Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 202 / Wednesday, October 20, 2004 / Rules and Regulations 61589

treated with methyl bromide to kill the 

pine shoot beetle in accordance with 7 

CFR 319.40–7(f). In addition, the U.S. 

destination (including county and State) 

of the regulated articles must be plainly 

indicated on the regulated articles or, if 

applicable, on the outer covering, 

packaging, or container. 

(2) The regulated articles consist of 

pine bark and are accompanied by a 

certificate that specifies both the county 

or municipal regional county and 

Province where the regulated articles 

originated and, if applicable, the 

counties or municipal regional counties 

and Provinces they were moved 

through, if different from the county or 

municipal regional county and Province 

of origin. The additional declaration 

section must state, ‘‘The pine bark in 

this shipment has been ground into 

pieces less than or equal to 1 inch in 

diameter.’’ In addition, the U.S. 

destination (including county and State) 

of the regulated articles must be plainly 

indicated on the regulated articles or, if 

applicable, on the outer covering, 

packaging, or container. 

(3) The regulated articles are shipped 

from a CFIA-approved facility that 

processes only regulated articles that 

originated in areas in Canada or the 

United States not considered to be 

infested with pine shoot beetle. The 

facility must be inspected by the CFIA 

at least twice a year to verify its 

compliance with CFIA handling and 

processing procedures, and the CFIA 

must provide APHIS with a current list 

of approved facilities at least annually. 

The name and address (including the 

county or municipal regional county 

and Province) of the CFIA-approved 

facility that shipped the articles, as well 

as the U.S. destination (including 

county and State) must be plainly 

indicated on the regulated articles or, if 

applicable, on the outer covering, 

packaging, or container.

(4) The pine products are 

accompanied by a certificate that 

specifies the county or municipal 

regional county and Province where the 

regulated articles originated and, if 

applicable, the counties or municipal 

regional counties and Provinces they 

were moved through, if different from 

the county or municipal regional county 

and Province of origin. The treatment 

section of the certificate must indicate 

that the regulated articles have been 

treated in accordance with § 319.40–6. 

In addition, the U.S. destination 

(including county and State) of the 

regulated articles must be plainly 

indicated on the regulated articles or, if 

applicable, on the outer covering, 

package, or container. 

(5) The regulated articles, consisting 

of logs with bark attached, are 

consigned to a U.S. facility that operates 

under a compliance agreement with 

APHIS in accordance with § 319.40–8 

for specified handling or processing of 

the regulated articles. The logs must be 

transported by as direct a route as 

reasonably possible and not off-loaded 

en route to the U.S. facility. The logs 

must be accompanied by a statement of 

origin and movement that specifies the 

county or municipal regional county 

and Province where the logs originated 

and, if applicable, the counties or 

municipal regional counties and 

Provinces they were moved through, if 

different from the county or municipal 

regional county and Province of origin. 

In addition, the name and address 

(including county and State) of the U.S. 

facility receiving the logs must be 

plainly indicated on the regulated 

articles or, if applicable, on the outer 

covering or container. 

(6) The regulated articles, consisting 

of pine bark, are shipped from a CFIAapproved facility for use as a fuel at a 

cogeneration facility in the United 

States approved by APHIS. The pine 

bark must be transported by as direct a 

route as reasonably possible and not offloaded en route to the U.S. cogeneration 

facility. The Canadian facility from 

which the pine bark is shipped must be 

inspected by the CFIA at least twice a 

year to verify that the facility is 

following handling and processing 

procedures that adequately safeguard 

the pine bark for shipment to the U.S. 

cogeneration facility. CFIA must 

provide APHIS with a current list of 

approved facilities at least annually. 

The name and address (including the 

county or municipal regional county 

and Province) of the CFIA-approved 

facility that shipped the pine bark, as 

well as the name and address of the U.S. 

cogeneration facility receiving the 

shipment (including county and State) 

must be plainly indicated on the outer 

covering, packaging, or container of the 

pine bark. 

(B) If the regulated articles in 

paragraphs (i)(2)(iv)(1) through (5) of 

this section are to be moved through an 

area of the United States quarantined for 

pine shoot beetle, as provided in 

§ 301.50–3 of this chapter, en route to an 

area or areas in the United States not 

quarantined for pine shoot beetle during 

the period of January through 

September when the temperature is 

higher than 10 °C (50 °F), the regulated 

articles must be shipped in an enclosed 

vehicle or completely covered (such as 

with plastic canvas, or other closely 

woven cloth) so as to prevent access by 

pine shoot beetle. 

