82_FR_30933 82 FR 30807 - Extension of Port Limits of Savannah, GA

82 FR 30807 - Extension of Port Limits of Savannah, GA

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
U.S. Customs and Border Protection

Federal Register Volume 82, Issue 126 (July 3, 2017)

Page Range30807-30808
FR Document2017-13983

U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) is proposing to extend the geographical limits of the port of entry of Savannah, Georgia. The proposed extension will make the boundaries more easily identifiable to the public and will allow for uniform and continuous service to the extended area of Savannah, Georgia. The proposed change is part of CBP's continuing program to use its personnel, facilities, and resources more efficiently and to provide better service to carriers, importers, and the general public.

Federal Register, Volume 82 Issue 126 (Monday, July 3, 2017)
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 126 (Monday, July 3, 2017)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 30807-30808]
From the Federal Register Online  [www.thefederalregister.org]
[FR Doc No: 2017-13983]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

U.S. Customs and Border Protection

19 CFR Part 101

[Docket No. USCBP-2017-0017]


Extension of Port Limits of Savannah, GA

AGENCY: U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Department of Homeland 
Security.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) is proposing to 
extend the geographical limits of the port of entry of Savannah, 
Georgia. The proposed extension will make the boundaries more easily 
identifiable to the public and will allow for uniform and continuous 
service to the extended area of Savannah, Georgia. The proposed change 
is part of CBP's continuing program to use its personnel, facilities, 
and resources more efficiently and to provide better service to 
carriers, importers, and the general public.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before September 1, 2017.

ADDRESSES: Please submit comments, identified by docket number, by one 
of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. 
Follow the instructions for submitting comments via docket number 
USCBP-2017-0017.
     Mail: Trade and Commercial Regulations Branch, Office of 
Trade, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, 90 K Street NE., 10th Floor, 
Washington, DC 20229-1177.
    Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency name 
and docket number for this rulemaking. All comments received will be 
posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov, including any 
personal information provided.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or 
comments received, go to http://www.regulations.gov. Submitted comments 
may be inspected during regular business days between the hours of 9 
a.m. and 4:30 p.m. at the Trade and Commercial Regulations Branch, 
Regulations and Rulings, Office of Trade, Customs and Border 
Protection, 90 K Street NE., 10th Floor, Washington, DC 20229-1177. 
Arrangements to inspect submitted comments should be made in advance by 
calling Mr. Joseph Clark at (202) 325-0118.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Roger Kaplan, Office of Field 
Operations, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, (202) 325-4543, or by 
email at [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Public Participation

    Interested persons are invited to participate in this rulemaking by 
submitting written data, views, or arguments on all aspects of the 
proposed rule. U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) also invites 
comments that relate to the economic, environmental, or federalism 
effects that might result from this proposed rule. Comments that will 
provide the most assistance to CBP will reference a specific portion of 
the proposed rule, explain the reason for any recommended change, and 
include data, information, or authority that support such recommended 
change.

