Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 233 / Monday, December 6, 2004 / Rules and Regulations 70379

Federal Communications Commission.

Linda C. Chang, 

Associate Division Chief, Mobility Division.

[FR Doc. 04–26742 Filed 12–3–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6712–01–P

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service 

50 CFR Part 14 

RIN 1018–AT59 

Conferring Designated Port Status on 

Houston, TX; Louisville, KY; and 

Memphis, TN

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Interior.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service, make Houston, Texas; 

Louisville, Kentucky; and Memphis, 

Tennessee, designated ports under 

section 9(f) of the Endangered Species 

Act of 1973 (ESA). This action will 

allow the direct importation and 

exportation of wildlife and wildlife 

products through these growing 

international ports. We are changing the 

regulations in 50 CFR part 14 to reflect 

this designation.

DATES: This rule is effective January 5, 

2005.

ADDRESSES: Comments and materials 

received, as well as supporting 

documentation used in the preparation 

of this final rule, are available for public 

inspection, by appointment, during 

regular business hours at the Branch of 

Investigations, U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service, Office of Law Enforcement, 

4501 North Fairfax Drive, Suite 3000, 

Arlington, Virginia 22203.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Gregory Jackson, Special Agent in 

Charge, Branch of Investigations, U.S. 

Fish and Wildlife Service, Office of Law 

Enforcement, at (703) 358–1949.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

The ESA requires that all fish and 

wildlife, with only limited exceptions, 

be imported and exported through 

designated ports. Designated ports 

facilitate U.S. efforts to monitor wildlife 

trade and enforce wildlife protection 

laws and regulations by funneling 

wildlife shipments through a limited 

number of locations. The Secretary of 

the Interior, with the approval of the 

Secretary of the Department of 

Homeland Security, designates ports for 

wildlife trade by regulation after 

holding a public hearing and collecting 

and considering public comments. 

Public hearings were conducted in 

Houston on June 10, 2004, in Memphis 

on July 1, 2004, and in Louisville on 

July 8, 2004. We published a proposed 

rule to designate the ports of Houston, 

Louisville, and Memphis, with a 30-day 

comment period, on April 22, 2004 (69 

FR 21806). 

The Service selects designated ports 

based upon numerous criteria, such as 

volume of wildlife shipments, 

geographic diversity, frequency of 

requests for designated port exception 

permits, and the proximity to existing 

ports of entry. The Service presently has 

14 designated ports of entry for the 

importation and exportation of wildlife 

and wildlife products: Anchorage, 

Alaska; Atlanta, Georgia; Baltimore, 

Maryland; Boston, Massachusetts; 

Chicago, Illinois; Dallas/Fort Worth, 

Texas; Honolulu, Hawaii; Los Angeles, 

California; Miami, Florida; New 

Orleans, Louisiana; New York, New 

York; Portland, Oregon; San Francisco, 

California; and Seattle, Washington. The 

Service maintains a staff of wildlife 

inspectors at each designated port to 

inspect and clear wildlife shipments. 

Regulatory exceptions allow certain 

types of wildlife shipments to enter or 

leave the country through ports that are 

not designated. Under certain 

conditions, importers and exporters can 

obtain a permit from the Service, called 

a designated port exception permit, that 

allows their use of non-designated ports. 

The importer or exporter will be 

responsible for additional fees 

associated with the designated port 

exception permit ($25) and the 

inspection of their wildlife shipment at 

a non-designated port. 

Need for This Rulemaking 

Existing and projected increases in air 

and express cargo, along with 

substantial growth in the number of 

airline passengers, international visitors, 

and hunters seeking clearance of 

wildlife imports and exports, justify the 

designation of the ports of Houston, 

Louisville, and Memphis. The 

designation of these ports will improve 

service, while reducing costs, for 

international air and ocean cargo and 

mail carriers, small businesses, and the 

public, while maintaining effective 

monitoring and regulation of the U.S. 

wildlife trade. 