(Approved by the Office of 

Management and Budget under control 

numbers 0579–0049, 0579–0135, and 

0579–0257)

Subpart—Gypsy Moth Host Material 

From Canada

■ 9. Section 319.77–4 is amended as 

follows:

■ a. In paragraph (a), footnote 1 is revised 

to read as set forth below.

■ b. In paragraph (b), footnote 2 is 

revised to read as set forth below.

§ 319.77–4 Conditions for the importation 

of regulated articles.

* * * * * 1Trees and shrubs from Canada may be 

subject to additional restrictions under 

‘‘Subpart-Nursery Stock, Plants, Roots, Seeds, 

and Other Plant Products’’ (§§ 319.37 through 

§ 319.37–14 of this part) and ‘‘Subpart—Logs, 

Lumber, and Other Unmanufactured Wood 

Articles’’ (§§ 319.40–1 through 319.40–11 of 

this part).

* * * * * 2Logs from Canada are also subject to 

restrictions under ‘‘Subpart—Logs, Lumber, 

and Other Unmanufactured Wood Articles’’

(§§ 319.40–1 through 319.40–11 of this part).

* * * * *

Done in Washington, DC, this 28th day of 

September 2004. 

Bill Hawks, 

Under Secretary for Marketing and Regulatory 

Programs.

[FR Doc. 04–22220 Filed 10–19–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–34–P

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Agricultural Marketing Service 

7 CFR Part 930

[Docket No. FV03–930–6 FIR] 

Tart Cherries Grown in the States of 

Michigan, et al.; Additional Option for 

Handler Diversion

AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service, 

USDA.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: The Department of 

Agriculture (Department) is adopting, as 

a final rule, without change, an interim 

rule that added another method of 

handler diversion to the regulations 

under the Federal tart cherry marketing 

order (order). Handlers handling 

cherries harvested in a regulated district 

may fulfill any restricted percentage 

requirement when volume regulation is 

in effect by diverting cherries or cherry 

products rather than placing them in an 

inventory reserve. Under this additional 

method, handlers will be allowed to 

61590 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 202 / Wednesday, October 20, 2004 / Rules and Regulations 

obtain diversion credit for diverting tart 

cherries, after processing, that may not 

be acceptable for the finished products 

manufactured by the handler. This 

action was unanimously recommended 

by the Cherry Industry Administrative 

Board (Board), the body which locally 

administers the marketing order. The 

marketing order regulates the handling 

of tart cherries grown in the States of 

Michigan, New York, Pennsylvania, 

Oregon, Utah, Washington, and 

Wisconsin.

DATES: Effective November 19, 2004.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Patricia A. Petrella or Kenneth G. 

Johnson, Marketing Order 

Administration Branch, Fruit and 

Vegetable Programs, AMS, USDA, Suite 

6C02, Unit 155, 4700 River Road, 

Riverdale, MD 20737, telephone: (301) 

734–5243, or Fax: (301) 734–5275; or 

George Kelhart, Technical Advisor, 

Marketing Order Administration 

Branch, Fruit and Vegetable Programs, 

AMS, USDA, 1400 Independence 

Avenue, SW., STOP 0237, Washington, 

DC 20250–0237; telephone: (202) 720–

2491, or fax: (202) 720–8938. 

Small businesses may request 

information on complying with this 

regulation, or obtain a guide on 

complying with fruit, vegetable, and 

specialty crop marketing agreements 

and orders by contacting Jay Guerber, 

Marketing Order Administration 

Branch, Fruit and Vegetable Programs, 

AMS, USDA, 1400 Independence 

Avenue, SW., STOP 0237, Washington, 

DC 20250–0237; telephone: (202) 720–

2491, fax: (202) 720–5698, or e-mail: 

Jay.Guerber@usda.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This rule 

is issued under Marketing Agreement 

and Order No. 930 (7 CFR part 930), 

regulating the handling of tart cherries 

produced in the States of Michigan, 

New York, Pennsylvania, Oregon, Utah, 

Washington, and Wisconsin, hereinafter 

referred to as the ‘‘order.’’ The order is 

effective under the Agricultural 

Marketing Agreement Act of 1937, as 

amended (7 U.S.C. 601-674), hereinafter 

referred to as the ‘‘Act.’’

