Anchorage Regulations; San Pedro Bay, CA, 3001-3003 [06-497]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 12 / Thursday, January 19, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
Schedule of the United States (HTSUS)),
1624;
*
*
*
*
of the Waterways Management Division,
at (310) 732–2020.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
*
Sections 12.104 through 12.104i also
issued under 19 U.S.C. 2612;
I
Regulatory Information
On November 5, 2004, we published
a notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM) entitled Anchorage Regulations:
San Pedro Bay, CA in the Federal
Register (69 FR 64549). We received no
letters commenting on the proposed
rule. No public meeting was requested,
and none was held.
Deborah J. Spiro,
Acting Commissioner, Bureau of Customs and
Border Protection.
Background and Purpose
Ships of increasing size are calling on
the Ports of Los Angeles—Long Beach.
While in an anchorage area, these larger
ships require watch circles of 1500
yards in diameter. Currently, the
anchorage area outside the federal
breakwater is made up of watch circles
1000 yards in diameter. An increase in
the anchorage boundary will allow three
additional anchorages for vessels with
watch circles of 1500 yards in diameter.
*
*
*
§ 12.104g
*
*
[Amended]
2. In § 12.104g(a), the table of the list
of agreements imposing import
restrictions on described articles of
cultural property of State Parties is
amended in the entry for Italy by
removing the reference to ‘‘T.D. 01–06’’
in the column headed ‘‘Decision No.’’
and adding in its place the language
‘‘T.D. 01–06 extended by CBP Dec. 06–
01’’.
Approved: January 17, 2006.
Timothy E. Skud,
Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Treasury.
[FR Doc. 06–528 Filed 1–18–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111–14–P
Discussion of Comments and Changes
The Coast Guard received no
comments on this rule and has not
changed the regulations from the
published NPRM.
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 110
[CGD11–04–007]
RIN 1625–AA01
Anchorage Regulations; San Pedro
Bay, CA
Coast Guard, DHS.
Final rule.
AGENCY:
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with RULES
ACTION:
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is enlarging
the current anchorage area outside the
Federal breakwater of the Ports of Los
Angeles—Long Beach, CA. This rule is
necessary in order to accommodate the
ever-increasing number of larger vessels
necessitating anchorage and will
provide vessels an appropriate area to
anchor.
DATES: This rule is effective February
21, 2006.
ADDRESSES: Comments and material
received from the public, as well as
documents indicated in this preamble as
being available in the docket, are part of
docket CGD11–04–007 and are available
for inspection or copying at Sector Los
Angeles—Long Beach, 1001 South
Seaside Avenue, Building 20, San
Pedro, California, 90731, between 8 a.m.
and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Lieutenant Peter Gooding, USCG, Chief
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:18 Jan 18, 2006
Jkt 205001
Regulatory Evaluation
This rule is not a ‘‘significant
regulatory action’’ under section 3(f) of
Executive Order 12866, Regulatory
Planning and Review, and does not
require an assessment of potential costs
and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of that
Order. The Office of Management and
Budget has not reviewed it under that
Order. It is not ‘‘significant’’ under the
regulatory policies and procedures of
the Department of Homeland Security
(DHS).
We expect the economic impact of
this proposed rule to be so minimal that
a full Regulatory Evaluation under the
regulatory policies and procedures of
DHS is unnecessary. This proposal will
impose no cost on vessel operators, and
have minimal impact to vessel traffic.
Small Entities
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act
(5 U.S.C. 601–612), we have considered
whether this rule would have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
The term ‘‘small entities’’ comprises
small businesses, not-for-profit
organizations that are independently
owned and operated and are not
dominant in their fields, and
governmental jurisdictions with
populations of less than 50,000.
The Coast Guard certifies under 5
U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule will not have
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
3001
a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
This rule will possibly affect the
following entities, some of which may
be small entities: The owners and
operators of private and commercial
vessels intending to transit or anchor in
the affected area. The impact to these
entities would not, however, be
significant since this zone will
encompass only a small portion of the
waterway and vessels can safely
navigate around the anchored vessels.
Additionally, large passenger vessels
already routinely anchor within the
anchorage areas.
Assistance for Small Entities
Under section 213(a) of the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104–121),
we offered to assist small entities in
understanding the rule so that they can
better evaluate its effects on them and
participate in the rulemaking process.
However, we received no requests for
assistance from any small entities.
