[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 140 (Tuesday, July 22, 2014)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 42449-42452]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-17190]
========================================================================
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. 79, No. 140 / Tuesday, July 22, 2014 / Rules
and Regulations
[[Page 42449]]
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
8 CFR Part 100
Customs and Border Protection
19 CFR Part 101
[Docket No. USCBP-2012-0037; CBP Dec. 14-08]
Closing of the Jamieson Line, New York Border Crossing
AGENCY: U.S. Customs and Border Protection, DHS.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This final rule amends the Department of Homeland Security
(DHS) regulations pertaining to the field organization of U.S. Customs
and Border Protection (CBP) by closing the Jamieson Line, New York
border crossing. The change is part of CBP's continuing program to
utilize its personnel, facilities, and resources more efficiently, and
to provide better service to carriers, importers, and the general
public.
DATES: This final rule is effective on August 21, 2014.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Roger Kaplan, Office of Field
Operations, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, (202) 325-4543, or by
email at [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
On September 24, 2012, CBP published a Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking (NPRM) in the Federal Register (77 FR 58782), proposing to
close the Jamieson Line, New York, border crossing and amend the lists
of CBP Customs stations at 19 CFR 101.4(c) and the CBP ports of entry
at 8 CFR 100.4(a) 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 Jamieson's Line port in Quebec, Canada
on April 1, 2011. As set forth in the NPRM, other factors were the very
limited usage of the port; the locations of the alternative ports of
entry of Trout River, New York and Chateaugay, New York; the lack of
infrastructure at the border crossing to meet modern operational,
safety, and technological demands of ports of entry; 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
CBP received nine public comments in response to the NPRM. Three
commenters supported the closure of the Jamieson Line border crossing
and six commenters opposed it. The following section summarizes the
comments and CBP responses, grouped into three general categories:
impact on travelers, impact on surrounding area, and costs.
1. Impact on Travelers
Comments: Several commenters wrote that the closure would require a
detour during their frequent trips from Canada to the United States
resulting in additional travel time, vehicle wear and tear, and added
fuel costs. One of the commenters stated that, as a senior citizen on a
very limited pension, the additional travel time to the Chateaugay
border crossing and the added fuel cost would be a great burden.
A commenter supporting the proposed closure of the border crossing
wrote that traveling the six to nine extra miles to the next closest
border crossing is not a substantial burden given that the Jamieson
Line border crossing is infrequently used. Another commenter wrote that
the border crossings at Chateaugay and Trout River are on state
highways (as opposed to the Jamieson Line border crossing which is on a
country road) and stated that re-routing the traffic to state highways
would provide a more direct route for most travelers. One of the
commenters queried whether the Jamieson Line border crossing has
historically had significantly higher traffic numbers than in more
recent years.
CBP Response: The Jamieson Line border crossing is one of CBP's
least trafficked border crossings. The border crossing has processed an
average of less than six privately owned vehicles per day and had the
eighth lowest traffic volume of all CBP land border crossings for the
past four fiscal years (2009-2012).\1\ As explained in detail below,
CBP would incur substantial costs in order to keep the border crossing
open. Although CBP sincerely regrets the disruptions to personal and
business routines that some individuals will experience due to the
closure of the Jamieson Line border crossing, CBP cannot justify the
substantial costs for so few vehicles.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Prior to 2008, traffic at the Jamieson Line border crossing
was combined with the traffic of nearby ports so CBP cannot
ascertain the actual number of crossings at the Jamieson Line border
crossing for earlier years.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Impact on Surrounding Area
Comments: One commenter wrote that the closing of the Jamieson Line
border crossing would lead to job loss and economic hardship within the
local community of Burke, New York, which will lose contracts at the
border crossing for services such as cleaning, lawn maintenance, and
snow removal as well as business from the loss of travelers. (The
Jamieson Line border crossing is in Burke, New York). The commenter
also stated that the neighboring ports will be adversely affected by
the closure since the neighboring ports are already burdened by
obsolete buildings and minimum staffing and that the closing of the
Jamieson Line border crossing would increase the wait times at the
neighboring ports of Chateaugay and Trout River.
A commenter supporting the proposed border crossing closure noted
that the citizens in the surrounding areas will be minimally impacted
by the closure of the Jamieson Line border crossing; according to
multiple maps of the area, there are no local businesses in the
vicinity of the Jamieson Line border crossing and the travel time would
not increase given the re-routing of the traffic to faster, more
efficient state highways.
Another commenter asked whether the necessary renovation to the
border crossing were it to remain open would stimulate the economy of
the town of Burke, New York, which might attract more Canadians into
the United States, especially given the favorable exchange rates. This
commenter also inquired if
[[Page 42450]]
renovating the Jamieson Line border crossing would potentially increase
trade between the United States and Canada per ``the Perimeter Security
agreement''. Finally, this commenter asked whether CBP considered
converting the Jamieson Line border crossing into an unmanned crossing.
Another commenter questioned whether the greater distance between the
border crossings made the border less secure.
