stat. 938 .
1990-Subsec. (h)(3)(A). Pub. L. 101–624, §506(b)(1), substituted "paragraph (5)(A)" for "paragraph (6) or paragraph (8)(A) of this subsection" and "paragraph (4)" for "paragraph (7) of this subsection".
Subsec. (h)(3)(C). Pub. L. 101–624, §506(b)(2), substituted "paragraph (5)(A)" for "paragraph (8)(A) of this subsection".
Subsec. (h)(4). Pub. L. 101–624, §506(a)(1), (2), redesignated par. (7) as (4) and struck out former par. (4) which related to establishment of a national program acreage for extra long staple cotton by Secretary.
Subsec. (h)(5). Pub. L. 101–624, §506(a)(1)–(3), redesignated par. (8) as (5), inserted "(including a zero percentage reduction)" after "reduction" in subpar. (A)(i), and struck out former par. (5) which required Secretary to determine a program allocation factor, not to exceed 100 per centum for each crop of extra long staple cotton.
Pub. L. 101–624, §506(b)(3), struck out before last sentence in subpar. (A)(i) the following: "If an acreage limitation program is announced under this paragraph for a crop of extra long staple cotton, paragraphs (4), (5), and (6) of this subsection shall not be applicable to such crop, including any prior announcement which may have been made under such paragraphs with respect to such crop."
Pub. L. 101–624, §506(b)(4), substituted "paragraph (13)(C)" for "paragraph (16)(C)" in subpar. (A)(ii).
Subsec. (h)(6). Pub. L. 101–624, §506(b)(5), substituted "paragraph (5)" for "paragraph (8) of this subsection".
Pub. L. 101–624, §506(a)(1), (2), redesignated par. (9) as (6) and struck out former par. (6) which provided a formula for determining individual farm program acreage for each crop of extra long staple cotton by multiplying allocation factor by acreage of extra long staple cotton planted for harvest on each farm for which individual farm program acreages are required to be determined.
Subsec. (h)(7) to (12). Pub. L. 101–624, §506(a)(2), redesignated pars. (10) to (15) as (7) to (12), respectively. Former pars. (7) to (9) redesignated (4) to (6), respectively.
"(A) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, except as provided in subparagraph (B), compliance on a farm with the terms and conditions of any other commodity program may not be required as a condition of eligibility for loans or payments under this subsection.
"(B) In the case of each of the 1989 and 1990 crops of extra long staple cotton, the Secretary may require that, as a condition of eligibility of producers for loans or payments under this subsection, the acreage planted for harvest on the farm to any other commodity for which an acreage limitation program is in effect shall not exceed the crop acreage base established for the farm for that commodity.
"(C) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, in the case of each of the 1987 through 1990 crops of extra long staple cotton, compliance with the terms and conditions of the program authorized by this subsection may not be required as a condition of eligibility for loans, purchases, or payments under any other commodity program."
Subsec. (h)(14), (15). Pub. L. 101–624, §506(a)(2), redesignated pars. (17) and (18) as (14) and (15), respectively. Former pars. (14) and (15) redesignated (11) and (12), respectively.
Subsec. (h)(16). Pub. L. 101–624, §506(a)(2), (5), redesignated par. (19) as (16) and substituted "1996" for "1991". Former par. (16) redesignated (13).
Subsec. (h)(17) to (19). Pub. L. 101–624, §506(a)(2), redesignated pars. (17) to (19) as (14) to (16), respectively.
1988-Subsec. (f)(3). Pub. L. 100–418 substituted "subheadings 9904.30.10 through 9904.30.30 of chapter 99 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States" for "items 955.01 through 955.03 of the Appendix to the Tariff Schedules of the United States".
Subsec. (h)(8)(A). Pub. L. 100–331, §2, designated existing provisions as cl. (i) and added cl. (ii).
Subsec. (h)(16)(C). Pub. L. 100–331, §1, substituted "through 1990" for "and 1988".
1987-Subsec. (h)(3)(B). Pub. L. 100–203 temporarily (see Effective and Termination Dates of 1987 Amendment note below) substituted "Except as provided in clause (ii), the" for "The" and added cl. (ii) which read as follows: "In the case of each of the 1988 and 1989 crops of extra long staple cotton, the established price for each such crop shall be 118.3 percent of the loan level determined for such crop under paragraph (2)."
1986-Subsec. (h)(16). Pub. L. 99–500, Pub. L. 99–591, and Pub. L. 99–641, in generally amending par. (16) identically, designated existing provisions as subpar. (A), inserted "except as provided in subparagraph (B)," and added subpars. (B) and (C).
1985-Subsec. (h)(2). Pub. L. 99–198, §507(1), in first sentence substituted "85 percent or the simple average price received by producers of extra long staple cotton, as determined by the Secretary, during 3 years of the 5-year period ending July 31 in the year in which the loan level is announced, excluding the year in which the average price was the highest and the year in which the average price was the lowest in such period." for "50 per centum in excess of the loan level established for each crop of Strict Low Middling one and one-sixteenth inch upland cotton (micronaire 3.5 through 4.9) at average location in the United States", and, in last sentence substituted "December 1" for "November 1" and struck out ", or within 10 days after the loan level for the related crop of upland cotton is announced, whichever is later,".