II. Background

    As part of its continuing efforts to use CBP's personnel, 
facilities, and resources more efficiently, and to provide better 
service to carriers, importers, and the general public, CBP is 
proposing to extend the limits of the Savannah, Georgia port of entry. 
The CBP ports of entry are locations where CBP officers and employees 
are assigned to accept entries of merchandise, clear passengers, 
collect duties, and enforce the various provisions of customs, 
immigration, agriculture, and related U.S. laws at the border. The term 
``port of entry'' is used in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) in 
title 8 for immigration purposes and in title 19 for customs purposes. 
For immigration purposes, Savannah, Georgia port of entry is classified 
as a Class A port in District 26 under 8 CFR 100.4(a).\1\ For customs 
purposes, CBP regulations list designated CBP ports of entry and the 
limits of each port in 19 CFR 101.3(b)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Ports of entry for immigration purposes are currently listed 
at 8 CFR 100.4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Savannah, Georgia was designated as a customs port of entry by the 
President's message of March 3, 1913, concerning a reorganization of 
the U.S. Customs Service pursuant to the Act of August 24, 1912 (37 
Stat. 434; 19 U.S.C. 1). Executive Order 8367, dated March 5, 1940, 
established specific geographical boundaries for the port of entry of 
Savannah, Georgia.
    The current boundaries of the Savannah port of entry begin at the 
intersection of US Highway 17 and Little Back River on the line between 
South Carolina and Georgia; thence in a general southeasterly direction 
through the Little Back River, Back River, Savannah River and South 
Channel to the mouth of St. Augustine Creek, a distance of 11.6 miles; 
thence in a straight line in a southwesterly direction to the 
intersection of Moore Avenue and DeRenne Avenue, a distance of 5.8 
miles; thence in a straight line in a westerly direction to the 
intersection of Middle Ground Road and DeRenne Avenue, a distance of 
2.7 miles; thence in a straight line in a westerly direction to the 
intersection of Garrard Avenue and Ogeechee Road, a distance of 2.4 
miles; thence in a straight line in a northwesterly direction to the 
intersection of Louisville Road and Bourne Avenue, a distance of 6.2 
miles; thence in a straight line in a northeasterly direction to the 
intersection of Augusta Road and Augustine Creek, a distance of 4.8 
miles; thence in a general easterly direction along Augustine Creek to 
the Savannah River, a distance of 2.4 miles; thence in a straight line 
in an easterly direction to the Chatham County line on Coastal Highway 
and Little Back River (the point of the beginning), a distance of 1.4 
miles. CBP has included a map of the current port limits in the docket 
as ``Attachment: Port of Entry of Savannah (blue lines).''
    Travel modes, trade volume, and transportation infrastructure have 
expanded greatly since 1940. For example, much of Savannah-Hilton Head 
International Airport is located beyond the current port limits, 
including the site of the proposed replacement Federal Inspection 
Service facility for arriving international travelers. Similarly, 
distribution centers and cold storage agricultural facilities that 
support the seaport are located outside existing port limits. As a 
result, the greater Savannah area's trade and travel communities do not 
know with certainty if they will be able to receive CBP services if 
they build facilities on the region's remaining undeveloped properties, 
almost all outside the boundaries of the port of entry.
    To address these concerns regarding the geographic limits of the 
port, CBP is proposing to amend 19 CFR 101.3(b)(1) to extend the 
boundaries of the port of entry of Savannah, Georgia, to include the 
majority of Chatham County, Georgia, as well as a small portion of 
Jasper County, South Carolina. The

[[Page 30808]]

update will also provide uniform and continuous service to the extended 
area of Savannah, Georgia, and respond to the needs of the trade and 
travel communities. Further, the extension of the boundaries will 
include all of Savannah-Hilton Head Airport, the distribution centers 
and cold storage agricultural facilities, as well as the site of the 
proposed replacement Federal Inspection Service facility for arriving 
international travelers, and any other projected new facilities. 
However, the proposed change in the boundaries of the port of Savannah, 
Georgia, will not result in a change in the service that is provided to 
the public by the port and will not require a change in the staffing or 
workload at the port.

III. Proposed Port Limits of Savannah, Georgia

    The new port limits of Savannah, Georgia, are proposed as follows:
    From 32[deg]14.588' N.--081[deg]08.455' W. (where Federal 
Interstate Highway 95 crosses the South Carolina-Georgia state line) 
and extending in a straight line to 32[deg]04.903' N.--080[deg]04.998' 
W. (where Walls Cut meets Wright River and Turtle Island); then 
proceeding in a straight line to 31[deg]52.651' N.--081[deg]03.331' W. 
(where Adams Creek meets Green Island South); then proceeding northwest 
in a straight line to 32[deg]00.280' N.--081[deg]17.00' W. (where 
Highway 204 intersects Federal Interstate Highway 95); then proceeding 
along the length of Federal Interstate Highway 95 to the point of 
beginning at the state line. CBP has included a map of the proposed 
port limits in the docket as ``Attachment: Port of Entry of Savannah 
(red lines).''

IV. Inapplicability of Notice and Public Procedure Requirements

    CBP routinely establishes, expands, and consolidates ports of entry 
throughout the United States to accommodate the volume of CBP-related 
activity in various parts of the country. This proposed amendment is 
not subject to the notice and public procedure requirements of 5 U.S.C. 
553 because it relates to agency management and organization (5 U.S.C. 
553(a)(2) and 553(b)(3)(A)). Notwithstanding the above, CBP generally 
provides the public with an opportunity to comment on the 
establishment, expansion and consolidation of ports of entry.