Small businesses may send comments
on the actions of Federal employees
who enforce, or otherwise determine
compliance with, Federal regulations to
the Small Business and Agriculture
Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman
and the Regional Small Business
Regulatory Fairness Boards. The
Ombudsman evaluates these actions
annually and rates each agency’s
responsiveness to small business. If you
wish to comment on actions by
employees of the Coast Guard, call 1–
888–REG–FAIR (1–888–734–3247).
Collection of Information
This rule calls for no new collection
of information under the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501–
3520).
Federalism
A rule has implications for federalism
under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct
effect on State or local governments and
would either preempt State law or
impose a substantial direct cost of
compliance on them. We have analyzed
this rule under that Order and have
determined that it does not have
implications for federalism.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531–1538) requires
Federal agencies to assess the effects of
their discretionary regulatory actions. In
particular, the Act addresses actions
that may result in the expenditure by a
State, local, or tribal government, in the
aggregate, or by the private sector of
E:\FR\FM\19JAR1.SGM
19JAR1
3002
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 12 / Thursday, January 19, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
$100,000,000 or more in any one year.
Though this rule will not result in such
an expenditure, we do discuss the
effects of this rule elsewhere in this
preamble.
Taking of Private Property
This rule will not effect a taking of
private property or otherwise have
taking implications under Executive
Order 12630, Governmental Actions and
Interference with Constitutionally
Protected Property Rights.
Civil Justice Reform
This rule meets applicable standards
in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive
Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to
minimize litigation, eliminate
ambiguity, and reduce burden.
Protection of Children
We have analyzed this rule under
Executive Order 13045, Protection of
Children from Environmental Health
Risks and Safety Risks. This rule is not
an economically significant rule and
does not create an environmental risk to
health or risk to safety that may
disproportionately affect children.
Indian Tribal Governments
This rule does not have tribal
implications under Executive Order
13175, Consultation and Coordination
with Indian Tribal Governments,
because it does not have a substantial
direct effect on one or more Indian
tribes, on the relationship between the
Federal Government and Indian tribes,
or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes.
Energy Effects
We have analyzed this rule under
Executive Order 13211, Actions
Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use. We have
determined that it is not a ‘‘significant
energy action’’ under that order because
it is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’
under Executive Order 12866 and is not
likely to have a significant adverse effect
on the supply, distribution, or use of
energy. The Administrator of the Office
of Information and Regulatory Affairs
has not designated it as a significant
energy action. Therefore, it does not
require a Statement of Energy Effects
under Executive Order 13211.
Technical Standards
The National Technology Transfer
and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15
U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use
voluntary consensus standards in their
regulatory activities unless the agency
provides Congress, through the Office of
Management and Budget, with an
explanation of why using these
standards would be inconsistent with
applicable law or otherwise impractical.
Voluntary consensus standards are
technical standards (e.g., specifications
of materials, performance, design, or
operation; test methods; sampling
procedures; and related management
systems practices) that are developed or
adopted by voluntary consensus
standards bodies.
This rule does not use technical
standards. Therefore, we did not
consider the use of voluntary consensus
standards.
Environment
We have analyzed this rule under
Commandant Instruction M16475.lD,
which guides the Coast Guard in
complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969
(NEPA)(42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and
have concluded that there are no factors
in this case that would limit the use of
a categorical exclusion under section
2.B.2 of the Instruction. Therefore, this
rule is categorically excluded, under
figure 2–1, paragraph (34)(f), of the
Instruction, from further environmental
documentation because it changes the
size of an existing anchorage.
A final ‘‘Environmental Analysis
Check List’’ and final ‘‘Categorical
Exclusion Determination’’ are available
in the docket where indicated under
ADDRESSES.
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 110
Anchorage grounds.
For the reasons discussed in the
preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33
CFR part 110 as follows:
I
PART 110—ANCHORAGE
REGULATIONS
1. The authority citation for part 110
continues to read as follows:
I
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 471, 1221 through
1236, 2030, 2035, and 2071; 33 CFR 1.05–
1(g). Department of Homeland Security
Delegation No. 0170.1.
2. Amend § 110.214 by revising
paragraph (b)(6) to read as follows:
I
§ 110.214 Los Angeles and Long Beach
Harbors, Calif.
*
*
*
*
*
(b) * * *
(6) Commercial Anchorage F (outside
of Long Beach Breakwater). The waters
southeast of the Long Beach Breakwater
bounded by a line connecting the
following coordinates:
Latitude
Beginning point ................................................................................................................................
Thence west to ................................................................................................................................
Thence south/southeast to ..............................................................................................................
Thence north/northeast to ...............................................................................................................
33 deg.¥43′¥05.1″
N.
33 deg.¥43′¥05.1″
N.
33 deg.¥38′¥17.5″
N.
33 deg.¥40′¥23.0″
N.
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with RULES
And thence north/northwest to the beginning point.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:18 Jan 18, 2006
Jkt 205001
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\19JAR1.SGM
19JAR1
Longitude
118 deg.¥07′¥59.0″
W.
118 deg.¥10′¥36.5″
W.
118 deg.¥07′¥00.0″
W.
118 deg.¥06′¥03.0″
W.
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 12 / Thursday, January 19, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
*
*
*
*
*
Dated: January 9, 2006.
K.J. Eldridge,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander,
Eleventh Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 06–497 Filed 1–18–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–15–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 165
Background and Purpose
[COTP St. Petersburg 05–163]
RIN 1625–AA00
Safety Zone Regulation; Tampa Bay,
FL
Coast Guard, DHS.
Temporary final rule.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
The Coast Guard is
establishing a temporary safety zone on
the waters of Tampa Bay, Florida in the
vicinity of the Treasure Island
Causeway bascule bridge. This safety
zone is being established to protect
mariners from the hazards associated
with the blasting demolition of the
concrete portions of the Treasure Island
bascule bridge. This rule is necessary to
provide for the safety of life on the
navigable waters of the United States.
DATES: This rule is effective from 7:30
a.m. on January 9, 2006 through 6 p.m.
March 10, 2006.
ADDRESSES: Documents indicated in this
preamble as being available in the
docket are part of docket [COTP St.
Petersburg 05–163] and are available for
inspection or copying at Coast Guard
Sector St. Petersburg, Prevention
Department, 155 Columbia Drive,
Tampa, Florida 33606–3598 between
7:30 a.m. and 3:30 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: BM1
Charles Voss at Coast Guard Sector St.
Petersburg, Prevention Department,
(813) 228–2191, ext. 8307.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
SUMMARY:
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with RULES
Regulatory Information
We did not publish a notice of
proposed rulemaking (NPRM) for this
regulation. Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the
Coast Guard finds that good cause exists
for not publishing an NPRM. The
necessary details for the blasting
demolition of the Treasure Island
Causeway bascule bridge were not
provided with sufficient time remaining
to publish an NPRM. Publishing an
NPRM and delaying its effective date
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:18 Jan 18, 2006
would be contrary to the public interest
since immediate action is needed to
minimize potential danger to the public
during the event. The Coast Guard will
issue a broadcast notice to mariners to
advise mariners of the restriction along
with Coast Guard assets on scene who
will also provide notice of the safety
zone to mariners.
For the same reasons, under 5 U.S.C.
553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that
good cause exists for making this rule
effective less than 30 days after
publication in the Federal Register.
Jkt 205001
Johnson Brothers Corporation was
contracted to replace the middle span
bridge, bascule portion on the Treasure
Island Causeway. In order to complete
the demolition of the existing bridge,
Johnson Brothers will conduct a total of
six blasts on three different days to
break up the concrete into smaller
sections for removal. The three days are
tentatively scheduled for 7:30 a.m. on
January 11, 2006, January 24, 2006, and
February 7, 2006. Each day there will be
two blasts approximately one hour
apart. The first day of blasts will be to
remove the concrete counterbalances.
The second and third days will be to
remove the West and East side concrete
main leaf structures respectively. The
use of explosives and the proximity of
the concrete bridge structure to the
navigable channel present a hazard to
mariners transiting the area. This safety
zone is being established to ensure the
safety of life on the navigable waters of
the United States.
Discussion of Rule
The safety zone will extend out from
the Treasure Island Causeway bascule
Bridge in a 1,000 foot radius. Vessels
and persons not under contract or
employees of Johnson Brothers are
prohibited from entering, anchoring or
transiting within this zone unless
authorized by the Captain of the Port St.
Petersburg or his designated
representative. This safety zone is
effective from 7:30 a.m. on January 9,
2006 through 6 p.m. on March 6, 2006.
The Coast Guard does not know the
exact dates that this safety zone will be
enforced at this time. Coast Guard
Sector St Petersburg will give notice of
the enforcement of the safety zone by
issuing a Broadcast Notice to Mariners
beginning 24 to 48 hours before the
blasting is scheduled to begin. On-scene
notice will be provided by local Coast
Guard and local law enforcement
marine units enforcing the safety zone.
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
3003
Regulatory Evaluation
This rule is not a ‘‘significant
regulatory action’’ under section 3(f) of
Executive Order 12866, Regulatory
Planning and Review, and does not
require an assessment of potential costs
and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of that
Order. The Office of Management and
Budget has not reviewed it under that
Order. It is not ‘‘significant’’ under the
regulatory policies and procedures of
the Department of Homeland Security
(DHS). The Coast Guard expects the
economic impact of this proposal to be
so minimal that a full Regulatory
Evaluation under the regulatory policies
and procedures of DHS is unnecessary
because the safety zone will be in effect
for a limited period of time and vessels
may enter with the express permission
of the Captain of the Port of St.
Petersburg or his designated
representative.
Small Entities
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act
(5 U.S.C. 601–612), we have considered
whether this rule would have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
The term ‘‘small entities’’ comprises
small businesses, not-for-profit
organizations that are independently
owned and operated and are not
dominant in their fields, and
governmental jurisdictions with
populations of less than 50,000.
The Coast Guard certifies under 5
U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule will not have
a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
This rule may affect the following
entities, some of which may be small
entities: the owners or operators of
vessels intending to transit within a
1,000 foot radius from the Treasure
Island Causeway Bascule Bridge. This
safety zone will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities for the
following reasons. This rule will only be
enforced in a location where traffic is
minimal and for a limited time when
vessel traffic is expected to be extremely
low. Additionally, traffic will be
allowed to enter the zone with the
permission of the Captain of the Port St.
Petersburg or his designated
representative.
Assistance for Small Entities
Under section 213(a) of the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Public Law 104–
121), we offered to assist small entities
in understanding the rule so that they
could better evaluate its effects on them
and participate in the rulemaking
E:\FR\FM\19JAR1.SGM
19JAR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 12 (Thursday, January 19, 2006)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 3001-3003]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 06-497]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 110
[CGD11-04-007]
RIN 1625-AA01
Anchorage Regulations; San Pedro Bay, CA
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is enlarging the current anchorage area
outside the Federal breakwater of the Ports of Los Angeles--Long Beach,
CA. This rule is necessary in order to accommodate the ever-increasing
number of larger vessels necessitating anchorage and will provide
vessels an appropriate area to anchor.
DATES: This rule is effective February 21, 2006.
ADDRESSES: Comments and material received from the public, as well as
documents indicated in this preamble as being available in the docket,
are part of docket CGD11-04-007 and are available for inspection or
copying at Sector Los Angeles--Long Beach, 1001 South Seaside Avenue,
Building 20, San Pedro, California, 90731, between 8 a.m. and 4 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lieutenant Peter Gooding, USCG, Chief
of the Waterways Management Division, at (310) 732-2020.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Regulatory Information
On November 5, 2004, we published a notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM) entitled Anchorage Regulations: San Pedro Bay, CA in the Federal
Register (69 FR 64549). We received no letters commenting on the
proposed rule. No public meeting was requested, and none was held.
Background and Purpose
Ships of increasing size are calling on the Ports of Los Angeles--
Long Beach. While in an anchorage area, these larger ships require
watch circles of 1500 yards in diameter. Currently, the anchorage area
outside the federal breakwater is made up of watch circles 1000 yards
in diameter. An increase in the anchorage boundary will allow three
additional anchorages for vessels with watch circles of 1500 yards in
diameter.
Discussion of Comments and Changes
The Coast Guard received no comments on this rule and has not
changed the regulations from the published NPRM.
Regulatory Evaluation
This rule is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under section
3(f) of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, and does
not require an assessment of potential costs and benefits under section
6(a)(3) of that Order. The Office of Management and Budget has not
reviewed it under that Order. It is not ``significant'' under the
regulatory policies and procedures of the Department of Homeland
Security (DHS).
We expect the economic impact of this proposed rule to be so
minimal that a full Regulatory Evaluation under the regulatory policies
and procedures of DHS is unnecessary. This proposal will impose no cost
on vessel operators, and have minimal impact to vessel traffic.
Small Entities
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have
considered whether this rule would have a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities. The term ``small entities''
comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations that are
independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their fields,
and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 50,000.
The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule will
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities. This rule will possibly affect the following entities, some
of which may be small entities: The owners and operators of private and
commercial vessels intending to transit or anchor in the affected area.
The impact to these entities would not, however, be significant since
this zone will encompass only a small portion of the waterway and
vessels can safely navigate around the anchored vessels. Additionally,
large passenger vessels already routinely anchor within the anchorage
areas.
Assistance for Small Entities
Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we offered to assist small
entities in understanding the rule so that they can better evaluate its
effects on them and participate in the rulemaking process. However, we
received no requests for assistance from any small entities.
Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal
regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory
Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory
Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and
rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to
comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR
(1-888-734-3247).
Collection of Information
This rule calls for no new collection of information under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).
Federalism
A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on State or local
governments and would either preempt State law or impose a substantial
direct cost of compliance on them. We have analyzed this rule under
that Order and have determined that it does not have implications for
federalism.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538)
requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary
regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may
result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in
the aggregate, or by the private sector of
[[Page 3002]]
$100,000,000 or more in any one year. Though this rule will not result
in such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule
elsewhere in this preamble.
Taking of Private Property
This rule will not effect a taking of private property or otherwise
have taking implications under Executive Order 12630, Governmental
Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property
Rights.
Civil Justice Reform
This rule meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2)
of Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize litigation,
eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden.
Protection of Children
We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13045, Protection
of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks. This rule
is not an economically significant rule and does not create an
environmental risk to health or risk to safety that may
disproportionately affect children.
Indian Tribal Governments
This rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order
13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments,
because it does not have a substantial direct effect on one or more
Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and
Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities
between the Federal Government and Indian tribes.
Energy Effects
We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13211, Actions
Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use. We have determined that it is not a ``significant
energy action'' under that order because it is not a ``significant
regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866 and is not likely to
have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use
of energy. The Administrator of the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs has not designated it as a significant energy
action. Therefore, it does not require a Statement of Energy Effects
under Executive Order 13211.
Technical Standards
The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15
U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use voluntary consensus standards
in their regulatory activities unless the agency provides Congress,
through the Office of Management and Budget, with an explanation of why
using these standards would be inconsistent with applicable law or
otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical
standards (e.g., specifications of materials, performance, design, or
operation; test methods; sampling procedures; and related management
systems practices) that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus
standards bodies.
This rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not
consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.
Environment
We have analyzed this rule under Commandant Instruction M16475.lD,
which guides the Coast Guard in complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA)(42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have
concluded that there are no factors in this case that would limit the
use of a categorical exclusion under section 2.B.2 of the Instruction.
Therefore, this rule is categorically excluded, under figure 2-1,
paragraph (34)(f), of the Instruction, from further environmental
documentation because it changes the size of an existing anchorage.
A final ``Environmental Analysis Check List'' and final
``Categorical Exclusion Determination'' are available in the docket
where indicated under ADDRESSES.
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 110
Anchorage grounds.
0
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33
CFR part 110 as follows:
PART 110--ANCHORAGE REGULATIONS
0
1. The authority citation for part 110 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 471, 1221 through 1236, 2030, 2035, and
2071; 33 CFR 1.05-1(g). Department of Homeland Security Delegation
No. 0170.1.
0
2. Amend Sec. 110.214 by revising paragraph (b)(6) to read as follows:
Sec. 110.214 Los Angeles and Long Beach Harbors, Calif.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(6) Commercial Anchorage F (outside of Long Beach Breakwater). The
waters southeast of the Long Beach Breakwater bounded by a line
connecting the following coordinates:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Latitude Longitude
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Beginning point....................... 33 deg.-43[min]-05.1[sec] N........ 118 deg.-07[min]-59.0[sec] W.
Thence west to........................ 33 deg.-43[min]-05.1[sec] N........ 118 deg.-10[min]-36.5[sec] W.
Thence south/southeast to............. 33 deg.-38[min]-17.5[sec] N........ 118 deg.-07[min]-00.0[sec] W.
Thence north/northeast to............. 33 deg.-40[min]-23.0[sec] N........ 118 deg.-06[min]-03.0[sec] W.
And thence north/northwest to the
beginning point.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 3003]]
* * * * *
Dated: January 9, 2006.
K.J. Eldridge,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Eleventh Coast Guard
District.
[FR Doc. 06-497 Filed 1-18-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P