Documents Required for Travelers Arriving in the United States at Air and Sea Ports-of-Entry From Within the Western Hemisphere, 46155-46174 [06-6854]
Download as PDF
46155
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 155 / Friday, August 11, 2006 / Proposed Rules
TABLE OF CONCENTRATION LIMITS
DEA chemical
code number
List I chemicals
*
*
*
*
Iodine ................................................................................................................................
*
*
*
(d) * * *
*
*
*
*
(4) Iodine products classified as
iodophors which exist as an iodine
complex to include poloxamer-iodine
complex, polyvinyl pyrrolidone-iodine
complex (i.e. povidone-iodine),
undecoylium chloride iodine,
nonylphenoxypoly (ethyleneoxy)
ethanol-iodine complex, iodine complex
with phosphate ester of alkylaryloxy
polyethylene glycol, and iodine
complex with ammonium ether sulfate/
polyoxyethylene sorbitan monolaurate.
*
Dated: July 6, 2006.
Michele M. Leonhart,
Deputy Administrator.
[FR Doc. E6–12353 Filed 8–10–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410–09–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Bureau of Customs and Border
Protection
[USCBP 2006–0097]
RIN 1651–AA66
DEPARTMENT OF STATE
22 CFR Parts 41 and 53
RIN 1400–AC10
Documents Required for Travelers
Arriving in the United States at Air and
Sea Ports-of-Entry From Within the
Western Hemisphere
Bureau of Customs and Border
Protection, Department of Homeland
Security; Bureau of Consular Affairs,
Department of State.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSAL
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The Intelligence Reform and
Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004
provides that by January 1, 2008, United
States citizens and nonimmigrant aliens
may enter the United States only with
passports or such alternative documents
as the Secretary of Homeland Security
may designate as satisfactorily
15:01 Aug 10, 2006
Jkt 208001
*
establishing identity and citizenship.
This notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM) is the first phase of a joint
Department of Homeland Security and
Department of State plan to implement
these new requirements. This NPRM
proposes that, beginning January 8,
2007, United States citizens and
nonimmigrant aliens from Canada,
Bermuda, and Mexico entering the
United States at air ports-of-entry and
most sea ports-of-entry, with certain
limited exceptions, will generally be
required to present a valid passport.
This NPRM does not propose to change
the requirements for United States
citizens and nonimmigrant aliens from
Canada, Bermuda, and Mexico entering
the United States at land border portsof-entry and certain types of arrivals by
sea (ferries and pleasure vessels) which
will be addressed in a separate, future
rulemaking.
DATES: Written comments must be
submitted on or before September 25,
2006.
Comments, identified by
docket number USCBP 2006–0097, must
be submitted by one of the following
methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
• Mail: Comments by mail are to be
addressed to the Bureau of Customs and
Border Protection, Office of Regulations
and Rulings, Border Security
Regulations Branch, 1300 Pennsylvania
Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20229.
Submitted comments by mail may be
inspected at the Bureau of Customs and
Border Protection at 799 9th Street,
NW., Washington, DC. To inspect
comments, please call (202) 572–8768 to
arrange for an appointment.
Instructions: All submissions must
include the agency name and docket
number USCBP 2006–0097. All
comments will be posted without
change to https://www.regulations.gov,
including any personal information sent
with each comment. For detailed
instructions on submitting comments
and additional information on the
rulemaking process, see the ‘‘Public
Participation in Rulemaking Process’’
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4702
*
6699
Sfmt 4702
Special
conditions
*
2.2
*
ADDRESSES:
8 CFR Parts 212 and 235
VerDate Aug<31>2005
*
Concentration
(percent)
*
*
heading of the SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION section of this document.
Docket: For access to the docket to
read background documents or
submitted comments, go to https://
www.regulations.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Department of Homeland Security:
Robert Rawls, Office of Field
Operations, Bureau of Customs and
Border Protection, 1300 Pennsylvania
Avenue, NW., Room 5.4–D, Washington,
DC 20229, telephone number (202) 344–
2847.
Department of State: Consuelo
Pachon, Office of Passport Policy,
Planning and Advisory Services, Bureau
of Consular Affairs, telephone number
(202) 663–2662.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Public Participation
II. Background
A. Current Entry Requirements for United
States Citizens Arriving by Air or Sea
B. Current Entry Requirements for
Nonimmigrant Aliens Arriving by Air or
Sea
1. Canadian Citizens and Citizens of the
British Overseas Territory of Bermuda
2. Mexican Citizens
C. Intelligence Reform and Terrorism
Prevention Act of 2004
D. Advance Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking
1. Passport as Only Acceptable Document
for WHTI Air-and-Sea Arrivals
2. Alternative Forms of Identification
3. One Implementation Date of January 1,
2008
4. Effective Communications Plan
5. Passport Exemption for Children Under
the Age of 16
6. Reduce Cost of Passports or Institute
Pricing Incentives
7. Bilateral or Multilateral Process
8. Native Americans
9. Mobile Offshore Drilling Units Working
on the United States Outer Continental
Shelf
10. Passengers Traveling by Ferry
11. Military Personnel
III. Proposed Requirements for United States
Citizens and Nonimmigrant Aliens
Traveling by Air and Sea to the United
States
A. Passports for Air and Sea Arrivals
B. Exceptions to the Passport Proposal
1. Pleasure Vessels
E:\FR\FM\11AUP1.SGM
11AUP1
46156
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 155 / Friday, August 11, 2006 / Proposed Rules
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSAL
2. Passengers Arriving by Ferry
3. Members of the United States Armed
Forces
C. Other Documents Deemed Acceptable To
Denote Citizenship and Identity
1. Merchant Mariner Document
2. Nexus Air Program Membership Card
D. Impact of This Rulemaking on Specific
Groups and Populations
1. Charter and Commercial Vessels
2. Aviation Passengers and Crew
3. Lawful Permanent Residents
4. Mexican Citizens
5. Children Under the Age of 16
6. Alien Members of the United States Armed
Forces
7. Members of NATO Armed Forces
8. Native Americans Born in Canada
9. Native Americans Born in the United
States
10. American Indian Card Holders From
Kickapoo Band of Texas and Tribe of
Oklahoma
11. Travel From Territories Subject to the
Jurisdiction of the United States
12. Outer Continental Shelf Employees
13. International Boundary and Water
Commission Employees
E. Section-by-Section Discussion of Proposed
Amendments
IV. Regulatory Analyses
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory
Planning and Review
B. Regulatory Flexibility Act
C. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
D. Executive Order 12988: Civil Justice
Reform
E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Assessment
F. Paperwork Reduction Act
G. Privacy Statement
List of Subjects
Abbreviations and Terms Used in This
Document
ANPRM—Advance Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking
APIS—Advance Passenger Information
System
BCC—Form DSP–150, B–1/B–2 Visa and
Border Crossing Card
CBP—Bureau of Customs and Border
Protection
DHS—Department of Homeland Security
DMV—Department of Motor Vehicles
DOS—Department of State
FAST—Free and Secure Trade
IBWC—International Boundary and Water
Commission
INA—Immigration and Nationality Act
INS—Immigration and Naturalization Service
IRTPA—Intelligence Reform and Terrorism
Prevention Act of 2004
LPR—Lawful Permanent Resident
MMD—Merchant Mariner Document
MODU—Mobile Offshore Drilling Unit
NATO—North Atlantic Treaty Organization
NPRM—Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
OCS—Outer Continental Shelf
OTTI—Office of Travel & Tourism Industries
SENTRI—Secure Electronic Network for
Travelers Rapid Inspection
TSA—Transportation Security
Administration
TWIC—Transportation Worker Identification
Card
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:01 Aug 10, 2006
Jkt 208001
US–VISIT—United States Visitor and
Immigrant Status Indicator Technology
Program
WHTI—Western Hemisphere Travel
Initiative
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. The Department of
Homeland Security (DHS) and the
Department of State (DOS) also invite
comments that relate to the economic or
environmental effects or the federalism
implications that might result from this
proposed rule. Comments that will
provide the most assistance to DHS and
DOS in developing these procedures
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. See
ADDRESSES above for information on
how to submit comments.