Pub. L. 99–114, §3(1), inserted ", or within 10 days after the loan level for the related crop of upland cotton is announced, whichever is later,".
Subsec. (h)(4). Pub. L. 99–114, §3(2), inserted "and announce" after "The Secretary shall establish" and struck out sentence which had provided that national program acreage for extra long staple cotton had to be announced by the Secretary not later than November 1 of the calendar year preceding the year for which such acreage was established.
Subsec. (h)(19). Pub. L. 99–198, §507(2), added par. (19).
1984-Subsec. (g)(3)(B). Pub. L. 98–258, §301, substituted "and $0.81 per pound for the 1984 and 1985 crops" for "$0.81 per pound for the 1984 crop, and $0.86 per pound for the 1985 crop".
Subsec. (g)(9)(A). Pub. L. 98–258, §302(1), inserted "except as provided in the second and third sentences of this subparagraph," after "Notwithstanding any other provision of this subsection,".
Pub. L. 98–258, §302(2), inserted sentences providing that for the 1985 crop of upland cotton, if the Secretary estimates that the quantity of upland cotton on hand in the United States on July 31, 1985 (not including any quantity of upland cotton produced in the United States during calendar year 1985), will exceed three million seven hundred thousand bales, the Secretary (i) shall provide for a land division [diversion] program as described under subparagraph (B) under which the acreage planted to upland cotton for harvest on the farm would be limited to the acreage base for the farm reduced by not less than 5 per centum and (ii) may provide for an acreage limitation program as described under this subparagraph under which the acreage planted to upland cotton for harvest on the farm would be limited to the acreage base for the farm reduced by not more than 20 per centum in addition to the reduction required under clause (i), that if the Secretary implements a combined acreage limitation program and land division [diversion] program, any reduction required by the Secretary in excess of 25 per centum of the acreage base for the farm shall be made under the land diversion program, and that, as a condition of eligibility for loans, purchases, and payments on the 1985 crop of upland cotton, if the Secretary implements a land diversion program or a combined acreage limitation and land diversion program, the producers on a farm must comply with the terms and conditions of such program.
Subsec. (g)(9)(B). Pub. L. 98–258, §302(3), inserted sentences providing that if the Secretary implements a land diversion program for the 1985 crop of upland cotton under the provisions of subparagraph (A), the Secretary shall make crop retirement and conservation payments to any producer of the 1985 crop of upland cotton whose acreage planted to upland cotton for harvest on the farm is reduced so that it does not exceed the upland cotton acreage base for the farm less an amount equivalent to the percentage of the acreage base specified by the Secretary, but not less than 5 per centum, in addition to the reduction required under the acreage limitation program under subparagraph (A), if any, and who devotes to approved conservation uses an acreage of cropland equivalent to the reduction required from the upland cotton acreage base under this subparagraph, that such payments shall be made in an amount computed by multiplying (i) the diversion payment rate, by (ii) the farm program payment yield for the crop, by (iii) the acreage diverted under this subparagraph, that the diversion payment rate shall be established by the Secretary at not less than $0.275 per pound: Provided, That if the Secretary estimates that the quantity of upland cotton on hand in the United States on July 31, 1985 (not including any quantity of upland cotton produced in the United States during calendar year 1985), will exceed (I) four million one hundred thousand bales, such rate shall be established by the Secretary at not less than $0.30 per pound, and (II) four million seven hundred thousand bales such rate shall be established by the Secretary at not less than $0.35 per pound, that the Secretary shall make not less than 50 per centum of any payments under this subparagraph to producers of the 1985 crop as soon as practicable after a producer enters into a land diversion contract with the Secretary and in advance of any determination of performance, and that if a producer fails to comply with a land diversion contract after obtaining an advance payment under this subparagraph, the producer shall repay the advance immediately and, in accordance with regulations issued by the Secretary, pay interest on the advance.
1983-Subsec. (h). Pub. L. 98–88 added subsec. (h).
Subsec. (f)(3). Pub. L. 97–446 temporarily substituted provision relating to the special quota status of Tariff Schedule items 955.01 and 955.03 before a special quota established under this subsection is filled and the cotton in question is duty free, for provision that, notwithstanding any other provision of law, the foregoing provisions of this subsection with respect to extension of the loan period and to proclamation of the special quota was to become effective Oct. 1, 1977, even though the cotton might have been of a crop prior to the 1978 crop. See Effective and Termination Dates of 1983 Amendment note below.
1981-Subsec. (g). Pub. L. 97–98 temporarily added subsec. (g). See Effective and Termination Dates of 1981 Amendment note below.
1980-Subsec. (f)(5)(A). Pub. L. 96–365, §201(b)(1), substituted "Except as otherwise provided in subparagraph (C) of this paragraph, effective with respect to the 1978 through 1981 crops of upland cotton" for "Effective only with respect to the 1978, 1979, and 1980 crops of upland cotton".
Pub. L. 96–213, §4(b)(1), substituted "1978, 1979, and 1980 crops of upland cotton" for "1978 and 1979 crops of upland cotton".
Subsec. (f)(5)(B). Pub. L. 96–365, §201(b)(2), substituted "Except as otherwise provided in subparagraph (C) of this paragraph, effective with respect to the 1978 through 1981 crops of upland cotton" for "Effective only with respect to the 1978, 1979, and 1980 crops of upland cotton".