CBP response: CBP believes that the impact of the closure of the
Jamieson Line border crossing on the town of Burke and the surrounding
area will be minimal. Since fewer than an average of six vehicles a day
enter the United States at the Jamieson Line crossing, the effect to
local businesses is likely to be very small and the effect on wait
times at nearby ports, if any, is likely to be minimal.
We do not believe that the vehicle traffic at the border crossing
would increase or that other benefits would accrue from renovating the
border crossing. CBP notes that such renovation would be performed only
to allow the border crossing to meet current DHS building safety and
security standards and that the border crossing would operate in the
same manner as before, with one primary lane, no secondary lane, and no
formal commercial vehicle inspection area. As such, CBP would not
expect an increase in jobs or business activity in the local community.
CBP does not believe that a renovation would increase the number of
tourists arriving from Canada, especially given the fact that the
border crossing on the Canadian side is closed. CBP also notes that the
Beyond the Border Declaration between the United States and Canada
(which the commenter refers to as the Perimeter Security agreement) is
not relevant to the closure of the Jamieson Line border crossing as it
primarily addresses security concerns, the further development of the
trusted traveler programs, and the coordination between Canada and the
United States at large border crossings.
CBP believes that the closure of the border crossing would not
impair security at the border. First, CBP notes that the Area Port of
Trout River and its border crossings (including Jamieson Line) have a
low-risk, low-threat security and law-enforcement environment. Second,
CBP will be taking several steps to address security concerns,
including building a barrier to physically block the road to vehicular
traffic, electronically monitoring the border crossing at all times,
and conducting periodic sweeps. The suggestion that CBP should consider
converting the Jamieson Line border crossing into an unmanned crossing
is not a viable option because the technology and equipment that would
allow a border to be unstaffed is prohibitively expensive. In addition,
the servicing port of any unmanned crossing at the Jamieson Line border
crossing would still have to redirect manpower to respond to entry
requests at a substantial cost.
3. Costs
Comments: Several of the commenters supporting the proposed closure
of the Jamieson Line border crossing asserted that the closure is the
fiscally sound option given the low daily volume of travelers, the
nearby alternative ports of entry available, and the substantial cost
to renovate the facilities to meet the current safety and security
requirements. One of the commenters praised CBP for taking steps to
save money especially given today's budgetary concerns. Another
commenter wrote that the current condition of the building could pose a
potential public risk if not updated and that the stated cost of
implementing these necessary renovations is extremely high in relation
to the low use of the border crossing.
Several commenters questioned the economic analysis included in the
NPRM. One of the commenters wrote that renovating the structure was not
the only viable option for keeping the Jamieson Line border crossing
open and that CBP should have considered the alternative of continuing
to operate the border crossing in its current state. Another commenter
wrote that the border crossing has functioned for over fifty years and
that only a modest replacement of the building for a fraction of the
$6,500,000 cost reflected in the NPRM would be necessary. A commenter
challenged the estimated costs and economic analysis in the NPRM and
asserted that numerous costs were incorrect. Among other assertions,
this commenter stated that the border crossing would only require three
full-time CBP officers for full coverage and not the five full-time CBP
officers currently assigned to the Jamieson Line border crossing.
Finally, one commenter wrote that the annual cost to travelers to close
the border crossing represents slightly less than 10% of what it would
cost CBP to keep the facility operating in its current state.
CBP Response: We disagree with the commenters' assertions that CBP
does not have to renovate the border crossing to continue operating the
crossing and CBP maintains that all of our cost calculations are
accurate. The current facility at the Jamieson Line border crossing
does not meet CBP building safety and security standards and CBP must
construct a new facility to meet these standards if the border crossing
operations are to continue. (The facility was built in 1945 and has not
undergone renovation since 1962.). As stated in the NPRM, CBP estimates
the cost to renovate the facility at the Jamieson Line border crossing
to be $6,500,000. This estimate is based on the actual labor, land,
environmental and other relevant costs to construct identical
facilities in New York and Vermont. As further stated in the NPRM, the
cost of the renovations and the costs to CBP of continuing to operate
the Jamieson Line border crossing are $7,087,000 (construction, plus
staffing and operating costs) during the first year and $587,000
(staffing and operating expenses) each following year. CBP estimates
that it will cost approximately $205,000 to physically close the border
crossing which involves building barricades, stabilizing the building
and fencing. CBP concurs that the additional travel cost to travelers
is far less than the annual expense to the taxpayer for operating the
Jamieson Line border crossing.
With regard to the level of staffing required at the Jamieson Line
border crossing, CBP requires five full-time CBP officers at the
crossing. This takes into account a five-day work week, vacation and
sick leave, and time for mandatory and mission-enhancing training. When
the NPRM was issued, the CBP Office of Field Operations estimated that
a CBP officer spends 1,194 hours performing border crossing duties
while at a border crossing (this estimate has since been revised to
1,182 hours). The Jamieson Line border crossing is open eight hours a
day, 365 days a year and is staffed by two CBP officers each day.
Therefore, this border crossing requires 5,840 hours of CBP officer
time specifically dedicated to border crossing duties each year. As a
result, five CBP officers are required to staff the Jamieson Line
crossing.
III. Conclusion
After carefully considering the comments, CBP has decided to close
the Jamieson Line, New York border crossing. We also considered (1) the
very limited usage of the border crossing; (2) the locations of the
alternative ports of entry; (3) the lack of infrastructure at the
border crossing to meet modern operational, safety, and technological
demands of ports of entry; and (4) the analysis of the net benefit of
the border crossing closure including the cost of necessary renovations
were
[[Page 42451]]
the crossing to remain open. The lists of CBP Customs stations at 19
CFR 101.4(c) and the CBP ports of entry at 8 CFR 100.4(a) are being
amended to reflect the change.
CBP is working with the New York State Department of Transportation
and CBSA to identify the permanent barrier and signage necessary to
prevent entry and re-route traffic to nearby ports of entry. CBP
expects that any impact on the environment and any costs incurred to
mitigate impact on the environment will be minimal. If necessary, CBP
will conduct minor environmental studies in the course of facility
demolition and decommissioning.
IV. Congressional Notification
On May 31, 2011, the Commissioner of CBP notified Congress of CBP's
intention to close the border crossing at Jamieson Line, 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 13563 and 12866
Executive Orders 13563 and 12866 direct agencies to assess the
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public
health and safety effects, distributive impacts, and equity). Executive
Order 13563 emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and
benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, and of promoting
flexibility. This rule is not a ``significant regulatory action,''
under section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, the Office of
Management and Budget has not reviewed this regulation. Nevertheless,
CBP provided its assessment of the benefits and costs of this
regulatory action in an NPRM (see 77 FR 58782). CBP adopts the NPRM's
economic analysis for this final rule without any changes, as
summarized below.
DHS has determined that the Jamieson Line crossing requires
significant renovation and expansion, requiring an estimated $6.5
million to build facilities that meet all current CBP safety and
security standards. Since this construction is the only alternative to
closing the crossing, CBP would need to spend $7,087,000 the first year
(construction plus staffing and operating costs) and $587,000 in
staffing and operating expenses each subsequent year if the crossing
were to remain open.
The costs of closing the Jamieson Line crossing fall into three
categories--the cost to CBP to physically close the crossing, the cost
to travelers to drive to the next nearest crossing, and the cost to the
economy of lost revenue resulting from potential decreased Canadian
travel. CBP estimates that it will cost approximately $205,000 to
physically close the crossing, which involves building road barricades,
stabilizing the building, and fencing. With the closure of Jamieson
Line crossing, travelers will incur an estimated $46,670 in time costs
and $50,000 in vehicle costs annually to travel to an alternative
crossing. We believe that the total impacts on the economy due to
decreased travel to the United States are negligible. Thus, total
quantifiable costs to close the crossing are $301,670 in the first year
and $96,670 each following year.
Accounting for the overall costs and benefits of closing the
Jamieson Line crossing, the net benefit of closing the crossing is
$6,785,330 the first year and $490,330 each year thereafter, for an
annualized net benefit of approximately $1.3 million over the next ten
years using a seven percent discount rate.
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
This section examines the impact of the rule on small entities as
required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 603), as amended
by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement and Fairness Act of 1996.
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). Individuals are not defined as small entities
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
Because CBP does not collect data on the number of small businesses
that use the border crossing of Jamieson Line, we cannot estimate how
many will be affected by this rule. However, an average of fewer than
six vehicles cross into the United States at the Jamieson Line border
crossing each day and DHS does not believe that this impact rises to
the level of a significant economic impact. In addition, such impacts
to small businesses are an indirect effect of this rule, but are
discussed previously in this preamble. DHS thus 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.
Title 8--Aliens and Nationality
CHAPTER I--DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
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 U.S.C. 1185 note (section 7209 of
Pub. L. 108-458; 8 CFR part 2.
Sec. 100.4 [Amended]
0
2. The list of ports in Sec. 100.4(a) is amended by removing
``Jamison's Line, NY'' from the list of Class B ports of entry under
District No. 7--Buffalo, New York.
[[Page 42452]]
Title 19--Customs Duties
CHAPTER I--U.S. CUSTOMS AND BORDER PROTECTION, DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
PART 101--GENERAL PROVISIONS
0
3. The general authority citation for part 101 and the specific
authority citation for Sec. 101.4 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. 101.4 [Amended]
0
4. The list of ports in Sec. 101.4(c) is amended by removing, under
the state of New York, the entry ``Jamieson's Line'' from the ``Customs
station'' column and removing the corresponding entry ``Trout River''
from the ``Supervisory port of entry'' column.
Dated: July 17, 2014.
Jeh Charles Johnson,
Secretary of Homeland Security.
[FR Doc. 2014-17190 Filed 7-21-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-14-P