II. Background
A. Current Entry Requirements for
United States Citizens Arriving by Air or
Sea
In general, under federal law it is
‘‘unlawful for any citizen of the United
States to depart from or enter * * * the
United States unless he bears a valid
United States passport.’’ 1 However, the
statutory passport requirement has not
been applied to United States citizens
when departing from or entering into
the United States from within the
Western Hemisphere other than from
Cuba.2 Currently, a United States citizen
entering the United States from within
the Western Hemisphere, other than
from Cuba, is inspected at an air or sea
port-of-entry by a DHS Bureau of
Customs and Border Protection (CBP)
officer.3 To lawfully enter the United
States, a person need only satisfy the
CBP officer of his or her United States
citizenship.4 In addition to assessing the
verbal declaration and examining the
documentation the person submits, the
CBP officer may ask for additional
identification and evidence of
citizenship until the officer is satisfied
1 Section 215(b) of the Immigration and
Nationality Act (INA), 8 U.S.C. 1185(b).
2 See 22 CFR 53.2(b), which waived the passport
requirement pursuant to section 215(b) of the INA,
8 U.S.C. 1185(b).
3 United States citizens entering the United States
at land border ports-of-entry from within the
Western Hemisphere are also inspected by a CBP
officer. However, such travelers are outside the
scope of this proposed rulemaking and will be
addressed in a separate, future rulemaking.
4 8 CFR 235.1(b).
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
that the person is a United States
citizen.
As a result of this procedure, United
States citizens arriving at air or sea
ports-of-entry from within the Western
Hemisphere currently produce a variety
of documents to establish their
citizenship and right to enter the United
States. A driver’s license issued by a
state motor vehicle administration or
other competent state government
authority is a common form of identity
document now accepted by CBP at the
border even though such documents do
not denote citizenship. Citizenship
documents currently accepted at portsof-entry generally include birth
certificates issued by a United States
jurisdiction, Consular Reports of Birth
Abroad, Certificates of Naturalization,
and Certificates of Citizenship.
B. Current Entry Requirements for
Nonimmigrant Aliens Arriving by Air or
Sea
Currently, each nonimmigrant alien
arriving in the United States must
present to the CBP officer at the port-ofentry a valid unexpired passport issued
by his or her country of citizenship and,
if required, a valid unexpired visa
issued by a United States embassy or
consulate abroad.5 Nonimmigrant aliens
entering the United States must also
satisfy any other applicable entry
requirements (e.g., United States Visitor
and Immigrant Status Indicator
Technology Program (US–VISIT)). For
nonimmigrant aliens arriving in the
United States, the only current general
exceptions to the passport requirement
apply to the admission of (1) citizens of
Canada and Bermuda arriving from
anywhere in the Western Hemisphere
and (2) Mexican nationals with a Border
Crossing Card (BCC) arriving from
contiguous territory.
1. Canadian Citizens and Citizens of the
British Overseas Territory of Bermuda
In most cases, Canadian citizens and
citizens of the British Overseas Territory
of Bermuda (Bermuda) currently are not
required to present a valid passport and
visa when entering the United States as
nonimmigrant visitors from countries in
the Western Hemisphere.6 Nevertheless,
these travelers are currently required to
satisfy the inspecting CBP officer of
their identity and citizenship at the time
of their application for admission.
Entering aliens may present any
evidence of identity and citizenship in
their possession. Individuals who
5 Section 212(a)(7)(B)(i) of the INA, 8 U.S.C.
1182(a)(7)(B)(i).
6 8 CFR 212.1(a)(1)(Canadian citizens) and 8 CFR
212.1(a)(2)(Citizens of Bermuda). See also 22 CFR
41.2.
E:\FR\FM\11AUP1.SGM
11AUP1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 155 / Friday, August 11, 2006 / Proposed Rules
initially fail to satisfy the examining
CBP officer may then be required to
provide further identification and
evidence of citizenship such as a birth
certificate, passport, or citizenship card.
2. Mexican Citizens
Mexican citizens arriving in the
United States at ports-of-entry who
possess a Form DSP–150, B–1/B–2 Visa
and Border Crossing Card (BCC) are
currently admitted without presenting a
valid passport if they are coming from
contiguous territory.7 A BCC is a
machine-readable, biometric card,
issued by the Department of State,
Bureau of Consular Affairs. The use of
a BCC without a passport is atypical in
the air/sea environment, but it
continues to be permitted. Although the
use of a BCC is much more common in
the land environment, this NPRM deals
solely with arrivals at air and sea portsof-entry.
C. Intelligence Reform and Terrorism
Prevention Act of 2004
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSAL
This NPRM is the first phase of the
joint DHS and DOS implementation of
section 7209 of the Intelligence Reform
and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004
(IRTPA), Pub. L. 108–458, 118 Stat.
3638 (Dec. 17, 2004). Section 7209 of
IRTPA requires that the Secretary of
Homeland Security, in consultation
with the Secretary of State, develop and
implement a plan to require travelers
entering the United States to present a
passport, other document, or
combination of documents, that are
‘‘deemed by the Secretary of Homeland
Security to be sufficient to denote
identity and citizenship.’’ Section 7209
expressly limits the waiver of
documentation requirements for United
States citizens under section 215(b) of
the Immigration and Nationality Act
(INA) 8 and eliminates the waiver of
documentation requirements for
categories of individuals for whom
documentation requirements have
previously been waived (citizens of
Canada, Mexico, and Bermuda) under
section 212(d)(4)(B) of the INA.9 United
States citizens and nonimmigrant aliens
from Canada, Mexico, and Bermuda will
be required to comply with the new
document requirements of section
7 8 CFR 212.1(c)(1)(i). See also 22 CFR 41.2(g). If
they are only traveling within a certain geographic
area along the United States border with Mexico:
usually up to 25 miles from the border but within
75 miles under the exception for Tucson, Arizona,
they do not need to obtain a form I–94. If they travel
outside of that geographic area, they must obtain an
I–94 from CBP at the port-of-entry. 8 CFR
235.1(f)(1).
8 8 U.S.C. 1185(b).
9 8 U.S.C. 1182(d)(4)(B).
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:01 Aug 10, 2006
Jkt 208001
7209.10 IRTPA requires that the
Secretary of Homeland Security, in
consultation with the Secretary of State,
develop and implement the plan by
January 1, 2008.
Section 7209 limits the Secretaries’
respective authorities 11 to waive
generally applicable documentation
requirements by providing that, after the
complete implementation of the plan,
neither the Secretary of State nor the
Secretary of Homeland Security may
exercise the authority of section
212(d)(4)(B) of the INA 12 to waive the
passport requirement on the basis of
reciprocity for nonimmigrant aliens who
are nationals of foreign contiguous
territory or adjacent islands. In addition,
section 7209 of IRTPA provides that the
President may exercise the authority of
section 215(b) of the INA 13 to waive the
new documentation requirements for
United States citizens departing from or
entering the United States only in three
specific circumstances: (1) When the
Secretary of Homeland Security
determines that ‘‘alternative
documentation’’ different from what is
required under section 7209 is sufficient
to denote citizenship and identity; (2) in
an individual case of an unforeseen
emergency; or (3) in an individual case
based on ‘‘humanitarian or national
interest reasons.’’ 14
United States citizens and
nonimmigrant aliens, who currently are
not required to have passports pursuant
to sections 215(b) and 212(d)(4)(B) of
the INA 15 respectively, would be
required to present a passport or other
identity and citizenship document
deemed sufficient by the Secretary of
Homeland Security when entering the
United States from countries within the
Western Hemisphere. The principal
groups affected by this provision of
IRTPA are United States citizens,
Canadian citizens, citizens of Bermuda,
and Mexican citizens holding BCC
cards. These groups of individuals are
currently exempt from the general
10 Section 7209 does not apply to Lawful
Permanent Residents, who will continue to be able
to enter the United States upon presentation of a
valid Form I–551, Alien Registration Card, or other
valid evidence of permanent resident status.