V. Statutory and Regulatory Reviews

A. Executive Orders 12866, 13563 and 13771

    Executive Orders 12866 (``Regulatory Planning and Review'') and 
13563 (``Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review'') 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. Executive Order 13771 (``Reducing Regulation and 
Controlling Regulatory Costs'') directs agencies to reduce regulation 
and control regulatory costs and provides that ``for every one new 
regulation issued, at least two prior regulations be identified for 
elimination, and that the cost of planned regulations be prudently 
managed and controlled through a budgeting process.''
    The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has not designated this 
rule a significant regulatory action under section 3(f) of Executive 
Order 12866. Accordingly, OMB has not reviewed it. As this rule is not 
a significant regulatory action, this rule is exempt from the 
requirements of Executive Order 13771. See OMB's Memorandum ``Guidance 
Implementing Executive Order 13771, Titled `Reducing Regulation and 
Controlling Regulatory Costs''' (April 5, 2017).
    The proposed change is intended to expand the geographical 
boundaries of the Savannah, Georgia, port of entry, and make the 
boundaries more easily identifiable to the public. There are no new 
costs to the public associated with this rule.

B. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et. seq.), as amended 
by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement and Fairness Act of 1996, 
requires agencies to assess the impact of regulations 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).
    This proposed rule merely expands the limits of an existing port of 
entry and does not impose any new costs on the public. Accordingly, we 
certify that this rule would not have a significant economic impact on 
a substantial number of small entities.

C. 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.

D. 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.

E. Signing Authority

    The signing authority for this document falls under 19 CFR 0.2(a) 
because the extension of port limits is not within the bounds of those 
regulations for which the Secretary of the Treasury has retained sole 
authority. Accordingly, this notice of proposed rulemaking may be 
signed by the Secretary of Homeland Security (or his delegate).

VI. Authority

    This change is proposed under the authority of 5 U.S.C. 301; 6 
U.S.C. 101, et seq.; 19 U.S.C. 2, 66, 1202 (General Note 3(i), 
Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States), 1623, 1624, 1646a.

VII. Proposed Amendment to the Regulations

    If the proposed port limits for Savannah, Georgia, are adopted, CBP 
will amend 19 CFR 101.3(b)(1) as necessary to reflect the new port 
limits.

    Dated: June 27, 2017.
Elaine C. Duke,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017-13983 Filed 6-30-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9111-14-P



                                                                            Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 126 / Monday, July 3, 2017 / Proposed Rules                                             30807