In the Fiscal Year 2004 budget 

appropriation for the Service’s Office of 

Law Enforcement, monies were 

appropriated by Congress in the amount 

of $700,000 each for the purpose of 

establishing the designated ports of 

Louisville and Memphis. The Service 

has not received an appropriation from 

Congress to designate the port of 

Houston. However, the designation of 

Houston has been under discussion for 

some time. At present, the Service has 

three wildlife inspectors on duty in 

Houston, which fulfills the staffing 

requirement that the Service has 

established for a designated port in 

funding and staffing models. Therefore, 

the designation of Houston would 

amount to changing the status of an 

existing Service port and would not 

require start-up costs as would be the 

case in Louisville and Memphis.

Houston is one of the fastest growing 

ports of entry in the nation in both 

international airfreight and shipping. 

The three airports comprising the 

Houston Airport System handled 

42,016,609 passengers and 330,701 tons 

of cargo in 2002. International air cargo 

tonnage at George Bush Intercontinental 

increased by more than 62 percent in 

the past 10 years with a 10 percent per 

year increase in the past 5 years. 

Houston is the primary air cargo 

gateway to and from Mexico, and the 

Houston sea port handles 81 steamship 

lines with 6,414 vessel calls, hauling 

175,000,000 tons of cargo between 

Houston and 200 countries worldwide 

in 2002. The Port of Houston ranks first 

in the United States in tonnage 

imported, and third in tonnage 

exported. Houston also has an extensive 

designated Foreign Trade Zone. 

Service records indicate that a wide 

variety of wildlife and wildlife products 

are imported and exported through 

Houston under designated port 

exception permits. These wildlife and 

wildlife products include game 

trophies, reptile leather goods, scientific 

and museum specimens, live tropical 

fish, and curios. The number of 

designated port exception permits 

issued for the port of Houston suggests 

that demand for the use of this port is 

high. In addition, the number of import/

export licenses issued to companies in 

the State of Texas has nearly doubled 

since 2001. Doubtless, many of these 

companies are doing business in or near 

the Houston area and will benefit from 

the designation of this port. 

Before this designation, the 

designated ports of entry for wildlife 

and wildlife products nearest to 

Houston were Dallas/Fort Worth, Texas 

(approximately 239 miles), and New 

Orleans, Louisiana (approximately 347 

miles). In the 2003 Fiscal Year, 4,434 

wildlife shipments were processed in 

Dallas/Forth Worth, and 659 wildlife 

shipments were processed in New 

Orleans. We estimate that a significant 

fraction of this volume will be shipped 

directly to Houston for Service 

inspection and clearance with its 

70380 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 233 / Monday, December 6, 2004 / Rules and Regulations 

designation, resulting in considerable 

savings in shipping time and costs. 

Before this designation, importations or 

exportations of wildlife or wildlife 

products arriving in Houston without 

Service clearance had to be either 

shipped in-bond, under U.S. Bureau of 

Customs and Border Protection (CBP) 

authority, to designated ports of entry 

for Service inspection and clearance, or 

had to be accompanied by a designated 

port exception permit that authorized 

Service inspection and clearance in 

Houston. Designated port exception 

permits for Houston have been issued 

on a regular basis since the Service does 

have three wildlife inspectors on duty at 

that location. However, either 

alternative creates delays and increased 

costs to businesses. 

In Louisville, the presence of the 

United Parcel Service (UPS) hub at the 

Louisville International Airport makes 

Louisville the 6th largest handler of air 

cargo in the world. In 2002, UPS at 

Louisville handled 3,360,155,981 lbs. of 

air cargo in 3.5 million shipments, 

including approximately 665,000 CBP 

import entries. In addition, the port of 

Louisville had 34,354 CBP entries for 

other importations and waterborne 

cargo at the Louisville Container Freight 

Port separate from the UPS facility. 

Before this designation, the 

designated ports of entry for wildlife 

and wildlife products nearest to 

Louisville were Chicago, Illinois 

(approximately 297 miles), and Atlanta, 

Georgia (approximately 421 miles). In 

the 2003 Fiscal Year, 5,434 wildlife 

shipments were processed in Chicago, 

and 2,020 wildlife shipments were 

processed in Atlanta. In addition, 

11,800 wildlife shipments were 

processed in Anchorage, which is the 

Pacific rim first port of landing for UPS. 

We estimate that a significant fraction of 

this volume will be shipped directly to 

Louisville for Service inspection and 

clearance with its designation, resulting 

in considerable savings in shipping time 

and costs. Before this designation, 

importations or exportations of wildlife 

or wildlife products arriving in 

Louisville without Service clearance 

had to be shipped in-bond, under CBP 

authority, to designated ports of entry 

for Service inspection and clearance, 

thereby creating delays and increased 

costs to businesses. Designated port 

exception permits for Louisville have 

been issued on an extremely limited 

basis since the Service does not 

currently have staff at that location, and 

issuing these permits can only be done 

subject to the availability of Service staff 

from other ports to conduct inspections. 

In Memphis, the presence of the 

Federal Express (FedEx) headquarters 

and Superhub makes Memphis 

International Airport the world’s largest 

processor of international airfreight, 

handling 2.63 million metric tons in 

2001, more than Los Angeles or Hong 

Kong. FedEx’s global network spans 

over 210 countries, and 121,000 

international shipments pass through 

the Memphis hub each day. More than 

130 foreign-owned firms from 22 

countries employing over 17,000 

workers have relocated to Memphis in 

the past 20 years. In addition, Memphis 

is home to both rail and waterborne 

freight imports and exports, with a CBP 

port of entry for such cargo. In 2001, the 

International Port of Memphis handled 

16,907,000 tons of cargo. Memphis is 

served by five Class 1 railroads, which 

operate approximately 220 freight trains 

daily through the city. 

Before this designation, the 

designated ports of entry for wildlife 

and wildlife products nearest to 

Memphis were New Orleans, Louisiana 

(approximately 402 miles), Dallas, Texas 

(approximately 452 miles), and Atlanta, 

Georgia (approximately 463 miles). In 

the 2003 Fiscal Year, 659 wildlife 

shipments were processed in New 

Orleans, 4,434 wildlife shipments were 

processed in Dallas, and 2,020 wildlife 

shipments were processed in Atlanta. In 

addition, 11,800 wildlife shipments 

were processed in Anchorage, which is 

the Pacific rim first port of landing for 

FedEx. We estimate that a significant 

percentage of this volume will be 

shipped directly to Memphis for Service 

inspection and clearance with its 

designation, resulting in considerable 

savings in shipping time and costs. 

Before this designation, importations or 

exportations of wildlife or wildlife 

products arriving in Memphis without 

Service clearance had to be shipped inbond, under CBP authority, to 

designated ports of entry for Service 

inspection and clearance, thereby 

creating delays and increased costs to 

businesses. Designated port exception 

permits for Memphis have been issued 

on an extremely limited basis since the 

Service has only one special agent at 

that location whose responsibilities 

extend far beyond the port. While there 

are 18 CBP inspectors and 10 U.S. 

Department of Agriculture Inspectors in 

Memphis, the absence of Service 

inspectors has increased the likelihood 

that illegal wildlife shipments have 

been imported or exported through 

Memphis, impacting both the United 

States’ ability to fulfill treaty obligations 

under the Convention on International 

Trade in Endangered Species (CITES) 

and creating an avenue for the 

introduction of injurious or invasive 

species into the nation. Prior to 

September 11, 2001, CBP inspectors in 

Memphis initiated about 156 wildliferelated seizures per year, mostly 

consisting of reptile leather goods. The 

single Service agent stationed in 

Memphis is responsible for criminal 

investigations in all of West Tennessee 

and, therefore, has had very little time 

to devote to import/export matters. 

However, by spending minimal time at 

the FedEx air facility, he has routinely 

made about 40 seizures of illegally 

imported wildlife or wildlife products 

annually. Designated port status for 

Memphis will expedite the processing 

of wildlife shipments, which is 

financially advantageous for Memphis’

and the region’s carriers, importers, and 

exporters, while interdicting the illegal 

international import and export trade in 

wildlife and wildlife products. 

In summary, the Service makes 

Houston, Louisville, and Memphis 

designated ports under section 9(f) of 

the ESA. The justification for this 

designation is based primarily on past 

and projected increases in the import 

and export of wildlife or wildlife 

products through these ports. The result 

of this designation will be to ease the 

financial and administrative burden on 

companies and individuals seeking to 

import or export wildlife or wildlife 

products through the ports of Houston, 

Louisville, and Memphis. With this 

final rule, the list of designated ports is 

now alphabetized by city name. 

Summary of Public Comments Received 

In response to our proposed rule to 

designate the ports of Houston, 

Louisville, and Memphis, published on 

April 22, 2004 (69 FR 21806), we 

received a total of 35 comments. All of 

these comments supported the 

designation of Houston, Louisville, and 

Memphis. In addition, we received three 

written comments at our hearing in 

Houston, and one written comment at 

our hearing in Louisville. All of these 

comments supported the designation of 

these ports.

Required Determinations 

Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory 

Planning and Review) 

This rule has not been reviewed by 

the Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) under Executive Order 12866. 

Under the criteria in Executive Order 

12866, this rule is not a significant 

regulatory action. 

a. This rule will not have an annual 

economic effect of $100 million or 

adversely affect an economic sector, 

productivity, jobs, the environment, or 

other units of government. A costVerDate jul<14>2003 14:06 Dec 03, 2004 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06DER1.SGM 06DER1
Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 233 / Monday, December 6, 2004 / Rules and Regulations 70381

benefit and economic analysis is not 

required. 

The purpose of this rule is to confer 

designated port status on Houston, 

Louisville, and Memphis. Changing the 

status of these ports will have very little 

or no adverse effect on the economic 

sector, productivity, jobs, or the 

environment, or other units of 

government. This rule is intended to 

decrease the administrative and 

financial burden on wildlife importers 

and exporters by allowing them to use 

the ports of Houston, Louisville, and 

Memphis for all varieties of wildlife 

shipments. This rule provides a 

significant benefit to those businesses 

that import or export wildlife or wildlife 

products by allowing the inspection of 

shipments in Houston, Louisville, and 

Memphis, and will result in a savings 

for the importer or exporter in both time 

and the expense of shipping to a 

designated port for Service inspection 

and clearance. 

b. This rule will not create 

inconsistencies with other agencies’

actions. 

The Service is the lead agency 

regulating wildlife trade through the 

declaration process, the issuance of 

permits to conduct activities affecting 

wildlife and their habitats, and carrying 

out the United States’ obligations under 

CITES. Therefore, this rule has no effect 

on other agencies’ responsibilities and 

will not create inconsistencies with 

other agencies’ actions. 

c. This rule will not materially affect 

entitlements, grants, user fees, loan 

programs, or the rights and obligations 

of their recipients. 

This rule will not materially affect 

entitlements, grants, loan programs, or 

the rights and obligations of their 

recipients. This rule will, however, 

affect user fees. User fees will be 

decreased or cancelled depending on 

whether the import or export of wildlife 

or wildlife products is for commercial 

purposes. For example, when we 

establish Houston, which is currently 

staffed with three wildlife inspectors, as 

a designated port, commercial importers 

and exporters will save a minimum of 

$40 per shipment and noncommercial 

importers and exporters will save a 

minimum of $95 per shipment. When 

we establish Memphis and Louisville, 

which are not currently staffed with 

wildlife inspectors, as designated ports, 

commercial importers and exporters 

will save all costs associated with 

inspections and clearance, such as 

travel, salary, and per diem, and 

noncommercial importers and exporters 

will save the $55 administrative fee plus 

all costs associated with inspections and 

clearance. In addition, when we 

establish Houston, Louisville, and 

Memphis as designated ports, all 

importers and exporters will save the 

$25 designated port exception permit 

fee. 

d. This rule will not raise novel legal 

or policy issues. 

This rule will not raise novel legal or 

policy issues because it is based upon 

specific language in the ESA and the 

Code of Federal Regulations, which has 

been applied numerous times to various 

ports around the country. 

Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 

et seq.) 

The Department of the Interior has 

determined that this rule will not have 

a significant economic effect on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 

U.S.C. 601 et seq.). An initial regulatory 

flexibility analysis is not required. In 

addition, a Small Entity Compliance 

Guide is not required. 

Most of the businesses that engage in 

commerce by importing or exporting 

wildlife or wildlife products would be 

considered small businesses as defined 

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act. 

This rule is intended to ease the 

financial and administrative burden on 

companies and individuals seeking to 

import or export wildlife or wildlife 

products through the ports of Houston, 

Louisville, and Memphis. This burden 

will be eased through the reduction or 

elimination of user fees, and the 

elimination of the need for designated 

port exception permits. In addition, the 

designation of these ports will provide 

small entities with opportunities for 

additional brokerage, freight forwarding, 

and related services to accommodate the 

increased volume of imports and 

exports of wildlife and wildlife products 

through these ports. These businesses 

would be considered by the Small 

Business Administration (SBA) as ‘‘All 

Other Support Activities for 

Transportation,’’ with an SBA size 

standard of $6 million in average annual 

receipts.

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act (5 U.S.C. 804(2)) 

This rule is not a major rule under 5 

U.S.C. 804(2), the Small Business 

Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act. 

a. This rule does not have an annual 

effect on the economy of $100 million 

or more. 

This rule will not increase costs for 

small entities. Before this designation, a 

shipper who requested Service 

clearance at Houston, Louisville, or 

Memphis had to have the shipment 

continue under CBP bond to a 

designated port. With the designation of 

Houston, Louisville, and Memphis, the 

elimination of costs associated with 

shipping under CBP bond to a 

designated port will amount to a 

substantial savings for importers and 

exporters of wildlife or wildlife 

products. In addition, the designation of 

these ports will provide small entities 

with opportunities for additional 

brokerage, freight forwarding, and 

related services to accommodate the 

increased volume of imports and 

exports of wildlife and wildlife products 

through these ports. 

b. This rule will not cause a major 

increase in costs or prices for 

consumers, individual industries, 

Federal, State, or local government 

agencies, or geographic regions. 

This rule is intended to ease the 

financial and administrative burden on 

companies and individuals seeking to 

import or export wildlife or wildlife 

products through the ports of Houston, 

Louisville, and Memphis, thereby 

decreasing costs or prices for consumers 

or individual businesses. 

c. This rule does not have significant 

negative effects on competition, 

employment, investment, productivity, 

innovation, or the ability of U.S.-based 

companies to compete with foreignbased companies. 

This rule is intended to ease the 

financial and administrative burden on 

companies and individuals seeking to 

import or export wildlife or wildlife 

products through the ports of Houston, 

Louisville, and Memphis, thereby 

promoting competition, employment, 

and investment, and increasing the 

ability of U.S.-based enterprises to 

compete with foreign-based enterprises. 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (2 

U.S.C. 1501 et seq.) 

Under the Unfunded Mandates 

Reform Act (2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.), this 

rule, as proposed, will not ‘‘significantly 

or uniquely’’ affect small governments. 

a. This rule will not significantly or 

uniquely affect small governments. A 

Small Government Agency Plan is not 

required. 

We are the lead agency for carrying 

out regulations that govern and monitor 

the importation and exportation of 

wildlife and wildlife products. 

Therefore this rule has no effect on 

small government’s responsibilities. 

b. This rule will not produce a 

Federal requirement that may result in 

the combined expenditure by State, 

local, or tribal governments of $100 

million or greater in any year, so it is 

not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’

under the Unfunded Mandates Reform 

Act. 

70382 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 233 / Monday, December 6, 2004 / Rules and Regulations 

This rule will not result in any 

combined expenditure by State, local, or 

tribal governments. 

Executive Order 12630 (Takings) 

Under Executive Order 12630, this 

rule does not have significant takings 

implications. Under Executive Order 

12630, this rule does not affect any 

constitutionally protected property 

rights. This rule will not result in the 

physical occupancy of property, the 

physical invasion of property, or the 

regulatory taking of any property. A 

takings implication assessment is not 

required. The purpose of this rule is to 

confer designated port status on the 

ports of Houston, Louisville, and 

Memphis. The result will be easing the 

financial and administrative burden on 

the public by eliminating the need for 

non-designated port permits, and 

decreasing or eliminating the 

administrative fees associated with 

shipment inspections. Therefore, this 

rule does not have significant takings 

implications. 

Executive Order 13132 (Federalism) 

Under Executive Order 13132, this 

rule does not have significant 

Federalism effects. A Federalism 

evaluation is not required. This rule will 

not have a substantial direct effect on 

the States, on the relationship between 

the Federal Government and the States, 

or on the distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government.

Executive Order 12988 (Civil Justice 

Reform) 

Under Executive Order 12988, the 

Office of the Solicitor has determined 

that this rule does not overly burden the 

judicial system and meets the 

requirements of sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) 

of the Order. Specifically, this rule has 

been reviewed to eliminate errors and 

ensure clarity, has been written to 

minimize lawsuits, provides a clear 

legal standard for affected actions, and 

specifies in clear language the effect on 

existing Federal law or regulation. 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 

U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) 

This rule does not contain any 

information collection requirements that 

require approval by the Office of 

Management and Budget under the 

Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 

3501 et seq.