Pub. L. 96–213, §4(b)(2), substituted "1978, 1979, and 1980 crops of upland cotton" for "1978 and 1979 crops of upland cotton".
Subsec. (f)(5)(C). Pub. L. 96–365, §201(b)(3), added subpar. (C).
1978-Subsec. (f)(1). Pub. L. 95–402 purported to strike out the fourth sentence of subsec. (f)(1). The enacting clause, however, stated that Pub. L. 95–402 was enacted to amend subsec. (f)(1) ". . . to ensure that the interest rates on price support loans for upland cotton are not less favorable to producers than the interest rates for such loans on other commodities". Accordingly, the third sentence of subsec. (f)(1) was struck out as the probable intent of Congress because it related to interest rates while the fourth sentence related to extension of the loan period and establishment of a special limited global import quota.
Pub. L. 95–279 temporarily substituted "during three years of the five-year period ending July 31" for "during the four-year period ending July 31" and inserted "excluding the year in which the average price was the highest and the year in which the average price was the lowest in such period" in cl. (i), substituted "for the fifteen-week period beginning July 1" for "for the first two full weeks of October" in cl. (ii), and inserted proviso relating to the minimum loan level and the power of the Secretary to raise the loan level as he may deem appropriate when the average Northern European price is less than the average United States spot market price. See Effective and Termination Dates of 1978 Amendment note below.
1977-Subsec. (f). Pub. L. 95–113 temporarily added subsec. (f). See Effective and Termination Dates of 1977 Amendment note below.
1973-Subsec. (e)(1). Pub. L. 93–86, §1(20)(A), (B), substituted "1971 through 1977 crops of upland cotton" for "1971, 1972, and 1973 crops of upland cotton", "three-year period" for "two-year period" in two places, "except that if the loan rate so calculated is higher than the then current level of average world prices for American cotton of such quality, the Secretary is authorized to adjust the current calculated loan rate for cotton to 90 per centum of the then current average world price" for "except that to prevent the establishment of such a loan level as would adversely affect the competitive position of United States upland cotton, following one or more years of excessively high prices the Secretary shall make such adjustments as are necessary to keep United States upland cotton competitive and to retain an adequate share of the world market for such cotton", "average price of American cotton in world markets" for "acreage world price", and "any of the 1972 through 1977 crops" for "the 1972 or 1973 crop".
Subsec. (e)(2). Pub. L. 93–86, §1(20)(C), substituted provisions setting out the formula for determining payments for each crop of cotton to the producers on each farm using, as elements of such formula, the average market price received by farmers for upland cotton during the calendar year which includes the first five months of the marketing year for such crop, as determined by the Secretary, the loan level determined under paragraph (1) for such crop, an established price of 38 cents per pound in the case of the 1974 and 1975 crops, adjusted prices in the case of the 1976 and 1977 crops, adjustment of increases to reflect changes in the national average yield per acre of cotton for the three calendar years preceding the year for which the determination is made over the national average yield per acre of cotton for the three calendar years preceding the year previous to the one for which the determination is made, and covering prevention of planting due to natural disasters and conditions for provisions authorizing payments by the Secretary to cooperators on the 1971, 1972, and 1973 crops of upland cotton, and struck out provisions directing preliminary payments to producers as soon as practicable after July 1 of the year in which the crop is harvested at a rate equal to 15 cents per pound.
Pub. L. 93–125 substituted "prevented from planting any portion" for "prevented from planting, any portion".
Subsec. (e)(4)(A). Pub. L. 93–86, §1(20)(D)–(F), inserted ", if required by the Secretary," before "(ii) the acreage of cropland on the farm devoted in preceding years to soil conserving uses, as determined by the Secretary", substituted "The Secretary is authorized for the 1974 through 1977 crops to limit the acreage planted to upland cotton on the farm in excess of the farm base acreage allotment to a percentage of the farm base acreage allotment" for "If the Secretary determines prior to the planting season for such crop that the carryover of upland cotton as of the beginning of the marketing year for the 1972 or 1973 crop will exceed 7.2 million bales, the Secretary is authorized for such crop to limit the acreage planted to upland cotton on the farm in excess of the farm base acreage allotment to such percentage of the farm base acreage allotment as he determines necessary to reduce the total supply to a reasonable level", deleted provision prohibiting grazing during any of the five principal months of the normal growing season as determined by the county committee established pursuant to section 590h(b) of Title 16, and inserted provisions authorizing the raising of hay on set-aside acreage and the production of triticale, oats, and rye.
Subsec. (e)(5). Pub. L. 93–86, §1(20)(G), authorized Secretary in case of programs for 1974 through 1977 crops to pay an appropriate share of cost of practices designed to protect set-aside acreage from erosion, insects, weeds, and rodents and to provide wildlife food plots or wildlife habitat.
1970-Subsec. (e). Pub. L. 91–524 added subsec. (e).
1968-Subsec. (d)(1). Pub. L. 90–559 provided for a one year extension, substituting "1966 through 1970" for "1966, 1967, 1968, and 1969".
1966-Subsec. (d)(3). Pub. L. 89–451 substituted "crop for which there are marketing quotas or voluntary adjustment programs in effect" for "income producing crop in such year" in last sentence.
1965-Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 89–112 provided that the Secretary shall deem an acreage on a farm which he finds was not planted to cotton in 1965 because of flood, drought, or other natural disaster to be an actual acreage of cotton planted on the farm for harvest when that acreage was not subsequently devoted to any price support crop in 1965.
Subsec. (d). Pub. L. 89–321 added subsec. (d).
1964-Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 88–297, §103(b)(1), (2), designated existing provisions as subsec. (a) and provided that the price support for the 1964 cotton crop shall be a national average support price which reflects 30 cents per pound for Middling one-inch cotton.
Subsecs. (b), (c). Pub. L. 88–297, §103(b)(3), added subsecs. (b) and (c).
Amendment by Pub. L. 101–624 effective beginning with 1991 crop of an agricultural commodity, with provision for prior crops, see section 1171 of Pub. L. 101–624, set out as a note under section 1421 of this title.
Amendment by Pub. L. 100–418 effective Jan. 1, 1989, and applicable with respect to articles entered on or after such date, see section 1217(b)(1) of Pub. L. 100–418, set out as a note under section 3001 of Title 19, Customs Duties.
Pub. L. 100–203, title I, §1101(d), Dec. 22, 1987, 101 Stat. 1330–2 , provided that the amendment made by section 1101(d) is effective only for the 1988 and 1989 crops of extra long staple cotton.
Pub. L. 98–88, §4, Aug. 26, 1983, 97 Stat. 494 , provided that the amendment made by section 4 is effective beginning with the 1984 crop of extra long staple cotton.
Pub. L. 97–446, title I, §155, Jan. 12, 1983, 96 Stat. 2345 , provided that the amendment made by section 155 is effective for the 1982 through 1985 crops of upland cotton.
Pub. L. 97–98, title V, §502, Dec. 22, 1981, 95 Stat. 1234 , provided that the amendment made by section 502 is effective only for the 1982 through 1985 crops of upland cotton.
Pub. L. 95–279, title I, §102, May 15, 1978, 92 Stat. 240 , provided that the amendment made by section 102 is effective only with respect to the 1978 through 1981 crops of upland cotton.
Amendment by Pub. L. 95–279 effective Oct. 1, 1978, and applicability to elections by producers receiving loans and payments prior to such date, see section 103 of Pub. L. 95–279, set out as a note under section 1309 of this title.
Pub. L. 95–113, title VI, §602, Sept. 29, 1977, 91 Stat. 934 , provided that the amendment made by section 602 is effective only with respect to the 1978 through 1981 crops of upland cotton, except as otherwise provided therein.
Pub. L. 93–86, §1(20)(C), Aug. 10, 1973, 87 Stat. 233 , provided that the amendment made by section 1(20)(C) is effective beginning with the 1974 crop.
Pub. L. 93–86, §1(20)(D), Aug. 10, 1973, 87 Stat. 234 , provided that the amendment made by section 1(20)(D), authorizing Secretary for the 1974 through 1977 crops to limit acreage planted in upland cotton on farm in excess of farm base acreage allotment to a percentage of farm base acreage allotment, is effective beginning with the 1974 crop.
Pub. L. 91–524, title VI, §602, Nov. 30, 1970, 84 Stat. 1374 , provided that the amendment made by section 602 is effective beginning with the 1971 crop of upland cotton.
Subsec. (a) of this section inapplicable to 2014 through 2018 crops of covered commodities, cotton, and sugar and inapplicable to milk during period beginning Feb. 7, 2014, through Dec. 31, 2018, see section 9092(b)(2) of this title.
Subsec. (a) of this section inapplicable to 2008 through 2012 crops of covered commodities, peanuts, and sugar and inapplicable to milk during period beginning June 18, 2008, through Dec. 31, 2012, see section 8782(b)(2) of this title.
Subsec. (a) of this section inapplicable to 2002 through 2007 crops of covered commodities, peanuts, and sugar and inapplicable to milk during period beginning May 13, 2002, through Dec. 31, 2007, see section 7992(b)(2) of this title.
Subsec. (a) of this section inapplicable to 1996 through 2002 crops of loan commodities, peanuts, and sugar and inapplicable to milk during period beginning Apr. 4, 1996, and ending Dec. 31, 2002, see section 7301(b)(1)(B) of this title.
Pub. L. 101–624, title V, §503, Nov. 28, 1990, 104 Stat. 3440 , provided that: "Section 103(a) of the Agricultural Act of 1949 (7 U.S.C. 1444(a)) shall not be applicable to the 1991 through 1995 crops."
Pub. L. 99–198, title V, §504, Dec. 23, 1985, 99 Stat. 1418 , provided that: "Sections 103(a) and 203 of the Agricultural Act of 1949 (7 U.S.C. 1444(a) and 1446d) shall not be applicable to the 1986 through 1990 crops."
Pub. L. 97–98, title V, §504, Dec. 22, 1981, 95 Stat. 1241 , provided that: "Sections 103(a) and 203 of the Agricultural Act of 1949 [sections 1444(a) and 1446d of this title] shall not be applicable to the 1982 through 1985 crops."
Pub. L. 95–113, title VI, §604(c), Sept. 29, 1977, 91 Stat. 939 , provided that: "Sections 103(a) and 203 of the Agricultural Act of 1949, as amended [sections 1444(a) and 1446d of this title] shall not be applicable to the 1978 through 1981 crops."


William T. SPRINGER, Appellant–Petitioner,v.STATE of Indiana, Appellee–Respondent.
Stephen T. Owens, Public Defender of Indiana, Kristen Phair, Deputy Public Defender, Indianapolis, IN, Attorneys for Appellant.Gregory F. Zoeller, Attorney General of Indiana, Ellen H. Meilaender, Deputy Attorney General, Indianapolis, IN, Attorneys for Appellee.
William T. Springer appeals the post-conviction court's denial of his petition for post-conviction relief. Springer raises two issues, which we consolidate and restate as whether the post-conviction court erred in denying Springer's petition for relief. We reverse.
The relevant facts follow. On November 2, 2005, Springer broke and entered the business of Ed Tackett with the intent to commit theft. Springer then exerted unauthorized control over Tackett's property with the intent to deprive Tackett of the value and use of the property. That same day, Springer broke and entered a recreational vehicle belonging to Sam Hall and damaged the vehicle. Springer also broke into the residential dwelling of Ray Walker by throwing a brick through a window with the intent to commit theft.
On January 6, 2006, Springer was arrested and incarcerated in the Whitley County Jail. Springer attempted to murder his cellmate by “striking, kicking, and/or choking [his cellmate, and] striking solid surfaces with his head and/or twisting his neck....” Petitioner's Exhibit 1 at 10.
On November 4, 2005, the State charged Springer under cause number 92C01–0511–FB–189 (“Cause No. 189”) with attempted burglary as a class B felony, burglary as a class C felony, theft as a class D felony, criminal mischief as a class B misdemeanor, and being an habitual offender.
On January 12, 2006, the State charged Springer with attempted murder under cause number 92C01–0601–FA–6 (“Cause No. 6”).
On March 20, 2006, twenty-six-year-old Springer pled guilty as charged under both cause numbers. The plea agreement stated that “the punishment which the law provides for the charge to which [Springer is] pleading guilty is: 36 years—141 years” and capped Springer's sentence at 100 years. Petitioner's Exhibit 6. The plea agreement stated that all sentences under Cause No. 189 would be served concurrent with one another and that the sentence under Cause No. 6 would be served consecutive to the sentence under Cause No. 189. The plea agreement also provided that the State agreed not to file an habitual offender charge under Cause No. 6.
Both parties indicate that Springer pled guilty as charged. The plea agreement states that Springer pled guilty under Cause No. 189 to Count II, burglary as a class B felony, while the charging information alleged Count II as burglary as a class C felony. However, a handwritten notation on the plea agreement appears to change either Count II to a class C felony or Count IV from a class B misdemeanor, which was alleged in the charging information, to a class C misdemeanor.
The amount cited as Springer's maximum sentence of 141 years appears to include sentencing Springer as an habitual offender under both Cause No. 189 and Cause No. 6 and ordering those sentences to be served consecutive to each other.
The court held a hearing that day regarding Springer's guilty plea under both cause numbers. At the hearing, Springer's attorney requested a psychiatric evaluation of Springer, and the court granted the request. Two psychiatrists or psychologists examined Springer and did not believe that Springer suffered from a mental disease or defect or insanity.
On May 30, 2006, the court held a consolidated sentencing hearing. Under Cause No. 189, the court found the following aggravators: (1) Springer's criminal history; (2) Springer's history of violating probation; (3) that Springer was on probation at the time of the offenses; (4) that Springer was in need of correctional or rehabilitative treatment; and (5) that Springer was a risk to commit future crimes. The court found the following mitigators: (1) Springer had his G.E.D.; (2) Springer's history of mental illness as a juvenile; (3) Springer's mental health issues; and (4) Springer's acceptance of responsibility by pleading guilty. The court found that the aggravators outweighed the mitigators and sentenced Springer to sixteen years for Count I, attempted burglary as a class B felony. The court ordered that the sentences for Counts II, III, and IV be served concurrent with Count I. The court enhanced the sentence for attempted burglary as a class B felony by twenty years due to his status as an habitual felony offender, for an aggregate sentence under Cause No. 189 of thirty-six years.
Under Cause No. 6, the court found the same mitigators and the same aggravators and also found the fact that “the victim did absolutely nothing to provoke the attack” as an additional aggravator. Petitioner's Exhibit 1 at 24. The court sentenced Springer to fifty years for attempted murder to be served consecutive to the sentences under Cause No. 189 for a total aggregate sentence of eighty-six years.
The court also revoked Springer's probation under cause number 0109–CF–177 and ordered Springer to serve two years of his suspended sentence consecutive to his sentence of eighty-six years.
counsel and that he did not knowingly, intelligently, or voluntarily enter into his plea agreement. On June 1, 2010, Springer filed an amendment to his petition for post-conviction relief. Springer cited Breaston v. State, 907 N.E.2d 992 (Ind.2009), for the proposition that a trial court could not order consecutive habitual offender sentences.