                                                    Issued in Washington, DC, on June 26,                 Trade, Customs and Border Protection,                  geographical boundaries for the port of
                                                  2017.                                                   90 K Street NE., 10th Floor, Washington,               entry of Savannah, Georgia.
                                                  Rodger A. Dean Jr.,                                     DC 20229–1177. Arrangements to                            The current boundaries of the
                                                  Manager, Airspace Policy Group.                         inspect submitted comments should be                   Savannah port of entry begin at the
                                                  [FR Doc. 2017–13990 Filed 6–30–17; 8:45 am]             made in advance by calling Mr. Joseph                  intersection of US Highway 17 and
                                                  BILLING CODE 4910–13–P                                  Clark at (202) 325–0118.                               Little Back River on the line between
                                                                                                          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:                       South Carolina and Georgia; thence in a
                                                                                                          Roger Kaplan, Office of Field                          general southeasterly direction through
                                                  DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND                                  Operations, U.S. Customs and Border                    the Little Back River, Back River,
                                                                                                          Protection, (202) 325–4543, or by email                Savannah River and South Channel to
                                                  SECURITY
                                                                                                          at Roger.Kaplan@dhs.gov.                               the mouth of St. Augustine Creek, a
                                                  U.S. Customs and Border Protection                                                                             distance of 11.6 miles; thence in a
                                                                                                          SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:                             straight line in a southwesterly direction
                                                  19 CFR Part 101                                         I. Public Participation                                to the intersection of Moore Avenue and
                                                                                                                                                                 DeRenne Avenue, a distance of 5.8
                                                  [Docket No. USCBP–2017–0017]                              Interested persons are invited to                    miles; thence in a straight line in a
                                                                                                          participate in this rulemaking by                      westerly direction to the intersection of
                                                  Extension of Port Limits of Savannah,                   submitting written data, views, or                     Middle Ground Road and DeRenne
                                                  GA                                                      arguments on all aspects of the                        Avenue, a distance of 2.7 miles; thence
                                                                                                          proposed rule. U.S. Customs and Border                 in a straight line in a westerly direction
                                                  AGENCY:  U.S. Customs and Border                        Protection (CBP) also invites comments
                                                  Protection, Department of Homeland                                                                             to the intersection of Garrard Avenue
                                                                                                          that relate to the economic,                           and Ogeechee Road, a distance of 2.4
                                                  Security.                                               environmental, or federalism effects that
                                                  ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
                                                                                                                                                                 miles; thence in a straight line in a
                                                                                                          might result from this proposed rule.                  northwesterly direction to the
                                                                                                          Comments that will provide the most                    intersection of Louisville Road and
                                                  SUMMARY:    U.S. Customs and Border
                                                                                                          assistance to CBP will reference a                     Bourne Avenue, a distance of 6.2 miles;
                                                  Protection (CBP) is proposing to extend
                                                                                                          specific portion of the proposed rule,                 thence in a straight line in a
                                                  the geographical limits of the port of
                                                                                                          explain the reason for any                             northeasterly direction to the
                                                  entry of Savannah, Georgia. The
                                                                                                          recommended change, and include data,                  intersection of Augusta Road and
                                                  proposed extension will make the
                                                                                                          information, or authority that support                 Augustine Creek, a distance of 4.8 miles;
                                                  boundaries more easily identifiable to
                                                                                                          such recommended change.                               thence in a general easterly direction
                                                  the public and will allow for uniform
                                                  and continuous service to the extended                  II. Background                                         along Augustine Creek to the Savannah
                                                  area of Savannah, Georgia. The                                                                                 River, a distance of 2.4 miles; thence in
                                                                                                             As part of its continuing efforts to use            a straight line in an easterly direction to
                                                  proposed change is part of CBP’s
                                                                                                          CBP’s personnel, facilities, and                       the Chatham County line on Coastal
                                                  continuing program to use its personnel,
                                                                                                          resources more efficiently, and to                     Highway and Little Back River (the
                                                  facilities, and resources more efficiently
                                                                                                          provide better service to carriers,                    point of the beginning), a distance of 1.4
                                                  and to provide better service to carriers,
                                                                                                          importers, and the general public, CBP                 miles. CBP has included a map of the
                                                  importers, and the general public.
                                                                                                          is proposing to extend the limits of the               current port limits in the docket as
                                                  DATES: Comments must be received on                     Savannah, Georgia port of entry. The                   ‘‘Attachment: Port of Entry of Savannah
                                                  or before September 1, 2017.                            CBP ports of entry are locations where                 (blue lines).’’
                                                  ADDRESSES: Please submit comments,                      CBP officers and employees are assigned                   Travel modes, trade volume, and
                                                  identified by docket number, by one of                  to accept entries of merchandise, clear                transportation infrastructure have
                                                  the following methods:                                  passengers, collect duties, and enforce                expanded greatly since 1940. For
                                                    • Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://                 the various provisions of customs,                     example, much of Savannah-Hilton
                                                  www.regulations.gov. Follow the                         immigration, agriculture, and related                  Head International Airport is located
                                                  instructions for submitting comments                    U.S. laws at the border. The term ‘‘port               beyond the current port limits,
                                                  via docket number USCBP–2017–0017.                      of entry’’ is used in the Code of Federal              including the site of the proposed
                                                    • Mail: Trade and Commercial                          Regulations (CFR) in title 8 for                       replacement Federal Inspection Service
                                                  Regulations Branch, Office of Trade,                    immigration purposes and in title 19 for               facility for arriving international
                                                  U.S. Customs and Border Protection, 90                  customs purposes. For immigration                      travelers. Similarly, distribution centers
                                                  K Street NE., 10th Floor, Washington,                   purposes, Savannah, Georgia port of                    and cold storage agricultural facilities
                                                  DC 20229–1177.                                          entry is classified as a Class A port in               that support the seaport are located
                                                    Instructions: All submissions received                District 26 under 8 CFR 100.4(a).1 For                 outside existing port limits. As a result,
                                                  must include the agency name and                        customs purposes, CBP regulations list                 the greater Savannah area’s trade and
                                                  docket number for this rulemaking. All                  designated CBP ports of entry and the                  travel communities do not know with
                                                  comments received will be posted                        limits of each port in 19 CFR                          certainty if they will be able to receive
                                                  without change to http://                               101.3(b)(1).                                           CBP services if they build facilities on
                                                  www.regulations.gov, including any                         Savannah, Georgia was designated as                 the region’s remaining undeveloped
                                                  personal information provided.                          a customs port of entry by the                         properties, almost all outside the
                                                    Docket: For access to the docket to                   President’s message of March 3, 1913,                  boundaries of the port of entry.
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS




                                                  read background documents or                            concerning a reorganization of the U.S.                   To address these concerns regarding
                                                  comments received, go to http://                        Customs Service pursuant to the Act of                 the geographic limits of the port, CBP is
                                                  www.regulations.gov. Submitted                          August 24, 1912 (37 Stat. 434; 19 U.S.C.               proposing to amend 19 CFR 101.3(b)(1)
                                                  comments may be inspected during                        1). Executive Order 8367, dated March                  to extend the boundaries of the port of
                                                  regular business days between the hours                 5, 1940, established specific                          entry of Savannah, Georgia, to include
                                                  of 9 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. at the Trade and                                                                       the majority of Chatham County,
                                                  Commercial Regulations Branch,                            1 Ports of entry for immigration purposes are        Georgia, as well as a small portion of
                                                  Regulations and Rulings, Office of                      currently listed at 8 CFR 100.4.                       Jasper County, South Carolina. The


                                             VerDate Sep<11>2014   16:50 Jun 30, 2017   Jkt 241001   PO 00000   Frm 00034   Fmt 4702   Sfmt 4702   E:\FR\FM\03JYP1.SGM   03JYP1


                                                  30808                     Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 126 / Monday, July 3, 2017 / Proposed Rules

                                                  update will also provide uniform and                    (‘‘Improving Regulation and Regulatory                 C. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of
                                                  continuous service to the extended area                 Review’’) direct agencies to assess the                1995
                                                  of Savannah, Georgia, and respond to                    costs and benefits of available regulatory
                                                  the needs of the trade and travel                       alternatives and, if regulation is                       This rule will not result in the
                                                  communities. Further, the extension of                  necessary, to select regulatory                        expenditure by State, local, and tribal
                                                  the boundaries will include all of                      approaches that maximize net benefits                  governments, in the aggregate, or by the
                                                  Savannah-Hilton Head Airport, the                       (including potential economic,                         private sector, of $100 million or more
                                                  distribution centers and cold storage                   environmental, public health and safety                in any one year, and it will not
                                                  agricultural facilities, as well as the site            effects, distributive impacts, and                     significantly or uniquely affect small
                                                  of the proposed replacement Federal                     equity). Executive Order 13563                         governments. Therefore, no actions are
                                                  Inspection Service facility for arriving                emphasizes the importance of                           necessary under the provisions of the
                                                  international travelers, and any other                  quantifying both costs and benefits, of                Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of
                                                  projected new facilities. However, the                  reducing costs, of harmonizing rules,                  1995.
                                                  proposed change in the boundaries of                    and of promoting flexibility. Executive
                                                  the port of Savannah, Georgia, will not                 Order 13771 (‘‘Reducing Regulation and                 D. Executive Order 13132
                                                  result in a change in the service that is               Controlling Regulatory Costs’’) directs                  The rule will not have substantial
                                                  provided to the public by the port and                  agencies to reduce regulation and
                                                                                                                                                                 direct effects on the States, on the
                                                  will not require a change in the staffing               control regulatory costs and provides
                                                                                                                                                                 relationship between the National
                                                  or workload at the port.                                that ‘‘for every one new regulation
                                                                                                                                                                 Government and the States, or on the
                                                                                                          issued, at least two prior regulations be
                                                  III. Proposed Port Limits of Savannah,                                                                         distribution of power and
                                                                                                          identified for elimination, and that the
                                                  Georgia                                                                                                        responsibilities among the various
                                                                                                          cost of planned regulations be prudently
                                                     The new port limits of Savannah,                     managed and controlled through a                       levels of government. Therefore, in
                                                  Georgia, are proposed as follows:                       budgeting process.’’                                   accordance with section 6 of Executive
                                                     From 32°14.588′ N.—081°08.455′ W.                                                                           Order 13132, this rule does not have
                                                                                                             The Office of Management and Budget
                                                  (where Federal Interstate Highway 95                                                                           sufficient federalism implications to
                                                                                                          (OMB) has not designated this rule a
                                                  crosses the South Carolina-Georgia state                                                                       warrant the preparation of a federalism
                                                                                                          significant regulatory action under
                                                  line) and extending in a straight line to                                                                      summary impact statement.
                                                                                                          section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866.
                                                  32°04.903′ N.—080°04.998′ W. (where                     Accordingly, OMB has not reviewed it.                  E. Signing Authority
                                                  Walls Cut meets Wright River and                        As this rule is not a significant
                                                  Turtle Island); then proceeding in a                    regulatory action, this rule is exempt                   The signing authority for this
                                                  straight line to 31°52.651′ N.—                         from the requirements of Executive                     document falls under 19 CFR 0.2(a)
                                                  081°03.331′ W. (where Adams Creek                       Order 13771. See OMB’s Memorandum                      because the extension of port limits is
                                                  meets Green Island South); then                         ‘‘Guidance Implementing Executive                      not within the bounds of those
                                                  proceeding northwest in a straight line                 Order 13771, Titled ‘Reducing                          regulations for which the Secretary of
                                                  to 32°00.280′ N.—081°17.00′ W. (where                   Regulation and Controlling Regulatory                  the Treasury has retained sole authority.
                                                  Highway 204 intersects Federal                          Costs’’’ (April 5, 2017).                              Accordingly, this notice of proposed
                                                  Interstate Highway 95); then proceeding
                                                                                                             The proposed change is intended to                  rulemaking may be signed by the
                                                  along the length of Federal Interstate
                                                  Highway 95 to the point of beginning at                 expand the geographical boundaries of                  Secretary of Homeland Security (or his
                                                  the state line. CBP has included a map                  the Savannah, Georgia, port of entry,                  delegate).
                                                  of the proposed port limits in the docket               and make the boundaries more easily
                                                                                                                                                                 VI. Authority
                                                  as ‘‘Attachment: Port of Entry of                       identifiable to the public. There are no
                                                  Savannah (red lines).’’                                 new costs to the public associated with                   This change is proposed under the
                                                                                                          this rule.                                             authority of 5 U.S.C. 301; 6 U.S.C. 101,
                                                  IV. Inapplicability of Notice and Public
                                                                                                          B. Regulatory Flexibility Act                          et seq.; 19 U.S.C. 2, 66, 1202 (General
                                                  Procedure Requirements
                                                                                                                                                                 Note 3(i), Harmonized Tariff Schedule
                                                    CBP routinely establishes, expands,                      The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5                   of the United States), 1623, 1624, 1646a.
                                                  and consolidates ports of entry                         U.S.C. 601 et. seq.), as amended by the
                                                  throughout the United States to                         Small Business Regulatory Enforcement                  VII. Proposed Amendment to the
                                                  accommodate the volume of CBP-related                   and Fairness Act of 1996, requires                     Regulations
                                                  activity in various parts of the country.               agencies to assess the impact of
                                                                                                                                                                   If the proposed port limits for
                                                  This proposed amendment is not subject                  regulations on small entities. A small
                                                  to the notice and public procedure                                                                             Savannah, Georgia, are adopted, CBP
                                                                                                          entity may be a small business (defined
                                                  requirements of 5 U.S.C. 553 because it                                                                        will amend 19 CFR 101.3(b)(1) as
                                                                                                          as any independently owned and
                                                  relates to agency management and                        operated business not dominant in its                  necessary to reflect the new port limits.
                                                  organization (5 U.S.C. 553(a)(2) and                    field that qualifies as a small business                 Dated: June 27, 2017.
                                                  553(b)(3)(A)). Notwithstanding the                      per the Small Business Act); a small not-              Elaine C. Duke,
                                                  above, CBP generally provides the                       for-profit organization; or a small                    Deputy Secretary.
                                                  public with an opportunity to comment                   governmental jurisdiction (locality with
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS




                                                                                                                                                                 [FR Doc. 2017–13983 Filed 6–30–17; 8:45 am]
                                                  on the establishment, expansion and                     fewer than 50,000 people).
                                                                                                                                                                 BILLING CODE 9111–14–P
                                                  consolidation of ports of entry.                           This proposed rule merely expands
                                                  V. Statutory and Regulatory Reviews                     the limits of an existing port of entry
                                                                                                          and does not impose any new costs on
                                                  A. Executive Orders 12866, 13563 and                    the public. Accordingly, we certify that
                                                  13771                                                   this rule would not have a significant
                                                    Executive Orders 12866 (‘‘Regulatory                  economic impact on a substantial
                                                  Planning and Review’’) and 13563                        number of small entities.


                                             VerDate Sep<11>2014   16:50 Jun 30, 2017   Jkt 241001   PO 00000   Frm 00035   Fmt 4702   Sfmt 9990   E:\FR\FM\03JYP1.SGM   03JYP1



Document Created: 2018-11-14 10:19:43
Document Modified: 2018-11-14 10:19:43
CategoryRegulatory Information
CollectionFederal Register
sudoc ClassAE 2.7:
GS 4.107:
AE 2.106:
PublisherOffice of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration
SectionProposed Rules
ActionNotice of proposed rulemaking.
DatesComments must be received on or before September 1, 2017.
ContactRoger Kaplan, Office of Field Operations, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, (202) 325-4543, or by email at [email protected]
FR Citation82 FR 30807 

2025 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR