[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 247 (Wednesday, December 26, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 75823-75825]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-31105]
========================================================================
Rules and Regulations
Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory documents
having general applicability and legal effect, most of which are keyed
to and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is published
under 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.
The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the Superintendent of Documents.
Prices of new books are listed in the first FEDERAL REGISTER issue of each
week.
========================================================================
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 247 / Wednesday, December 26, 2012 /
Rules and Regulations
[[Page 75823]]
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
8 CFR Part 100
U.S. Customs and Border Protection
19 CFR Part 101
[Docket No. USCBP-2011-0017: CBP Dec. 12-22]
RIN 1651-AA93
Closing of the Port of Whitetail, MT
AGENCY: U.S. Customs and Border Protection, DHS.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This document amends the Department of Homeland Security (DHS)
regulations pertaining to the field organization of U.S. Customs and
Border Protection (CBP) to reflect the closure of the port of entry of
Whitetail, Montana. The change is part of CBP's continuing program to
more efficiently utilize its personnel, facilities, and resources, and
to provide better service to carriers, importers, and the general
public.
DATES: Effective Date: January 25, 2013.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Roger Kaplan, Office of Field
Operations, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, (202) 325-4543, or by
email at Roger.Kaplan@dhs.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
On August 24, 2011, CBP published a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
(NPRM) in the Federal Register (76 FR 52890), proposing to close the
port of entry of Whitetail, Montana, and amend the lists of CBP ports
of entry to reflect the change. The primary reason for the proposed
closure was the Canada Border Services Agency's (CBSA) closure of its
adjacent port of entry of Big Beaver, Saskatchewan, Canada, on April 1,
2011. As set forth in the NPRM, other factors were the limited usage of
the port; the locations of the alternative ports of entry of Raymond,
Montana, and Scobey, Montana; and the analysis of the net benefit of
the port closure, including the cost of necessary renovations were the
port to remain open.
II. Analysis of Comments
A. Comments Received
CBP received four public comments in response to the NPRM. One
commenter supports the closure of Whitetail and three commenters are
opposed.
The commenter who supports the proposed closure of the port of
Whitetail believes that the costs of operating the port and maintaining
the surrounding area are too high considering the low usage. This
commenter points out that, using the figures provided in the NPRM for
2007 to 2009, with the annual crossing average of 1,261 cars and 57
trucks and the port's total annual operating cost of $492,000, it
currently costs the taxpayers of the United States in excess of $373
for each vehicle to cross at Whitetail. This commenter thinks that
these costs are not warranted considering the limited increase in time
and mileage that crossers would incur if the port of Whitetail were
closed. Additionally, this commenter claims the closure of the port
would have no effect on cross border commerce because there are
currently no commercial carriers processed at the port. This commenter
also asserts that basing any increase in travel time resulting from the
proposed closure on the distance from the port of Whitetail to the
alternate ports of Raymond and Scobey was not realistic, as the actual
increase in mileage would be much less considering the more likely
points of origin and destination.
The other three commenters opposed the proposed closure, citing the
disruptions the closure would cause them. Two commenters said that the
increased travel time would cause them to discontinue their frequent
trips from Canada to the United States to buy goods and visit shops and
restaurants. Another commenter stated that the closure would increase
the cost to the commenter to move hay bales between the commenter's
farms in Canada and Montana. This commenter also surmised that the
closure could be detrimental to other Canadian and Montanan
agricultural producers.
B. CBP Response
With regard to the comment about increased travel time, CBP
acknowledged in the NPRM that using the distance between the ports may
overstate the cost of the closure to travelers. However, CBP does not
collect data on these travelers' points of origin and destination.
Thus, CBP based the analysis on the assumption that the closure would
create a detour adding 1 hour and 40 miles to each crosser's trip. The
actual additional time and mileage U.S. travelers may incur to drive to
an alternate port may be less.
With regard to the comments about usage and cost, as discussed in
the NPRM, the port of Whitetail is one of CBP's least trafficked ports
and has processed an average of less than 4 vehicles per day for the
last 4 years. From 2007 to 2009, Whitetail averaged only 1,318 cars and
trucks a year. More recently, in fiscal year 2011, southbound traffic
dropped to less than 960 vehicles, with almost all of the decrease in
southbound traffic occurring after CBSA closed the port of Big Beaver
to northbound traffic in April 2011. The commercial traffic is even
lower. In fiscal year 2011 CBP processed only 24 commercial vehicles at
the port of Whitetail. This was a significant decrease from the already
low annual average of about 60 commercial vehicles between 2007 and
2009. Notwithstanding this very low usage, as explained in the NPRM,
CBP would incur substantial costs in order to keep the port open. In
addition to the nearly $500,000 annual operational budget, CBP would
need to construct a replacement facility, an estimated $8 million cost,
because the current facility does not have the infrastructure to meet
modern operational, safety, and technological demands for ports of
entry. Although CBP regrets the disruptions to personal and business
routines that some individuals will experience due to the closure of
Whitetail, CBP cannot justify the above-referenced costs for so few
vehicles.
III. Conclusion
After consideration of the comments received, the low usage of the
port, the locations of the alternative ports of entry, and the analysis
of the net benefit of the port closure, including the cost of
[[Page 75824]]
necessary renovations were the port to remain open, CBP is closing the
port of entry of Whitetail, Montana. The lists of CBP ports of entry at
8 CFR 100.4(a) and 19 CFR 101.3(b)(1) are being amended to reflect the
change.
CBP is working with the Montana Department of Transportation and
CBSA to identify the permanent barrier and signage necessary to prevent
entry and reroute traffic to nearby ports of entry. CBP expects that
any impact on the environment and any costs incurred for this purpose
will be minimal. If necessary, CBP will conduct appropriate
environmental studies in the course of decommissioning and prior to
facility demolition.
IV. Congressional Notification
On September 28, 2010, the Commissioner of CBP notified Congress of
CBP's intention to close the port of entry at Whitetail, Montana,
fulfilling the congressional notification requirements of 19 U.S.C.
2075(g)(2) and section 417 of the Homeland Security Act (6 U.S.C. 217).
V. Regulatory Requirements
A. Signing Authority
The signing authority for this document falls under 19 CFR 0.2(a).
Accordingly, this final rule is signed by the Secretary of Homeland
Security.
B. Executive Orders 12866 and 13563
This rule is not a significant regulatory action under Executive
Order 12866, as supplemented by Executive Order 13563, and has not been
reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget under that order.
Nevertheless, CBP provided its assessment of the benefits and costs of
this regulatory action in the NPRM and CBP adopts the NPRM's economic
analysis for this final rule without any change.
In summary, if the port of entry of Whitetail, Montana remained
open, it would need significant renovation to meet current safety and
security standards, which CBP estimates would cost approximately $8
million. Whitetail also costs CBP approximately $500,000 in yearly
operating expenses to pay for staff and utilities. If Whitetail closed,
travelers would need to find an alternative crossing. As alternative
crossings would require travelers to travel additional miles, CBP
estimates travelers would incur an additional $104,000 annually in
additional driving time and mileage costs if the Whitetail crossing was
not available. In addition, if Whitetail was closed, CBP would incur a
onetime cost of $158,000 in closure expenses. Thus, the net benefit of
the Whitetail closure is about $8.2 million the first year and $396,000
each year after that.
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) requires
federal agencies to examine the impact a rule would have on small
entities. A small entity may be a small business (defined as any
independently owned and operated business not dominant in its field
that qualifies as a small business per the Small Business Act); a small
not-for-profit organization; or a small governmental jurisdiction
(locality with fewer than 50,000 people).
Because CBP does not collect data on the number of small businesses
that use the port of Whitetail, we cannot estimate how many would be
affected by this rule. However, an average of less than four vehicles
crossed into the United States at Whitetail each day even before
closure of the Canadian port of Big Beaver further reduced traffic.
Commercial traffic is even lower--an average of fewer than 60
commercial vehicles crossed at Whitetail each year from 2007 to 2009,
with only 24 commercial vehicles crossing in fiscal year 2011. The
assessment of the benefits and costs of this regulatory action included
in the NPRM concluded that the total cost of the rule to the public is
about $104,000 a year, even assuming the longest possible detour for
all traffic. DHS does not believe that this cost rises to the level of
a significant economic impact. DHS thus believes that this rule will
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities. DHS did not receive any comments contradicting this finding.
Accordingly, DHS certifies that this rule will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
This rule will not result in the expenditure by State, local, and
tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100
million or more in any one year, and it will not significantly or
uniquely affect small governments. Therefore, no actions are necessary
under the provisions of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995.
E. Executive Order 13132
The rule will not have substantial direct effects on the States, on
the relationship between the National Government and the States, or on
the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels
of government. Therefore, in accordance with section 6 of Executive
Order 13132, this rule does not have sufficient federalism implications
to warrant the preparation of a federalism summary impact statement.
List of Subjects
8 CFR Part 100
Organization and functions (Government agencies).
19 CFR Part 101
Customs duties and inspection, Customs ports of entry, Exports,
Imports, Organization and functions (Government agencies).
Amendments to DHS Regulations
For the reasons set forth above, DHS amends part 100 of title 8 of
the Code of Federal Regulations and part 101 of title 19 of the Code of
Federal Regulations as set forth below.
8 CFR CHAPTER 1--AMENDMENTS
PART 100--STATEMENT OF ORGANIZATION
0
1. The authority citation for part 100 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1103; 8 CFR part 2.
Sec. 100.4 [Amended]
0
2. The list of ports in Sec. 100.4(a) is amended by removing
``Whitetail, MT'' from the list of Class A ports of entry under
District No. 30--Helena, Montana.
19 CFR CHAPTER 1--AMENDMENTS
PART 101--GENERAL PROVISIONS
0
3. The general authority citation for part 101 and the specific
authority citation for section 101.3 continue to read as follows:
Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301; 19 U.S.C. 2, 66, 1202 (General Note
3(i), Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States), 1623, 1624,
1646a.
Sections 101.3 and 101.4 also issued under 19 U.S.C. 1 and 58b;
* * * * *
Sec. 101.3 [Amended]
0
4. The list of ports in Sec. 101.3(b)(1) is amended by removing, under
the state of Montana, the entry ``Whitetail'' from the ``Ports of
entry'' column and removing the corresponding entry ``E.O. 7632, June
15, 1937 (2 FR 1245).'' from the ``Limits of port'' column.
[[Page 75825]]
Dated: December 20, 2012.
Janet Napolitano,
Secretary of Homeland Security.
[FR Doc. 2012-31105 Filed 12-21-12; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 9111-14-P