On August 31, 2010, the court held a hearing on Springer's petitions. At the hearing, Springer's trial counsel testified that he informed Springer that the penal consequences were “anywhere from thirty-six to one hundred forty-one years.” Transcript at 6. Springer's counsel stated that he was not aware of the Breaston case because it was handed down in 2009, but that he “did read through the cases and [he became] aware the [sic] Sarks [ Starks ] case, the Smith case and the Ingham [ Ingram ] case. Each of which was decided before Mr. Springer's case and each of which decided on separate grounds that habitual offender enhancements could not be sentenced consecutively.” Id. at 14. Springer's counsel also indicated that the maximum sentence Springer could have received under the plea agreement was one hundred years.
Q. So why did you plead guilty?
A. I pled guilty because I was pretty much informed that I was going to die in prison, otherwise, and that I was certain that the seriousness of the crimes weren't to the point where I was going to be maxed out on pretty much everything. I wasn't completely maxed out.
Q. Would you have accepted this plea agreement if you had known that you could not have received a hundred and forty-one years?
A. There ain't no way.
Q. If you had known that you could not receive, in fact, a consecutive habitual offender enhancement?
A. Absolutely not. Id. at 15–16.
On September 28, 2010, Springer filed his proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law and cited Starks v. State, 523 N.E.2d 735 (Ind.1988), Ingram v. State, 761 N.E.2d 883 (Ind.Ct.App.2002), and Smith v. State, 774 N.E.2d 1021 (Ind.Ct.App.2002), trans. denied, in support of his argument that consecutive habitual offender enhancements were improper. On September 30, 2010, the State filed its proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law and noted that Breaston v. State, 907 N.E.2d 992 (Ind.2009), was decided after Springer's guilty plea.
2. [Springer] was advised correctly as to his potential sentence according to the state of the law at the time of his guilty plea.
3. [Springer] cites Breaston v. State, 907 N.E.2d 992 (Ind.2009) for the proposition that two HFO enhancements of this type cannot be run consecutively. However, [Springer's] change of plea took place in March of 2006. In March of 2006, the law was not clearly established on this issue.
4. In 2008, the Indiana Court of Appeals found the law to be contrary to that ultimately decided by the Indiana Supreme Court in 2009. In Breaston v. State, 893 N.E.2d 6 (Ind.App.2008) the Court found that consecutive HFO enhancements were proper.
5. The Indiana Supreme Court granted transfer and ultimately ruled that the statute did not “expressly authorize multiple habitual offender enhancements to be imposed consecutively.” Id. [at] 995.
6. Trial counsel cannot be expected to accurately prognosticate the state of the law three years hence.
7. The advice that trial counsel gave to Mr. Springer was technically correct. Not until 2009, when the Indiana Supreme Court overruled the Court of Appeals and resolved the issue once and for all, could it be said that the advice given was wrong.
8. Mr. Springer's Petition should be denied because the performance of trial counsel was not deficient.
9. The Court is not convinced that had Mr. Springer been advised that the maximum possible penalty was only 111 years, he would have not accepted the plea agreement anyway.
10. It is [Springer's] burden to show that but for his trial counsel's ineffectiveness, he would have taken a different course. He has not met that burden.
11. Because [Springer] was not provided with any information known to be incorrect at the time, and/or because it is not clear whether [Springer] would have pled guilty regardless of whether he was told the maximum possible sentence was 111 or 141 years, the Court now DENIES the Petition for Post–Conviction Relief.
Before discussing Springer's allegations of error, we note the general standard under which we review a post-conviction court's denial of a petition for post-conviction relief. The petitioner in a post-conviction proceeding bears the burden of establishing grounds for relief by a preponderance of the evidence. Fisher v. State, 810 N.E.2d 674, 679 (Ind.2004); Ind. Post–Conviction Rule 1(5). When appealing from the denial of post-conviction relief, the petitioner stands in the position of one appealing from a negative judgment. Fisher, 810 N.E.2d at 679. On review, we will not reverse the judgment unless the evidence as a whole unerringly and unmistakably leads to a conclusion opposite that reached by the post-conviction court. Id. Further, the post-conviction court in this case entered findings of fact and conclusions thereon in accordance with Indiana Post–Conviction Rule 1(6). Id. “A post-conviction court's findings and judgment will be reversed only upon a showing of clear error—that which leaves us with a definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been made.” Id. In this review, we accept findings of fact unless clearly erroneous, but we accord no deference to conclusions of law. Id. The post-conviction court is the sole judge of the weight of the evidence and the credibility of witnesses. Id.
Smith, 774 N.E.2d at 1024). Springer argues that the Court of Appeals decision in Breaston “represented a departure from established precedent....” Id. at 8–9. Springer argues that “[t]he facts presented to the post conviction court show that Springer was threatened with consecutive habitual offender enhancements and thus threatened with an inaccurate maximum sentencing exposure of 141 years.” Id. at 6. Springer also argues his trial counsel was ineffective for misadvising him and that his guilty plea was based on an illusory threat and was therefore unknowing, unintelligent, and involuntary. Lastly, Springer argues that the “actual benefit [he] received by pleading guilty was minimal considering the amount of time he faced” and that he received “only 11 years off of a potential 111 year sentence” as a maximum under the plea agreement. Id. at 11.
The State argues that Springer's primary concern was “keeping open the possibility that he would live long enough to get out of prison.” Appellee's Brief at 8. The State points out that Springer was twenty-six years old at the time of his plea and argues that “[v]iewed from that perspective, there was a significant difference between a possible 111.5–year sentence and a maximum 100–year sentence.” Id. The State argues that “[a]ssuming good time credit, it is the difference between being released at age seventy-six and not being released until the age of eighty-one.” Id. The State argues that “[i]t seems fairly clear from the record that [Springer] did not have a realistic chance of being acquitted if he went to trial.” Id. at 9. The State also argues that “[b]y pleading guilty, [Springer] could—and did—argue his acceptance of responsibility and admission of guilt as a mitigating factor, and the trial court did find this to be a significant mitigating factor.” Id. at 9–10 (internal citations omitted).
The State does not appear to challenge Springer's argument that consecutive habitual offender enhancements were prohibited at the time of his guilty plea. Rather, the State notes: “Prior to [Springer's] plea, Indiana courts had held that, absent express statutory authority, which had not been found to exist, consecutive habitual offender enhancements were not allowed.” Id. at 8 (citing Starks, 523 N.E.2d at 737; Smith, 774 N.E.2d at 1024; and Ingram, 761 N.E.2d at 885–886).
In Smith, which was handed down prior to Springer's guilty plea, Robert Smith was charged with a number of offenses including being an habitual offender. 774 N.E.2d at 1022. While released on bond pending trial on these charges, Smith committed additional crimes and was charged with a number of offenses including being an habitual offender. Id. Smith argued that the post-conviction court erred when it determined consecutive habitual offender enhancements were properly imposed. Id. On appeal, the State cited Ind.Code § 35–50–1–2(d) and argued that the trial court was obliged to require that Smith's sentences, including both enhancements, be served consecutively. Id. at 1023–1024. We noted the absence of express statutory authorization for imposing multiple habitual offender sentences, whether in a single proceeding or in multiple proceedings. Id. at 1024. We concluded that the court “erred when it ordered Smith's habitual offender sentences to run consecutively.” Id.
Indiana law, a trial court cannot order consecutive habitual offender sentences.” 907 N.E.2d at 995. The Court also observed that Ind.Code § 35–50–1–2(d) was enacted by the Legislature in 1987, that the statute “was in its present form” when the Court wrote Starks in 1988, and that the statute does not expressly authorize multiple habitual offender enhancements to be imposed consecutively. Id. Based upon Smith, we conclude that Springer was improperly advised that the maximum sentence he faced was 141 years.
[I]t is apparent, from a study of the present statutes, that such statutes are silent on the question of whether courts have the authority to require habitual offender sentences to run consecutively, when engaged in the process of meting out several sentences. In the absence of express statutory authorization for such a tacking of habitual offender sentences, there is none.
FN5. Hill[ v. Lockhart, 474 U.S. 52, 60, 106 S.Ct. 366, 88 L.Ed.2d 203 (1985) ].
FN6. McCleese v. United States, 75 F.3d 1174, 1179 (7th Cir.1996); State v. Donald, 198 Ariz. 406, 10 P.3d 1193, 1201 (Ct.App.2000) [, review denied, cert. denied, 534 U.S. 825, 122 S.Ct. 63, 151 L.Ed.2d 30 (2001) ].
Generally, “a bargained plea, motivated by an improper threat, is to be deemed illusory and a denial of substantive rights.” Champion v. State, 478 N.E.2d 681, 683 (Ind.1985) (citing Gibson v. State, 456 N.E.2d 1006 (Ind.1983)). “At the moment the plea is entered, the State must possess the power to carry out any threat which was a factor in obtaining the plea agreement which was accepted.” Daniels v. State, 531 N.E.2d 1173, 1174 (Ind.1988). “The lack of that real power is what makes the threat illusory and causes the representation to take on the characteristics of a trick.” Id. See also Nash v. State, 429 N.E.2d 666, 671 (Ind.Ct.App.1981) (stating that a threat by a prosecutor to do what the law will not permit, if it motivates a defendant ignorant of the impossibility, renders the plea involuntary).
Whether viewed as ineffective assistance of counsel or an involuntary plea, the postconviction court must resolve the factual issue of the materiality of the bad advice in the decision to plead, and postconviction relief may be granted if the plea can be shown to have been influenced by counsel's error. However, if the postconviction court finds that the petitioner would have pleaded guilty even if competently advised as to the penal consequences, the error in advice is immaterial to the decision to plead and there is no prejudice. 749 N.E.2d at 504–505. Thus, it is immaterial whether Springer's claim is characterized as an involuntary plea or ineffective assistance of counsel. See Willoughby v. State, 792 N.E.2d 560, 563 (Ind.Ct.App.2003) (citing Segura and holding that it was immaterial whether the petitioner's claim was characterized as an involuntary plea or ineffective assistance of counsel because, under either standard, the petitioner must demonstrate that the intimidation resulting from his trial counsel's failure to inform him of the single larceny rule was material to his decision to plead guilty), trans. denied.
advice as to the law.” Id. (citing Segura, 749 N.E.2d at 504–505, 507).
[I]n order to state a claim for postconviction relief a petitioner may not simply allege that a plea would not have been entered. Nor is the petitioner's conclusory testimony to that effect sufficient to prove prejudice. To state a claim of prejudice from counsel's omission or misdescription of penal consequences that attaches to both a plea and a conviction at trial, the petitioner must allege, in Hill's terms, “special circumstances,” or, as others have put it, “objective facts” supporting the conclusion that the decision to plead was driven by the erroneous advice.
We believe a showing of prejudice from incorrect advice as to the penal consequences is to be judged by an objective standard, i.e., there must be a showing of facts that support a reasonable probability that the hypothetical reasonable defendant would have elected to go to trial if properly advised. Nevertheless, ... a petitioner may be entitled to relief if there is an objectively credible factual and legal basis from which it may be concluded that “there is a reasonable probability that, but for counsel's errors, he would not have pleaded guilty and would have insisted on going to trial.” Hill [ v. Lockhart, 474 U.S. 52,] 59, 106 S.Ct. 366 [88 L.Ed.2d 203 (1985) ].
[F]or claims relating to penal consequences, a petitioner must establish, by objective facts, circumstances that support the conclusion that counsel's errors in advice as to penal consequences were material to the decision to plead. Merely alleging that the petitioner would not have pleaded is insufficient. Rather, specific facts, in addition to the petitioner's conclusory allegation, must establish an objective reasonable probability that competent representation would have caused the petitioner not to enter a plea. Segura, 749 N.E.2d at 507.
The maximum sentences for each charge follow: twenty years for attempted burglary as a class B felony; eight years for burglary as a class C felony; three years for theft as a class D felony; six months for criminal mischief as a class B misdemeanor; thirty years enhancement for being an habitual offender; and fifty years for attempted murder as a class A felony. See Ind.Code §§ 35–50–2–4 to –8; 35–50–3–3. As previously mentioned, the State argues that the proper maximum sentence was 111.5 years. This calculation is based in part upon the maximum sentence of 180 days for criminal mischief as a class B misdemeanor. See Ind.Code § 35–50–3–3. We observe that the trial court sentenced Springer at the sentencing hearing to six months under Count IV which the court characterized as “Criminal Mischief as a class B misdemeanor.” Petitioner's Exhibit 1 at 23. However, the court's sentencing order and abstract of judgment sentenced Springer to sixty days under Count IV which the court characterized as criminal mischief as a class C misdemeanor. The maximum sentence for a class C misdemeanor is sixty days. See Ind.Code § 35–50–3–4.
circumstances, we conclude that Springer demonstrated at least a reasonable probability that the hypothetical reasonable defendant would have elected to go to trial if properly advised. See Reeves v. State, 564 N.E.2d 550, 553 (Ind.Ct.App.1991) (holding that petitioner's plea was involuntary where petitioner was twenty-eight years old at the time he pled guilty and was advised he faced the choice of accepting a plea agreement with a maximum of fifteen years or going to trial with the prospect of receiving a maximum of sixty years when he faced a proper maximum sentence of only thirty years).
For the foregoing reasons, we reverse the post-conviction court's denial of Springer's petition for post-conviction relief.
FRIEDLANDER, J., and BAILEY, J., concur.


text:
What happens if you miss your trial in a divorce case?
What happens if you miss your trial in a divorce case? Can you tell the court you did not get notice? Will you get a new trial? What if you don’t have a lawyer?
These are some of the questions that clients have when they miss a court date. Most people outside the legal community do not understand how a family cases moves through the system, or how hearings are set. That is why pro se litigants (those without lawyers) almost always lose against experienced family lawyers. It’s their first rodeo so to speak.
Don’t let that happen to you. Never represent yourself in a family case. Let’s look at the law regarding trial settings in a family case, and what happens if you fail to appear and then try to file a motion for new trial to overturn to result. Let’s assume you are claiming that you did not receive notice of the trial setting.
Notice of trial setting ordinarily does not appear in the transcript and need not affirmatively appear in the record. Bruneio v. Bruneio, 890 S.W.2d 150, 155 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi 1994, no writ). Rather, the law presumes that a trial court will hear a case only after proper notice to the parties. Hanners v. State Bar of Tex., 860 S.W.2d 903, 908 (Tex. App.—Dallas 1993, writ dism’d); Bruneio, 890 S.W.2d at 155.
A recitation of due notice of the trial setting in the judgment constitutes some evidence that proper notice was given. Wilson v. Indus. Leasing Corp., 689 S.W.2d 496, 497 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1985, no writ). To rebut this presumption, an appellant has the burden to affirmatively show a lack of notice by affidavit or other competent evidence. Hanners, 860 S.W.2d at 908; Jones v. Tex. Dept. of Pub. Safety, 803 S.W.2d 760, 761 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 1991, no writ). This burden is not discharged by mere allegations in a motion for new trial, unsupported by affidavits or other competent evidence, that proper notice was not received. Hanners, 860 S.W.2d at 908. If a judgment is effectively rebutted by other evidence in the record, the presumption of proper notice is no longer taken to be true. P. Bosco & Sons Contracting Corp. v. Conley, Lott, Nichols Mach. Co., 629 S.W.2d 142, 143 (Tex. App.—Dallas 1982, writ ref’d n.r.e.); Osborn v. Osborn, 961 S.W.2d 408, 411 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1997, pet. denied).
What these cases tell us is that it may not be enough to later claim you did not receive notice. There is a presumption that all hearings are the result of properly notified parties who are prepared for the hearing.
Don’t let this happen to you. Call our experienced family law team today so we can help.

matches: v. v. v. v. v. v.