The Department of Agriculture 

(USDA) is issuing this rule in 

conformance with Executive Order 

12866. 

This rule has been reviewed under 

Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice 

Reform. This rule will not preempt any 

State or local laws, regulations, or 

policies, unless they present an 

irreconcilable conflict with this rule. 

The Act provides that administrative 

proceedings must be exhausted before 

parties may file suit in court. Under 

section 608c(15)(A) of the Act, any 

handler subject to an order may file 

with the USDA a petition stating that 

the order, any provision of the order, or 

any obligation imposed in connection 

with the order is not in accordance with 

law and request a modification of the 

order or to be exempt therefrom. Such 

handler is afforded the opportunity for 

a hearing on the petition. After the 

hearing, the Secretary would rule on the 

petition. The Act provides that the 

district court of the United States in any 

district in which the handler is an 

inhabitant, or has his or her principal 

place of business, has jurisdiction in 

equity to review the USDA’s ruling on 

the petition, provided an action is filed 

not later than 20 days after the date of 

the entry of the ruling. 

Handler diversion is authorized under 

§ 930.59 of the tart cherry marketing 

order and, when volume regulation is in 

effect, handlers may fulfill restricted 

percentage requirements by diverting 

cherries or cherry products into 

authorized outlets. Volume regulation is 

intended to help the tart cherry industry 

stabilize supplies and prices in years of 

excess production. The volume 

regulation provisions of the order 

provide for a combination of processor 

owned inventory reserves and grower or 

handler diversion of excess tart cherries. 

Reserve cherries may be released for 

sale into commercial outlets when the 

free percentage portion of the regulated 

crop is not expected to fill demand. 

Section 930.59(b) of the order 

provides for the designation of 

allowable forms of handler diversion. 

These include: Uses exempt under 

§ 930.62; contribution to a Board 

approved food bank or other approved 

charitable organization; acquisition of 

grower diversion certificates that have 

been issued in accordance with 

§ 930.58; or other uses, including 

diversion by destruction of the cherries 

at the handler’s facilities as provided for 

in § 930.59(c).

Section 930.159 of the rules and 

regulations under the order allows 

handlers to divert cherries by 

destruction of the cherries at the 

handler’s facility. Currently, at-plant 

diversion of cherries takes place at the 

handler’s facility prior to placing 

cherries into the processing line. 

However, experience has shown that 

this limitation places a burden on 

handlers regulated under this order. 

To remove this burden, the Board 

unanimously recommended that 

handlers be allowed to divert and 

receive diversion credit for tart cherries 

after processing that may not be 

acceptable for the finished products 

they manufacture. With the capability to 

divert such cherries after processing, but 

before the finished product is 

completed, handlers would have an 

incentive to remove the lower quality 

processed cherries from the lot, meet 

their restricted obligation requirements, 

and improve the quality of their 

products. Improvement in the quality of 

tart cherries and tart cherry products 

would benefit producers, handlers, and 

consumers. 

This action continues to provide 

handlers more flexibility in meeting 

their restricted obligation requirements. 

The ability to perform at-plant diversion 

after placing the cherries into the 

processing line, but before a finished 

product is completed, will benefit all 

handlers. This action is expected to 

especially benefit handlers who only 

process one product. In many instances, 

these handlers are small. 

This rule continues to allow a handler 

who processes only five plus one 

cherries (25 pounds of tart cherries with 

5 pounds of sugar added) to fulfill his/

her restricted percentage obligation (in a 

volume regulated year) by diverting atplant, lower quality wholesome fruit 

from his/her five plus one processing 

line. Previously, the diversion took 

place prior to processing and handlers 

that processed one product were forced 

to divert their good quality tart cherries 

with the lower quality wholesome 

cherries, or divert cherries by some 

other approved method. Handlers 

processing more than one product also 

are able to take advantage of the 

additional method of at-plant diversion. 

Diversion may also be accomplished 

by handlers donating cherries to 

charitable organizations, utilizing 

cherries in exempt outlets, or redeeming 

grower diversion certificates obtained 

from growers who have diverted 

cherries by non-harvest, and who have 

been issued diversion certificates by the 

Board in accordance with rules and 

regulations governing the issuance of 

grower diversion certificates (§ 930.158). 

The Board reported that during the 

2001–2002 crop year, the inventory 

reserve contained 44.3 percent frozen 

products, 11.3 percent waterpack, 15.2 

percent piefill, 28 percent juice and 

juice concentrate, and 1.2 percent other 

products. These percentages show that 

frozen products, juice and juice 

concentrate make up most of the reserve 

quantities. 

Pursuant to § 930.159(b), handlers 

electing to divert cherries or cherry 

products must first notify the Board and 

submit a plan for approval. Such 

notification and plan must include an 

agreement that diversion will take place 

under the supervision of the USDA 

Processed Products Inspection Service 

or Board employees, and that the costs 

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 202 / Wednesday, October 20, 2004 / Rules and Regulations 61591

of such supervision are to be paid by the 

handler. USDA inspectors supervise the 

diversion of cherries or finished 

products at the current hourly rate 

under USDA’s inspection fee schedule 

(7 CFR 54.42). Board employees 

supervise diversion at the same 

payment rate. 

Once diversion is satisfactorily 

accomplished, handlers receive 

diversion certificates stating the weight 

of cherries diverted. Such diversion 

certificates can be used to satisfy 

handlers’ restricted percentage 

obligations. Cherries and finished 

cherry products that have been diverted 

are not subject to assessments. 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act and 

Effects on Small Businesses 

The Agricultural Marketing Service 

(AMS) has considered the economic 

impact of this action on small entities 

and has prepared this final regulatory 

flexibility analysis. The Regulatory 

Flexibility Act (RFA) would allow AMS 

to certify that regulations do not have a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities. 

However, as a matter of general 

policy, AMS’ Fruit and Vegetable 

Programs (Programs) no longer opt for 

such certification, but rather perform 

regulatory flexibility analyses for any 

rulemaking that would generate the 

interest of a significant number of small 

entities. Performing such analyses shifts 

the Programs’ efforts from determining 

whether regulatory flexibility analyses 

are required to the consideration of 

regulatory options and economic or 

regulatory impacts. 

The purpose of the RFA is to fit 

regulatory actions to the scale of 

business subject to such actions in order 

that small businesses will not be unduly 

or disproportionately burdened. 

Marketing orders issued pursuant to the 

Act, and rules issued thereunder, are 

unique in that they are brought about 

through group action of essentially 

small entities acting on their own 

behalf. Thus, both statutes have small 

entity orientation and compatibility. 

There are approximately 40 handlers 

of tart cherries who are subject to 

regulation under the tart cherry 

marketing order and approximately 900 

producers of tart cherries in the 

regulated area. Small agricultural 

service firms, which includes handlers, 

have been defined by the Small 

Business Administration (13 CFR 

121.201) as those having annual receipts 

of less than $5,000,000, and small 

agricultural producers are defined as 

those having annual receipts of less than 

$750,000. A majority of the producers 

and handlers are considered small 

entities under SBA’s standards. 

Board and subcommittee meetings are 

widely publicized in advance and are 

held in a location central to the 

production area. The meetings are open 

to all industry members (including 

small business entities) and other 

interested persons who are encouraged 

to participate in the deliberations and 

voice their opinions on topics under 

discussion. Thus, Board 

recommendations can be considered to 

represent the interests of small business 

entities in the industry.

The Board reported that during the 

2001–2002 crop year, the inventory 

reserve contained 44.3 percent frozen 

products, 11.3 percent waterpack, 15.2 

percent piefill, 28 percent juice and 

juice concentrate, and 1.2 percent other 

products. These percentages show that 

frozen products, juice and juice 

concentrate make up most of the reserve 

quantities. 

The Board unanimously 

recommended this additional method 

for diversion credit to allow handlers to 

divert product after processing that may 

not be acceptable for the finished 

products manufactured by the handler. 

As discussed earlier, this action 

continues to provide handlers more 

flexibility in meeting their restricted 

obligation requirements and is expected 

to be particularly helpful to handlers 

who produce only one product. In many 

instances, the one-product handlers in 

the tart cherry industry are small. 

Handlers that process juice 

concentrate and other products can 

more easily meet their restricted 

obligation requirements by juicing and 

processing lower quality wholesome 

product and placing it in the inventory 

reserve. Handlers that only have the 

ability to process products requiring 

higher quality fruit like five plus one 

cherries have to put this fruit into the 

inventory reserves, or take advantage of 

other diversion options available under 

the order. 

To sell more of their higher quality 

products, some handlers purchase 

cherries or diversion credit certificates 

from other handlers to meet their 

restricted obligation requirements. The 

added flexibility provided by this action 

will help all handlers, and is expected 

to especially benefit the one-product 

handlers who will be able to sell more 

of their higher quality cherries in 

finished product form. 

Producers also are expected to benefit 

from the implementation of this action. 

Currently, producers can use in-orchard 

tank diversion, in which cherries 

harvested into tanks are measured, 

calculated then diverted in the orchard. 

This method of diversion, however, 

removes both good and lesser quality 

fruit. Under the Board’s 

recommendation, producers could 

deliver all of their fruit to handlers and 

the good quality fruit would be sorted 

and the poor quality fruit diverted or 

dumped. Producers would be paid for 

the good quality fruit. According to the 

Board, growers are paid on a quality 

point basis relative to the quality of the 

fruit delivered. This action would 

continue to provide producers with 

more consistent income proportionate to 

the quality of the fruit delivered to 

handlers and with discretion to reduce 

orchard diversion. As such, producers 

can be more selective in complying with 

the grower diversion process. 

The principal demand for tart cherries 

is in the form of processed products. 

Tart cherries are dried, frozen, canned, 

juiced, and pureed. Data from the 

National Agricultural Statistics Service 

(NASS) states that during the period 

1995/96 through 2002/03, 

approximately 92 percent of the U.S. 

tart cherry crop, or 285.7 million 

pounds, was processed annually. Of the 

285.7 million pounds of tart cherries 

processed, 58 percent was frozen, 30 

percent was canned, and 12 percent was 

utilized for juice. 

With regard to alternatives, the Board 

felt that the recommendation was the 

only solution to providing handlers 

additional flexibility in meeting their 

restricted obligation requirements. 

USDA has not identified any relevant 

Federal rules that duplicate, overlap, or 

conflict with this regulation. 

In compliance with Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) 

regulations (5 CFR part 1320) which 

implement the Paperwork Reduction 

Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–13), the 

information collection and 

recordkeeping requirements have been 

previously approved by OMB and 

assigned OMB Number 0581–0177. 

There are some reporting, 

recordkeeping, and other compliance 

requirements under the marketing order. 

The reporting and recordkeeping 

burdens are necessary for compliance 

purposes and for developing statistical 

data for maintenance of the program. 

The forms require information which is 

readily available from handler records 

and which can be provided without data 

processing equipment or trained 

statistical staff. As with other, similar 

marketing order programs, reports and 

forms are periodically studied to reduce 

or eliminate duplicate information 

collection burdens by industry and 

public sector agencies. This rule does 

not change those requirements. 

61592 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 202 / Wednesday, October 20, 2004 / Rules and Regulations 

An interim final rule concerning this 

action was published in the Federal 

Register on July 9, 2004. Copies of the 

rule were mailed by the Board’s staff to 

all Board members and tart cherry 

handlers. In addition, the Office of the 

Federal Register and USDA made the 

rule available through the Internet. That 

rule provided for a 60-day comment 

period which ended September 7, 2004. 

No comments were received. 

After consideration of all relevant 

material presented, including the 

Board’s recommendation, and other 

information, it is found that finalizing 

the interim final rule, without change, 

as published in the Federal Register (69 

FR 41383, July 9, 2004) will tend to 

effectuate the declared policy of the Act.

List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 930

Marketing agreements, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, Tart 

cherries.

PART 930—TART CHERRIES GROWN 

IN THE STATES OF MICHIGAN, NEW 

YORK, PENNSYLVANIA, OREGON, 

UTAH, WASHINGTON, AND 

WISCONSIN

■ Accordingly, the interim final rule 

amending 7 CFR part 930 which was 

published at 69 FR 41383 on July 9, 2004, 

is adopted as a final rule without change.

Dated: October 14, 2004. 

A.J. Yates, 

Administrator, Agricultural Marketing 

Service.

[FR Doc. 04–23417 Filed 10–19–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–02–P

NUCLEAR REGULATORY 

COMMISSION 

10 CFR Part 72 

RIN 3150–AH50 

List of Approved Fuel Storage Casks: 

NAC–MPC Revision, Confirmation of 

Effective Date

AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission.

ACTION: Direct final rule: Confirmation 

of effective date. 

SUMMARY: The Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission (NRC) is confirming the 

effective date of October 27, 2004, for 

the direct final rule that was published 

in the Federal Register on August 13, 

2004 (69 FR 50053). This direct final 

rule amended the NRC’s regulations to 

revise the NAC–MPC cask system listing 

to include Amendment No. 4 to 

Certificate of Compliance (CoC) No. 

1025.

EFFECTIVE DATE: The effective date of 

October 27, 2004, is confirmed for this 

direct final rule.

ADDRESSES: Documents related to this 

rulemaking, including comments 

received, may be examined at the NRC 

Public Document Room, located at One 

White Flint North, 11555 Rockville 

Pike, Rockville, MD 20852. These same 

documents may also be viewed and 

downloaded electronically via the 

rulemaking Web site (http://

ruleforum.llnl.gov). For information 

about the interactive rulemaking Web 

site, contact Ms. Carol Gallagher (301) 

415–5905; e-mail CAG@nrc.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Jayne M. McCausland, Office of Nuclear 

Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S. 

Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 

Washington, DC 20555, telephone (301) 

415–6219, e-mail jmm2@nrc.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On August 

13, 2004 (69 FR 50053), the NRC 

published a direct final rule amending 

its regulations in 10 CFR part 72 to 

revise the NAC–MPC cask system listing 

within the ‘‘List of Approved Spent Fuel 

Storage Casks’’ to include Amendment 

No. 4 to CoC No. 1025. This amendment 

increases vacuum drying time limits, 

deletes canister removal from concrete 

cask requirements, revises surface 

contamination removal time limits, and 

revises allowable contents fuel assembly 

limits. In the direct final rule, NRC 

stated that if no significant adverse 

comments were received, the direct 

final rule would become final on 

October 27, 2004. The NRC did not 

receive any comments that warranted 

withdrawal of the direct final rule. 

Therefore, this rule will become 

effective as scheduled.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 14th day 

of October, 2004.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 

Michael T. Lesar, 

Chief, Rules and Directives Branch, Division 

of Administrative Services, Office of 

Administration.

[FR Doc. 04–23426 Filed 10–19–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 97

[Docket No. 30426; Amdt. No. 3107] 

Standard Instrument Approach 

Procedures; Miscellaneous 

Amendments

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: This amendment establishes, 

amends, suspends, or revokes Standard 

Instrument Approach Procedures 

(SIAPs) for operations at certain 

airports. These regulatory actions are 

needed because of the adoption of new 

or revised criteria, or because of changes 

occurring in the National Airspace 

System, such as the commissioning of 

new navigational facilities, addition of 

new obstacles, or changes in air traffic 

requirements. These changes are 

designed to provide safe and efficient 

use of the navigable airspace and to 

promote safe flight operations under 

instrument flight rules at the affected 

airports.

DATES: This rule is effective October 20, 

2004. The compliance date for each 

SIAP is specified in the amendatory 

provisions. 

The incorporation by reference of 

certain publications listed in the 

regulations is approved by the Director 

of the Federal Register as of October 20, 

2004.

ADDRESSES: Availability of matters 

incorporated by reference in the 

amendment is as follows: 

For Examination—

1. FAA Rules Docket, FAA 

Headquarters Building, 800 

Independence Avenue, SW., 

Washington, DC 20591; 

2. The FAA Regional Office of the 

region in which the affected airport is 

located; 

3. The Flight Inspection Area Office 

which originated the SIAP; or, 

4. The National Archives and Records 

Administration (NARA). For 

information on the availability of this 

material at NARA, call 202–741–6030, 

or go to: http://www.archives.gov/

federal_register/

code_of_federal_regulations/

ibr_locations.html.

For Purchase—Individual SIAP 

copies may be obtained from: 

1. FAA Public Inquiry Center (APA–

200), FAA Headquarters Building, 800 

Independence Avenue, SW., 

Washington, DC 20591; or 

2. The FAA Regional Office of the 

region in which the affected airport is 

located. 

By Subscription—Copies of all SIAPs, 

mailed once every 2 weeks, are for sale 

by the Superintendent of Documents, 

U.S. Government Printing Office, 

Washington, DC 20402.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Donald P. Pate, Flight Procedure 

Standards Branch (AMCAFS–420), 

Flight Technologies and Programs 

Division, Flight Standards Service,