National Environmental Policy Act 

This rule has been analyzed under the 

criteria of the National Environmental 

Policy Act and 318 DM 2.2(g) and 

6.3(D). This rule does not amount to a 

major Federal action significantly 

affecting the quality of the human 

environment. An environmental impact 

statement/evaluation is not required. 

This rule is categorically excluded from 

further National Environmental Policy 

Act requirements, under part 516 of the 

Departmental Manual, Chapter 2, 

Appendix 1.10. 

Executive Order 13175 (Tribal 

Consultation) and 512 DM 2 

(Government-to-Government 

Relationship With Tribes) 

Under the President’s memorandum 

of April 29, 1994, ‘‘Government-toGovernment Relations with Native 

American Tribal Governments’’ (59 FR 

22951), Executive Order 13175, and 512 

DM 2, we have evaluated possible 

effects on Federally recognized Indian 

tribes and have determined that there 

are no effects. Individual tribal members 

are subject to the same regulatory 

requirements as other individuals who 

engage in the import and export of 

wildlife or wildlife products. 

Executive Order 13211 (Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use) 

On May 18, 2001, the President issued 

Executive Order 13211 on regulations 

that significantly affect energy supply, 

distribution, and use. Executive Order 

13211 requires agencies to prepare 

Statements of Energy Effects when 

undertaking certain actions. The 

purpose of this rule is to confer 

designated port status on the ports of 

Houston, Louisville, and Memphis. This 

rule is not a significant regulatory action 

under Executive Order 12866 and it is 

not expected to significantly affect 

energy supplies, distribution, and use. 

Therefore, this action is a not a 

significant energy action and no 

Statement of Energy Effects is required. 

Endangered Species Act 

A determination has been made under 

section 7 of the ESA that the revision of 

part 14 will not affect federally listed 

species. 

Author 

The originator of this rule is Mark 

Phillips, Office of Law Enforcement, 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Washington, DC.

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 14

Animal welfare, Exports, Fish, 

Imports, Labeling, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, 

Transportation, Wildlife.

Regulation Promulgation

■ For the reasons described above, we 

amend part 14, subchapter B of chapter 

1, title 50 of the Code of Federal 

Regulations as set forth below.

PART 14—IMPORTATION, 

EXPORTATION, AND 

TRANSPORTATION OF WILDLIFE

■ 1. The authority citation for part 14 

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 16 U.S.C. 668, 704, 712, 1382, 

1538(d)–(f), 1540(f), 3371–3378, 4223–4244, 

and 4901–4916; 18 U.S.C. 42; 31 U.S.C. 9701.

■ 2. Revise § 14.12 to read as follows:

§ 14.12 Designated ports. 

The following ports of entry are 

designated for the importation and 

exportation of wildlife and wildlife 

products and are referred to hereafter as 

‘‘designated ports’’:

(a) Anchorage, Alaska. 

(b) Atlanta, Georgia. 

(c) Baltimore, Maryland. 

(d) Boston, Massachusetts. 

(e) Chicago, Illinois. 

(f) Dallas/Fort Worth, Texas. 

(g) Honolulu, Hawaii. 

(h) Houston, Texas. 

(i) Los Angeles, California. 

(j) Louisville, Kentucky. 

(k) Memphis, Tennessee. 

(l) Miami, Florida. 

(m) New Orleans, Louisiana. 

(n) New York, New York. 

(o) Portland, Oregon. 

(p) San Francisco, California. 

(q) Seattle, Washington.

Dated: November 29, 2004. 

David P. Smith, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Fish and 

Wildlife and Parks.

[FR Doc. 04–26717 Filed 12–3–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–55–P

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service 

50 CFR Part 17 

RIN 1018–AT65 

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife 

and Plants; Establishment of an 

Additional Manatee Protection Area in 

Lee County, FL

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Interior.

ACTION: Emergency rule.

SUMMARY: We, the Fish and Wildlife 

Service (Service), as required by 

regulation, hereby provide notice of the 

termination of the emergency