Section 211(b) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1181(b). It also
does not apply to alien members of United States
Armed Forces traveling under official orders.
Section 284 of INA, 8 U.S.C. 1354. Additionally,
section 7209 does not apply to nonimmigrant aliens
from anywhere other than Canada, Mexico, or
Bermuda. See section 212(d)(4)(B) of the INA, 8
U.S.C. 1182(d)(4)(B) and 8 C.F.R. 212.1.
11 See section 212(d)(4)(B) of the INA, 8 U.S.C.
1182(d)(4)(B), and section 215(b) of the INA, 8
U.S.C. 1185(b).
12 8 U.S.C. 1182(d)(4)(B).
13 8 U.S.C. 1185(b).
14 Section 7209(c)(2) of IRTPA.
15 8 U.S.C. 1185(b) and 8 U.S.C. 1182(d)(4)(B).
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
46157
passport requirement when entering the
United States from within the Western
Hemisphere.16
D. Advance Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking
On September 1, 2005, DHS and DOS
published in the Federal Register (70
FR 52037) an advance notice of
proposed rulemaking (ANPRM) that
announced that DHS and DOS were
planning to amend their respective
regulations to implement section 7209
of IRTPA. The DHS and DOS plan to
implement section 7209 is also known
as the Western Hemisphere Travel
Initiative (WHTI). As stated in the
ANPRM, DHS and DOS proposed to
develop a plan that would require
citizens of the United States, Canada,
Bermuda, and Mexico to possess a
passport or other acceptable secure
document to enter the United States
from within the Western Hemisphere by
January 1, 2008. The ANPRM invited
comments on the possible means of
implementation and specifically invited
comments on what documents, other
than passports, should be accepted as
sufficient under section 7209.
The ANPRM announced that DHS and
DOS anticipated implementing the
documentation requirements of section
7209 in two stages. The first stage would
affect travelers entering the United
States at air and sea ports-of-entry
beginning January 1, 2007. The second
stage would address travelers arriving at
land border ports-of-entry beginning
January 1, 2008. The two-stage approach
is intended to ensure an orderly
transition, provide affected persons with
adequate notice to obtain necessary
documents, and ensure that adequate
resources are available to issue
additional passports or other authorized
documents.
In the ANPRM, DHS and DOS sought
public comment to assist the Secretary
of Homeland Security to make a final
determination of which document or
combination of documents other than
valid passports will be accepted at
ports-of-entry to satisfy section 7209.
DHS and DOS also solicited public
comments regarding the economic
impact of implementing section 7209,
the costs anticipated to be incurred by
United States citizens and others as a
result of new document requirements,
potential benefits of the rulemaking,
alternative methods of complying with
the legislation, and the proposed stages
for implementation. In addition to
receiving written comments, DHS and
16 Section 212(d)(4)(B) of the INA, 8 U.S.C.
1182(d)(4)(B) and section 215(b) of the INA, 8
U.S.C. 1185(b).
E:\FR\FM\11AUP1.SGM
11AUP1
46158
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 155 / Friday, August 11, 2006 / Proposed Rules
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSAL
DOS representatives attended over 30
public sessions and town hall meetings
throughout the country and met with
community leaders and stakeholders to
discuss the initiative.
DHS and DOS received 2,062 written
comments in response to the ANPRM.
The majority of the comments (1,910)
addressed only potential changes to the
documentation requirements at land
border ports-of-entry. One hundred and
fifty-two comments addressed changes
to the documentation requirements for
persons arriving at air or sea ports-ofentry. Comments were received from a
wide range of United States and
Canadian sources including: private
citizens; businesses and associations;
local, state, federal, and tribal
governments; and members of the
United States Congress and Canadian
Parliament.
Some of the comments pertaining to
arrivals at air and sea ports-of-entry
were also applicable to land border
crossings and will therefore be
addressed in both this rulemaking and
a separate, future rulemaking specific to
land border crossings. As this proposed
rule deals only with changes to arrivals
at air and sea ports-of-entry, the
comments received regarding only land
border crossings will not be addressed
here.
A general discussion of the comments
relevant to this rulemaking follows.
Complete responses to the comments
from both the ANPRM and this NPRM
regarding air and sea travel will be
presented in the final rule.
1. Passport as Only Acceptable
Document for WHTI Air-and-Sea
Arrivals
Forty commenters contended that
DHS should accept only a valid passport
to satisfy documentary requirements for
air and sea arrivals beginning January 1,
2007. Thirty-six of the 40 comments
were submitted by United States
citizens and four comments were
submitted by associations or businesses
located in the United States. Eight
commenters recommended that the
implementation of a ‘‘passport only’’
requirement should not be delayed.
Among the reasons for supporting a
‘‘passport only’’ requirement,
commenters expressed the need to
enhance border security, prevent
document forgeries, and simplify
document review for CBP officers by
utilizing one standardized document.
One hundred and twelve commenters
opposed any proposal that would
require a valid passport to satisfy the
documentation requirements for air and
sea arrivals, but supported the goal of
improving border security.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:22 Aug 10, 2006
Jkt 208001
Thirty-two comments stated that a
‘‘passport only’’ requirement would
significantly impede travel and tourism
either by causing lengthy delays at the
border or by preventing individuals who
did not possess a passport from
traveling. Some of these comments
asserted that requiring passports could
essentially prevent travelers from
making spontaneous decisions to travel
by air or sea within the Western
Hemisphere.
Thirty-four comments contended that
due to the cost of a passport, a passport
only requirement would be an
unreasonable financial burden for many
families. Citing the $97 cost of an initial
adult passport and the $82 cost of a
child’s passport, several commenters
asserted that the costs are multiplied for
a family traveling together. Thirty-nine
comments contended that a ‘‘passport
only’’ requirement would have a
significant negative economic impact on
businesses and local economies. Many
of these commenters provided
quantitative and qualitative information
to illustrate their proffered economic
impact.
In addition, five commenters raised
the concern that the demand for
passports could exceed the passport
processing capacity of DOS.
2. Alternative Forms of Identification
Eighty-one commenters submitted
recommendations about the types of
alternate documentation that could
satisfy the requirements of section 7209
of IRTPA. Many of these commenters
noted that section 7209 of IRTPA
provides that a passport substitute could
be another document or combination of
documents that sufficiently denote
identity and citizenship. Fifty-nine
commenters asserted that DHS should
identify acceptable alternative
documents that would be more
convenient, affordable and easier to
obtain than a passport. Many of these
commenters noted that DHS has not
identified other low-cost and easily
obtainable documents in lieu of a
passport. Several commenters also
recommended that any new document
should be small enough to carry in a
wallet as opposed to the current
booklet-style passport.
Ten commenters recommended that
DHS continue to accept a state-issued
driver’s license and an original birth
certificate as evidence of identity and
citizenship. Numerous commenters
asserted that a driver’s license combined
with a birth certificate is the best-known
and most generally accepted
combination of documents that denote
identity and citizenship. Several
commenters reasoned that since these
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
documents are sufficient to establish
nationality and identity for the purpose
of obtaining a passport, they should be
acceptable at the border as well.
One commenter recommended that
the current NEXUS Air program 17
should be expanded to additional
Canadian airports. Another commenter
noted that acquiring a NEXUS Air card
requires a lengthy processing time of
approximately 6 to 8 weeks for the
individual to become enrolled.
3. One Implementation Date of January
1, 2008
Fifty-seven comments recommended
that DHS and DOS delay the first stage
of implementation for air and sea
travelers by changing the
implementation date from January 1,
2007, to January 1, 2008, or an
unspecified later date. Many of these
commenters asserted that the January 1,
2007, implementation date for air and
sea travel does not allow adequate time
for the traveling public and industry to
prepare for the new regulations.
Some commenters expressed concern
that a phased-in approach would
unnecessarily discriminate against one
mode of travel in favor of another
because those traveling by air and sea
will be subject to more stringent
documentation requirements than those
traveling by land during 2007. Several
comments asserted that there is no basis
for treating travelers who arrive by air
or sea any differently from those who
travel over land borders.
One commenter argued that the
statutory deadline for implementation is
January 1, 2008, and that IRTPA does
not require implementation to be
phased-in prior to that date. Several
comments suggested that one
implementation date would be less
confusing to the traveling public and
allow more time to educate the public
about the new requirements and for
proper consideration of alternative
secure documents other than a passport.
Finally, a few commenters
recommended delaying the
implementation date of January 1, 2007,
for air and sea travelers by at least one
week, until after the holiday travel
season.
4. Effective Communications Plan
Thirty-eight commenters
recommended that DHS and DOS work
17 NEXUS Air is an airport border clearance pilot
project implemented at one airport in Vancouver,
Canada by CBP and the Canada Border Services
Agency, pursuant to the Shared Border Accord and
Smart Border Declaration between the United States
and Canada. The NEXUS Air alternative inspection
program allows pre-screened, low-risk travelers to
be processed more efficiently by United States and
Canadian border officials.
E:\FR\FM\11AUP1.SGM
11AUP1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 155 / Friday, August 11, 2006 / Proposed Rules
with the travel industry to launch an
effective communications campaign to
inform and educate the traveling public
about any new documentation
requirements. According to several
commenters, some Canadian and United
States citizens mistakenly believe that a
‘‘passport only’’ requirement is already
in effect. One commenter noted that due
to confusion around the implementation
phase-in dates, many members of the
public believe that the first phase-in
period will apply to all persons
traveling to the United States whether or
not they travel by air, sea or land.
Another commenter suggested that
educating the public about changes to
the documentation requirements is best
accomplished by beginning outreach
and public relations efforts far in
advance of any new requirement.
5. Passport Exemption for Children
Under the Age of 16
Thirty-one commenters recommended
that children under the age of 16 should
be exempt from a passport requirement
and instead be able to use a citizenship
document such as a birth certificate.
Several commenters asserted that very
few children possess passports so that
for children under the age of 16 from
both Canada and the United States, the
current documentation requirements
should be maintained.
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSAL
6. Reduce Cost of Passports or Institute
Pricing Incentives
Eleven commenters recommended
that passports should be either less
expensive or pricing incentives should
be introduced for United States citizens
who are obtaining a passport for the first
time in advance of the implementation
deadline. One commenter asserted that
financial incentives would encourage
United States citizens to obtain a firsttime passport or renew an existing
passport. Several commenters
specifically requested that passport
costs be reduced for children less than
16 years of age, students, senior citizens,
and families. One commenter
recommended that the federal
government provide a financial subsidy
or discount the cost of passports for
low-income earners, welfare recipients,
and families with more than two
children.
7. Bilateral or Multilateral Process
Three commenters recommended that
the implementation of new
documentation requirements should be
a collaborative, multilateral process
with a United States-Canadian
partnership and a United StatesMexican partnership. Commenters
recommended that the United States
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:01 Aug 10, 2006
Jkt 208001
and Canadian governments work
together to explore acceptable forms of
documents in lieu of a passport for
Canadian citizens. Certain commenters
noted that if the United States
unilaterally develops a new form of
alternative document for entry into the
United States, there would be no
guarantee that the Canadian and
Mexican governments would accept the
new form of documentation as an entry
document. These commenters suggested
that the United States Government
should not act unilaterally because of
the potential negative effects that this
rulemaking might have on the economy,
and international relations, including a
negative public reaction.
46159
III. Proposed Requirements for United
States Citizens and Nonimmigrant
Aliens Traveling by Air and Sea to the
United States
Three commenters recommended that
offshore workers of United States
citizenship working aboard Mobile
Offshore Drilling Units (MODUs) on the
United States Outer Continental Shelf
(OCS) be specifically excluded from any
new documentation requirements when
traveling between the United States and
MODUs.
This NPRM proposes that, with some
exceptions, United States citizens and
nonimmigrant aliens from Canada,
Bermuda, and Mexico traveling into the
United States by air and sea from
Western Hemisphere countries, be
required to show a passport. This NPRM
does not propose changes to the
documentation requirements at land
border ports-of-entry.
This passport requirement would
apply to most air and sea travel,
including commercial air travel and
commercial sea travel (including cruise
ships). There are two categories of travel
and one category of traveler, discussed
in more detail below, which would not
be subject to the passport requirement
proposed here. First, this proposal
would not apply to pleasure vessels
used exclusively for pleasure and which
are not for the transportation of persons
or property for compensation or hire.
Second, this proposal would not apply
to travel by ferry. Finally, this proposal
would not apply to United States citizen
members of the Armed Forces on active
duty.
This NPRM also proposes to designate
two documents, in addition to the
passport, as sufficient to denote identity
and citizenship under section 7209, and
acceptable for air and sea travel. The
first document is the Merchant Mariner
Document (MMD) or ‘‘z-card’’ issued by
the United States Coast Guard (Coast
Guard) to Merchant Mariners. The
second document is the NEXUS Air
card when used with a NEXUS Air
kiosk. Finally, this proposal would not
apply to United States citizen members
of the Armed Forces on active duty.
10. Passengers Traveling by Ferry
A. Passports for Air and Sea Arrivals
8. Native Americans
Three commenters opposed any
regulation that would require Native
Americans traveling from Canada into
the United States to carry and produce
a United States or Canadian passport as
identification. These commenters
asserted that such a requirement would
infringe upon the treaty rights of
indigenous peoples living within the
United States and Canada to travel
freely across the border on the basis of
their membership in a particular Native
American tribe or nation.
9. Mobile Offshore Drilling Units
Working on the United States Outer
Continental Shelf
Eight commenters raised concerns
that the new documentation
requirements might create long waits
and substantial disruption at ferry
terminals, resulting in a decrease in
ferry traffic. Some of these commenters
recommended that any change to the
documentation requirements for ferry
passengers should be postponed until
the implementation of any new
documentation requirements at land
border ports-of-entry.
11. Military Personnel
Two commenters recommended that
fees for passports, including fees for
expedited processing, be eliminated for
active duty military personnel and their
dependents.
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
After reviewing the comments
received and taking them into
consideration, DHS and DOS jointly
propose that, beginning January 8, 2007,
most United States citizens and
nonimmigrant aliens from Canada,
Bermuda, and Mexico entering the
United States at air or sea ports-of-entry
from Western Hemisphere countries
will be required to present a valid
passport. DHS and DOS note that in
response to comments, the originally
proposed implementation date of
January 1, 2007, for air and sea travelers
is being delayed until January 8, 2007,
to better accommodate the holiday
travel season. The Departments do not
believe that there will be an adverse
effect on national security by delaying
the implementation of this rule by one
E:\FR\FM\11AUP1.SGM
11AUP1
46160
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 155 / Friday, August 11, 2006 / Proposed Rules
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSAL
week. Persons traveling prior to the
effective date of the final rule
implementing the air and sea stages of
WHTI should plan to depart from the
United States with documents sufficient
to meet requirements that will be in
place when they return.
This proposed rule would implement
Congress’ direction in IRTPA by
eliminating the passport waiver for
United States citizens,18 who enter the
United States at air and sea ports-ofentry when traveling between the
United States and any country, territory,
or island adjacent thereto in North,
South or Central America.19 In addition,
this proposed rule would eliminate the
passport waiver for nonimmigrant aliens
who are Canadian citizens, citizens of
Bermuda, and Mexican nationals
entering the United States at air and sea
ports-of-entry from any country,
territory, or island adjacent thereto in
North, South or Central America.20
As required by IRTPA, both DHS and
DOS reviewed a variety of options for
implementing the WHTI requirements,
and jointly decided to phase-in the
documentation requirement based upon
risk management and operational
considerations. As the ANPRM
discussed, this phased approach is
essential because a staggered
implementation at air and sea ports-ofentry one year before the statutory
deadline will enhance security
requirements using existing
infrastructure while allowing the
Departments time to acquire and
develop resources to meet the increased
demand for the largest sector, the land
border crossings.
Requiring travelers to carry and
produce passports for the air and sea
environments has multiple security and
operational benefits. WHTI will reduce
the vulnerabilities identified in the final
report of the National Commission on
Terrorist Attacks Upon the United
States (9/11 Commission). WHTI is
intended not only to enhance security
efforts at our Nation’s borders, but also
to expedite the movement of legitimate
travel within the Western Hemisphere.
As the report of the 9/11 Commission
observed, travel documents are as
18 In addition to affecting U.S. citizens who
currently leave and enter the United States without
a passport for travel within the Western
Hemisphere, section 7209 requires the elimination
of the exception to the U.S. passport requirement
for U.S. citizen children under the age of 12
included in the foreign parent’s passport and for
U.S. citizens under age 21 who are members of the
household of an official or employee of a foreign
government or the United Nations and in
possession of or included in a foreign passport. See
22 CFR 53.2 (e) and (f).
19 See 22 CFR 53.2(b).
20 See 8 CFR 212.1 and 22 CFR 41.2.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:01 Aug 10, 2006
Jkt 208001
valuable as weapons to terrorists, and
the passport is regarded as the most
secure travel identity document in the
world. After a review of current
international travel documents and the
available alternatives, DHS and DOS
believe that the passport is the most
reliable travel document to optimize
safety and efficiency in the air and sea
environments.
Standardizing documentation
requirements for all air and sea travelers
entering the United States will enhance
our national security and secure and
streamline the entry process into the
United States. A passport requirement
for the majority of travelers would allow
border security officials to quickly,
efficiently, accurately, and reliably
review documentation, identify persons
of concern to national security, and
determine eligibility for entry of
legitimate travelers without disrupting
the critically important movement of
people and goods across our air and sea
borders. Implementing standardized
travel documents (i.e., passports) for
citizens of the United States, Canada,
Bermuda, and Mexico entering the
United States at air and sea ports-ofentry would also reduce confusion for
the airline industry and make the entry
process more efficient for CBP officers
and the public alike since the majority
of travelers traveling internationally to
or from an airport or seaport would
require the passport as a travel
document, regardless of destination.
The 9/11 Commission noted that the
current exemptions to the passport
requirement are a weak link in our
layered approach to security that can no
longer be ignored. Cognizant of this
concern and the realities of the modern
world, DHS and DOS agree that any
acceptable alternative documents must
establish the identity and citizenship of
the bearer in a way that can be
electronically verified and must include
significant security features.
Passports incorporate a host of
security features not normally found or
available on other documents such as
birth certificates and driver’s licenses.
Security features include, but are not
limited to, rigorous adjudication
standards and document security
features. The adjudication standards
establish the individual’s citizenship
and identity and ensure that the
individual meets the qualifications for a
United States passport. The document
authentication features include digitized
photographs, embossed seals,
watermarks, ultraviolet and fluorescent
light verification features, security
laminations, micro-printing, and
holograms. A United States passport is
a document that is adjudicated by
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
trained DOS experts and issued to
persons who have documented their
United States identity and citizenship
by birth, naturalization or derivation.
Applications are subject to additional
Federal government checks to ensure
the applicants are eligible to receive a
U.S. passport under applicable
standards (for example, those subject to
outstanding federal warrants for arrest
are not eligible for a U.S. passport).
Finally, CBP Officers can verify and
authenticate a U.S. passport through
connectivity with the DOS passport
database, allowing a real-time check on
the validity of the passport. The primary
purpose of the passport has always been
to establish citizenship and identity. It
has been used to facilitate travel to
foreign countries by displaying any
appropriate visas or entry/exit stamps.
Passports are globally interoperable,
consistent with worldwide standards,
and usable regardless of the
international destination of the traveler.
Requiring passports for most air and
sea travel would allow CBP officers to
more efficiently process these travelers
because there is a standard document to
review which contains features that
allow for quick reading of the relevant
information. Reducing the number of
acceptable travel documents would
eliminate the need to examine a host of
distinct and sometimes illegible, birth
certificates and other documents—over
8,000 types may be presented today. By
requiring most air and sea passengers to
possess a passport, CBP officers would
reduce the time and effort used to
manually enter passenger information
into the computer system on arrival
because the officer can quickly scan the
machine-readable zone of the passport
to process the information using
standard passport readers used for all
machine readable passports worldwide.
It is difficult to precisely determine the
improved efficiencies resulting from
limiting the acceptable documents at air
and sea environments. Based on
information from CBP field operations,
CBP estimates that presenting secure
and machine-readable documentation
may typically save CBP officers from 5
to 30 seconds per air and sea passenger
processed. This could result in an
annual cost savings of $2.5 million to
$15.0 million.21
21 This is based on the estimated time savings (5
to 30 seconds) multiplied by the number of new
passengers with a passport (5,905,462; from Chapter
2 of the Regulatory Assessment) multiplied by the
hourly cost of a CBP officer. The annual base salary
for a GS–11/1 (in 2005) is $45,239. This is
multiplied by a load factor of 1.4 to account for
fringe benefits and locality pay, for an annual salary
of $63,335. This is divided by 2,080 hours to reach
an hourly rate of $30.45.
E:\FR\FM\11AUP1.SGM
11AUP1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 155 / Friday, August 11, 2006 / Proposed Rules
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSAL
Protecting the national security is a
fundamental mission of DHS. Initiating
the first phase for all air and most sea
travelers by January 8, 2007, will
remedy significant vulnerabilities
identified by the 9/11 Commission
associated with the millions of travelers
who enter the United States through air
and sea ports-of-entry. This
improvement will utilize the existing
operational capabilities of both
Departments without unduly burdening
the traveling public. Phasing in the air
and sea travel prior to land border
crossings will provide near term border
security benefits with regard to a
significant number of arriving
passengers without significant
investment in new port-of-entry
infrastructure. DHS estimates that CBP
will be able to facilitate the processing
of arriving passengers more efficiently
when all arriving air and sea passengers
carry and produce passports, MMD, or
NEXUS Air card, instead of the broad
range of documents now presented by
arriving United States citizens and
citizens of Canada, Bermuda, and
Mexico.
CBP estimates that approximately 21
million United States citizens travel to
Canada, Mexico, and the Caribbean
annually, and that approximately six
million of those air and sea travelers do
not possess a passport (see section IV
below, regarding the Regulatory
Analyses). Airports and seaports
currently have the personnel and
equipment to inspect incoming
passengers who carry passports, so the
major operational requirement of the
final rule resulting from this NPRM is
for DOS to expand passport production
capacity to meet passport demand. DOS
is already expanding passport
production capacity to meet the
additional demand for passports and
will be able to meet a significant
increase in demand from the more than
10 million passports produced in fiscal
year 2005. DOS reports an estimated 25
percent increase in passport
applications so far in fiscal year 2006.
DOS has increased passport production
capacity with an aim towards
processing 16 million passports in fiscal
year 2007 and 19 million passports in
fiscal year 2008.
B. Exceptions to the Passport Proposal
DHS and DOS do not propose any
change in the requirements for travel by
pleasure vessel and ferry at this time.
The Departments also propose to
(5,905,462 travelers)(5 seconds)($30.45/hour) =
$2,497,463
(5,905,462 travelers)(30 seconds)($30.45/hour) =
$14,984,778.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:01 Aug 10, 2006
Jkt 208001
postpone any change in the
requirements for United States citizen
members of the United States Armed
Forces also discussed below.
1. Passengers Arriving by Pleasure
Vessel
For purposes of this proposed rule, a
pleasure vessel will be defined as a
vessel that is used exclusively for
recreational or personal purposes and
not to transport passengers or property
for hire. A day sailer or bareboat charter
that is rented without a captain or crew
and is used for recreational or personal
purposes would be considered a
pleasure vessel. This rule would not
propose changes to the documentation
requirements for United States citizens
and nonimmigrant aliens from Canada,
Bermuda, and Mexico who are aboard
pleasure vessels arriving in the United
States from a foreign port or place from
within the Western Hemisphere.
Pleasure vessel arrivals are treated
similarly to land border crossings rather
than like commercial vessel arrivals.
These pleasure vessel passengers, who
are frequent, short duration travelers,
are similar to land border crossers and
will be addressed in the WHTI second
phase rulemaking. This will allow for
more consistent processing of these
travelers and the use of land border
based inspection systems including
registered/trusted traveler programs.
Many of the pleasure vessel crossings
are similar to bridge crossings because
they are crossings of a short expanse of
river or other waterway and are
relatively short in duration.
2. Passengers Arriving by Ferry
For purposes of this proposed rule, a
ferry is defined as any vessel: (1)
Operating on a pre-determined fixed
schedule; (2) providing transportation
only between places that are no more
than 300 miles apart; and (3)
transporting passengers, vehicles, and/
or railroad cars. Since ferries will be
subject to land border type entry
processing on arrival from or departure
to a foreign port or place, DHS and DOS
propose that ferries be exempt from the
new requirements of this rulemaking.
Ferries will be addressed in the second
phase rulemaking. Thus, current
documentation requirements for ferry
passengers will not change at this time.
3. Members of the United States Armed
Forces
When this rule is promulgated, all
active duty members of the United
States Armed Forces regardless of
citizenship will be exempt from the
requirement to present a valid passport
when entering the United States.
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
46161
Currently, under 22 CFR 53.2(d),
citizens of the United States are not
required to possess a valid passport to
enter or depart the United States when
traveling as a member of the Armed
Forces of the United States on active
duty.22 Under this proposed rule, travel
document requirements for United
States citizens who are members of the
United States Armed Forces would not
change from the current requirements.
Future changes, if any, to the current
documentation requirements will be
addressed during the second phase of
the WHTI rulemaking process.
Spouses and dependents of these
military members would be required to
present a passport or other document or
combination of documents sufficient to
denote identity and citizenship as
discussed below, and a valid visa, if
required, when entering the United
States at air or sea ports-of-entry.
C. Other Documents Deemed
Acceptable To Denote Citizenship and
Identity
This NPRM also proposes to designate
two documents, in addition to the
passport, as sufficient to denote identity
and citizenship under section 7209, and
acceptable for air and sea travel. IRTPA
gives the Secretary of Homeland
Security the authority to determine
what documents other than the passport
are sufficient to denote identity and
citizenship for all travel into the United
States by United States citizens and
citizens of Canada, Mexico, and
Bermuda.23 Accordingly, the Merchant
Mariner Document (MMD) when used
in conjunction with maritime business,
and the NEXUS Air card when used at
a designated kiosk, are proposed as
acceptable for air and sea travel into the
United States from within the Western
Hemisphere.
1. Merchant Mariner Document
Currently, an MMD or ‘‘z-card’’ is
accepted for United States citizen
crewmembers in lieu of a passport.24 To
obtain an MMD, United States citizen
Merchant Mariners must provide proof
of their citizenship, must provide proof
of their identity and must undergo an
application process that includes a
fingerprint background check submitted
to the Federal Bureau of Investigation, a
National Driver Register check, and a
drug test from an authorized official that
administers a drug testing program.
The Secretary of Homeland Security
proposes that an MMD when used in
22 For a discussion regarding the documentation
requirements for alien members of the United States
Armed Forces, see section III.D.6. of this document.
23 Section 7209(b)(1) of IRTPA.
24 See 22 CFR 53.2(c).
E:\FR\FM\11AUP1.SGM
11AUP1
46162
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 155 / Friday, August 11, 2006 / Proposed Rules
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSAL
conjunction with maritime business
would be sufficient to denote identity
and citizenship when presented upon
arrival at an air or sea port-of-entry.
Accordingly, under this proposed rule,
United States citizens who possess an
MMD would continue to be exempt
from the requirement to present a
passport when arriving in the United
States at air or sea ports-of-entry.
However, the Coast Guard has proposed
to phase-out the MMD over the next five
years and streamline all existing
Merchant Mariner credentials.25 DHS
proposes to accept the MMD as long as
it is an unexpired document. We also
note that United States citizen Merchant
Marines serving on U.S. flag vessels are
eligible for no fee U.S. passports upon
presentation of a letter from the
employer and an MMD, in addition to
the standard evidence of citizenship and
identity.
2. NEXUS Air Program Membership
Card
NEXUS Air is an airport border
clearance pilot project implemented by
CBP and the Canada Border Services
Agency, pursuant to the Shared Border
Accord and Smart Border Declaration
between the United States and Canada.
The NEXUS Air program is an
alternative inspection program designed
to facilitate the entry formalities by
registered users which allows prescreened, low-risk travelers to be
processed more efficiently by United
States and Canadian border officials.
Enrollment in the program is limited
to citizens of the United States and
Canada, Lawful Permanent Residents
(LPRs) of the United States, and
permanent residents of Canada. To
enroll in the NEXUS Air program, a
participant must provide acceptable
proof of citizenship or permanent
resident status in Canada or the United
States. United States citizens must
provide an original birth certificate,
along with a government-issued photo
identification, a valid passport, or a
certificate of naturalization. Canadian
citizens must provide an original birth
certificate, along with a governmentissued photo identification, a valid
passport, citizenship certificate with
photo identification, or a citizenship
card.
LPRs of the United States must
provide evidence of citizenship and of
permanent resident status to enroll in
NEXUS Air. Because the scope of
section 7209 of IRTPA does not include
LPRs, membership in Nexus Air does
not change their document
requirements. Therefore, LPRs of the
25 71
FR 29462 (May 22, 2006).
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:01 Aug 10, 2006
Jkt 208001
United States, whether or not
participating in the NEXUS Air
program, will continue to be required to
present a valid Form I–551, Alien
Registration Card, or other valid
evidence of permanent resident status to
enter the United States. Canadian
permanent residents must provide an
original birth certificate, along with a
government-issued photo identification,
a valid passport (and visa if applicable),
and proof of permanent resident status
when applying for NEXUS Air
enrollment.
An extensive background check
against law enforcement databases and
terrorist indices, including fingerprint
checks, as well as a personal interview
with a CBP officer is required of each
applicant. Each NEXUS Air membership
card has physical security features
including digital photographs of the
participant’s face. When a participant
uses a NEXUS Air kiosk, he or she is
prompted to look into a camera, which
then biometrically verifies membership
in NEXUS Air by taking a picture of the
participant’s iris and matching it to the
image stored in the database.
The Secretary of Homeland Security
proposes that a NEXUS Air membership
card would be a document sufficient to
denote identity and citizenship for
United States citizens, Canadian
citizens, and permanent residents of
Canada when arriving in the United
States as a NEXUS Air program
participant and when using a NEXUS
Air kiosk at designated airports.
LPRs of the United States, whether or
not participating in the NEXUS Air
program, will continue to be required to
present a valid Form I–551, Alien
Registration Card, or other valid
evidence of permanent resident status to
enter the United States.
D. Impact of This Rulemaking on
Specific Groups and Populations
1. Charter and Commercial Vessels
Under this proposed rule, a
commercial vessel will be defined as
any civilian vessel being used to
transport persons or property for
compensation or hire to or from any
port or place including all cruise ships.
A charter vessel, that is leased or
contracted to transport persons or
property for compensation or hire to or
from any port or place, would be
considered a commercial vessel. In
contrast, a day sailer or bareboat charter
that is rented without a captain or crew
and is used for recreational or personal
purposes would be considered a
pleasure vessel as described above in
section III.B.1. Under this proposed
rule, commercial vessels will be treated
PO 00000
Frm 00035
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
as arrivals at sea ports-of-entry under
this proposed rule. Passengers and crew
aboard commercial vessels will need to
possess a valid passport when arriving
in the United States from a foreign port
or place.
Under applicable immigration law,
sailing from a United States port into
international waters, without a call at a
foreign port, and returning to the United
States, does not constitute a ‘‘departure’’
from the United States and,
consequently, is not an ‘‘entry’’ into the
United States that requires a passport
under section 215(b) of the INA.26
Therefore, passports will not be
required for persons (including
commercial fishermen) onboard a vessel
that sails from a United States port and
returns without calling at a foreign port
or place as the vessel is not considered
to have departed the United States.
Therefore, commercial fishermen would
not be required to possess a passport
unless they call at a foreign port or
place.
2. Aviation Passengers and Crew
Under this proposed rule, all aviation
passengers and crew, including
commercial flights and general aviation
flights (i.e., private planes), who arrive
at air ports-of-entry in the United States
from countries within the Western
Hemisphere will be required to possess
a valid passport beginning January 8,
2007. The only exceptions to this
requirement would be for United States
citizens who are members of the United
States Armed Forces traveling on active
duty and travelers who possess either an
MMD or NEXUS Air card, as described
above.
3. Lawful Permanent Residents
Section 7209 of IRTPA applies to
documentation requirements waived
under section 212(d)(4)(B) of the
INA27,27 which applies to
nonimmigrant aliens, and section 215(b)
of the INA,28 which applies to United
States citizens. LPRs are exempt from
the requirement to present a passport
when arriving in the United States
under Section 211 of the INA 29—
section 7209 does not apply to LPRs.
LPRs will continue to be able to enter
the United States upon presentation of
a valid Form I–551, Alien Registration
Card, or other valid evidence of
permanent resident status.30 Form I–551
is a secure, fully adjudicated document
that can be verified and authenticated
26 8
U.S.C. 1185(b).
U.S.C. 1182(d)(4)(B).
28 8 U.S.C. 1185(b).
29 8 U.S.C. 1181.
30 See section 211(b) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1181(b).
27 8
E:\FR\FM\11AUP1.SGM
11AUP1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 155 / Friday, August 11, 2006 / Proposed Rules
by CBP at ports-of-entry. DHS published
a notice of proposed rulemaking in the
Federal Register on July 27, 2006, that
proposes to collect and verify the
identity of LPRs arriving at air and sea
ports-of-entry, or requiring secondary
inspection at land ports of entry,
through US–VISIT.31
4. Mexican Citizens
Currently, Mexican citizens traveling
to the United States for business or
pleasure who are in possession of a BCC
may be admitted, subject to certain
limitations,32 without presenting a valid
passport when coming from a
contiguous territory.33 IRTPA, however,
does not exempt Mexican citizens who
possess a BCC from providing a passport
or other document designated by DHS
upon arrival in the United States. By
this rulemaking, Mexican citizens,
whether in possession of a BCC or not,
would be required to present a valid
passport when entering the United
States by air or commercial sea vessel,
except by ferry or pleasure vessel.
This requirement for Mexican BCC
holders is consistent with the
requirements that are imposed on both
other aliens and United States citizens.
5. Children Under the Age of 16
The United States government
currently requires children under the
age of 16 arriving from countries outside
the Western Hemisphere to provide a
passport when entering the United
States. IRTPA does not contain an
exemption from providing a passport or
other document designated by DHS for
children under the age of 16 when
entering the United States from Western
Hemisphere countries. Consequently, as
there is no other statutory exemption,
children under the age of 16 arriving
from Western Hemisphere countries
would be required to present a passport
when entering the United States by air
or commercial sea vessel, except by
ferry or pleasure vessel.
6. Alien Members of the United States
Armed Forces
Pursuant to section 284 of the INA ,34
alien members of the United States
Armed Forces entering under official
orders presenting military identification
are not required to present a passport
and visa.35 Because this statutory
exemption does not fall within the
scope of section 7209 of IRTPA, under
this proposed rule alien members of the
United States Armed Forces traveling on
orders would continue to be exempt
from the requirement to present a
passport when arriving in the United
States at air or sea ports-of-entry.
Accordingly, under this NPRM, these
individuals would continue to be
required to present a military
identification card and official orders.
However, spouses and dependents of
military members are not covered by the
exemption set forth in section 284 of the
INA.36 Under the proposed regulation
they would continue to be required to
present a passport (and visa if required)
when entering the United States at air
or sea ports-of-entry even when
returning from travel in the Western
Hemisphere.
7. Members of NATO Armed Forces
Pursuant to Article III of the
Agreement Between the Parties to the
North Atlantic Treaty Regarding the
Status of Their Forces, June 19, 1951,37
North Atlantic Treaty Organization
(NATO) military personnel on official
duty are normally exempt from passport
and visa regulations and immigration
inspection on entering and leaving the
territory of a NATO party, but if asked
must present a personal I.D. card issued
by their NATO party of nationality and
official orders from an appropriate
agency of that country or from NATO.38
Because their exemption from the
passport requirement is based on the
NATO Status of Forces Agreement
rather than a waiver under section
212(d)(4)(B) of the INA ,39 they are not
subject to section 7209 of IRTPA.
Therefore, notwithstanding this
proposed rule, NATO military
personnel would not be subject to the
requirement to present a passport when
arriving in the United States at air or sea
ports-of-entry.
35 See
also 8 CFR 235.1(c).
U.S.C. 1354.
37 Agreement Between the Parties to the North
Atlantic Treaty Regarding the Status of Their
Forces, June 19, 1951, [1953, pt.2] 4 U.S.T. 1792,
T.I.A.S. No. 2846 (effective Aug. 23, 1953). NATO
member countries are: Belgium, Bulgaria, Canada,
the Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, France,
Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Italy, Latvia,
Lithuania, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway,
Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia,
Spain, Turkey, the United Kingdom of Great Britain
and Northern Ireland, and the United States.
38 See also 8 CFR 235.1(c).
39 8 U.S.C. 1182(d)(4)(B).
36 8
31 See
71 FR 42605.
8 CFR 235.1(f).
33 8 CFR 212.1(c)(1)(i). Also, Mexican citizens
who enter the United States from Mexico solely to
apply for a Mexican passport or other ‘‘official
Mexican document’’ at a Mexican consulate in the
United States have not been required to present a
valid passport. This type of entry generally occurs
at land borders. Land border entry for this purpose
will be addressed in a separate, future rulemaking
regarding documentation requirements at land
border ports-of-entry. See 8 CFR 212.1(c)(1)(ii).
34 8 U.S.C. 1354.
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSAL
32 See
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:01 Aug 10, 2006
Jkt 208001
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
46163
8. Native Americans Born in Canada
Section 289 of the INA 40 provides
that nothing in the INA affects ‘‘the
right’’ of Native Americans born in
Canada to ‘‘pass the borders of the
United States,’’ provided they possess at
least 50 percentum of Native American
blood.41 Historically, the courts have
addressed the right of Native Americans
born in Canada to ‘‘pass the borders of
the United States’’ in the context of land
border crossings.42 Subsequent case law
has not expressly addressed the
extension of the right to ‘‘pass the
borders of the United States’’ by air or
sea.43 Moreover, any right or privilege to
‘‘pass the border’’ does not necessarily
encompass a right to ‘‘pass the border’’
without sufficient proof of identity and
citizenship. Under this proposed rule,
Native Americans born in Canada
would now be required to present a
valid passport when entering the United
States by air and commercial sea vessel,
except by ferry or pleasure vessel.
9. Native Americans Born in the United
States
Federal statutes apply to Native
Americans born in the United States
absent some clear indication that
Congress did not intend for them to
apply.44 IRTPA expressly applies to
United States citizens and as a matter of
law Native Americans born in the
United States are United States
citizens.45 Moreover, Congress did not
indicate any intention to exclude Native
Americans born in the United States
from the requirements of IRTPA. Under
this proposed rule, therefore, Native
Americans born in the United States
would now be required to present a
valid passport when entering the United
States by air and commercial sea vessel,
except by ferry or pleasure vessel.
10. American Indian Card Holders From
Kickapoo Band of Texas and Tribe of
Oklahoma
DHS issues American Indian Cards
(Form I–872) to both United States-born
40 8
U.S.C. 1359.
41 Canadian-born
Inuits (Eskimos) do not have the
same right to ‘‘pass’’ the borders of the United
States.
42 See Akins v. Saxbe, 380 F.Supp. 1210, 1221 (D.
Maine 1974) (‘‘[I]t is reasonable to assume that
Congress’ purpose in using the Jay Treaty language
in the 1928 Act was to recognize and secure the
right of free passage as it had been guaranteed by
that Treaty.’’) See also United States ex rel. Diabo
v. McCandless, 18 F.2d 282 (E.D. Pa. 1927), aff’d,
25 F.2d 71 (3rd Cir. 1928).
43 See Matter of Yellowquill, 16 I.&N. Dec. 576
(BIA 1978).
44 See Federal Power Commission v. Tuscarora
Indian Nation, 362 U.S. 99, 120 (1960); Taylor v.
Ala. Intertribal Council Title IV J.T.P.A., 261 F.3d
1032, 1034–1035 (11th Cir. 2001).
45 8 U.S.C. 1401(b).
E:\FR\FM\11AUP1.SGM
11AUP1
46164
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 155 / Friday, August 11, 2006 / Proposed Rules
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSAL
Kickapoo Indians and Mexican-born
Kickapoo Indians to document their
status. The American Indian Card is
issued pursuant to the Texas Band of
Kickapoo Act of 1983 (TBKA).46 There
are two versions of the American Indian
Card: (1) For Kickapoos who opted to
become United States citizens under the
TBKA (the filing deadline for this
benefit closed in 1989) and (2) for
Kickapoos who opted not to become
United States citizens, but instead were
afforded ‘‘pass/repass’’ status.
While certain Mexican born Kickapoo
Indians may ‘‘pass the borders’’ between
Mexico and the United States 47 under
this authority, this authority has
historically been used at land border
crossings. Therefore, under this
proposed rule, both United States and
Mexican-born Kickapoo Indians would
be required to present a valid passport
when entering the United States by air
and sea. Any changes to the land border
requirements for Kickapoo Indians will
be addressed in the WHTI second phase
rulemaking. Mexican-born Kickapoo
Indians arriving at air or sea ports-ofentry would be required to present their
Mexican passport.
As stated previously, federal statutes
apply to Native Americans born in the
United States absent some clear
indication that Congress did not intend
for them to apply. IRTPA expressly
applies to United States citizens and as
a matter of law American Indians born
in the United States are United States
citizens. As a result, American-born
Kickapoo Indians will be required to
present a valid passport when entering
the United States by air and commercial
sea vessel, except by ferry or pleasure
vessel.
11. Travel From Territories Subject to
the Jurisdiction of the United States
Pursuant to section 215(c) of the
INA ,48 the term ‘‘United States’’ as used
in section 215 includes all territory and
waters, continental or insular, subject to
the jurisdiction of the United States.
The United States, for purposes of
section 215 of the INA and IRTPA
section 7209, includes Guam, Puerto
Rico, the U.S. Virgin Islands, American
Samoa, Swains Island, and the
Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana
Islands. Because section 7209’s
requirements apply only to persons
traveling between the United States and
foreign countries, these requirements
will not apply to United States citizens
and nationals who travel directly
46 Pub.
L. 97–429, 96 Stat. 2269 (1983), codified
at 25 U.S.C. 1300b–11–1300b–16.
47 TBKA, 25 U.S.C. 1300b–13.
48 8 U.S.C. 1185(c).
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:01 Aug 10, 2006
Jkt 208001
between parts of the United States, as
defined in section 215(c) of the INA,
without touching at a foreign port or
place.
12. Outer Continental Shelf Employees
In response to comments received to
the ANPRM, DHS and DOS are
clarifying that, under this proposed rule,
offshore workers who work aboard
Mobile Offshore Drilling Units (MODUs)
attached to the United States Outer
Continental Shelf (OCS) and travel to
and from them would not need to
possess a passport to re-enter the United
States if they depart the United States
and do not enter a foreign port or place.
Upon return to the United States from
a MODU, such an individual would not
be considered a new ‘‘entry’’ for
inspection purposes under 8 CFR 235.1.
Therefore, this individual would not
need to possess a passport when
returning to the United States. However,
an individual who travels to a MODU
from outside of the United States and,
therefore has not been previously
inspected and admitted to the United
States, would be required to possess a
passport and visa when arriving at the
U.S. port-of-entry by air or commercial
sea vessel, except by ferry.
13. International Boundary and Water
Commission Employees
In response to comments received to
the ANPRM, DHS and DOS are
clarifying that, under this proposed rule,
documentation requirements for direct
and indirect employees of the
International Boundary and Water
Commission crossing the United StatesMexico border while on official
business will not change.49
E. Section-by-Section Discussion of
Proposed Amendments
Based on the discussion above, the
following changes are necessary to the
regulations.
8 CFR 212.1
The amendment to this section would
revise paragraphs (a)(1) and (a)(2),
which provide a passport exemption for
Canadian citizens and citizens of the
British Overseas Territory of Bermuda.
New language would be added that
requires a passport for these groups
when they enter the United States from
within the Western Hemisphere except
by land, ferry, or pleasure vessel.
Canadian citizens who are participants
in the NEXUS Air program may present
49 Article 20 of the 1944 Treaty Between the
United States and Mexico (regarding division of
boundary water and the functions of International
Boundary and Water Commission), TS 922, Bevan
1166, 59 Stat. 1219; 8 CFR 212.1(c)(5).
PO 00000
Frm 00037
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
other documentation in the form of a
NEXUS Air membership card pursuant
to 8 CFR 235.1(e).
In addition, this section involves a
revision of paragraph (c)(1)(i), which
concerns Mexican nationals entering the
United States who are in possession of
a BCC. New language would be added
that specifies that the passport
exemption applies when entering the
United States from contiguous territory
by land, ferry, or pleasure vessel.
8 CFR 235.1
The amendment to this section would
involve adding a new paragraph (d),
which provides that United States
citizens who are holders of a Merchant
Mariner Document (MMD or ‘‘z-card’’)
issued by the Coast Guard traveling on
maritime business may present, in lieu
of a passport, an MMD. This new
paragraph would be added because the
Secretary of Homeland Security
proposes that an MMD, when used on
maritime business and presented upon
arrival, will be deemed sufficient
documentation to denote identity and
citizenship under IRTPA.
In addition, this section involves
adding a new paragraph (e), which
provides that United States citizens,
Canadian citizens, and permanent
residents of Canada who enter the
United States as NEXUS Air
participants by using a NEXUS Air
kiosk, may present, in lieu of a passport,
a valid NEXUS Air membership card
when entering the United States.
22 CFR 41.1
The amendment to this section would
revise paragraph (b), which provides a
passport exemption for American
Indians born in Canada, having at least
50 per centum of blood of the American
Indian race. New language would be
added to clarify that the passport
exemption applies only to those persons
entering from contiguous territory by
land, ferry, pleasure vessel, or as
participants in the NEXUS Air program.
22 CFR 41.2
The amendment to this section would
revise paragraphs (a) and (b), which
provide a passport exemption for
Canadian citizens and citizens of
Bermuda. New language would be
added to clarify that the passport
exemption applies only to travel into
the United States from within the
Western Hemisphere by land, ferry,
pleasure vessel, or in conjunction with
the NEXUS Air program, as applicable.
In addition, this section would revise
paragraph (g), which concerns Mexican
nationals entering the United States
who are in possession of a Form DSP–
E:\FR\FM\11AUP1.SGM
11AUP1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 155 / Friday, August 11, 2006 / Proposed Rules
150, B–1/B–2 Visa and Border Crossing
Card. Subparagraph (g)(2) would be
eliminated as redundant because Form
DSP–150 is a B–1/B–2 visa as well as a
Border Crossing Card. Subparagraph
(g)(4) would be eliminated because 22
CFR 41.32 has been amended to require
that all applicants for Border Crossing
Cards present a valid passport; section
41.32 no longer provides conditions for
a waiver of the passport requirement.
New language would be added that
specifies that the passport exemption
applies only when entering the United
States at a land border port-of-entry or
by pleasure vessel or ferry.
22 CFR 53.1
The amendments to this part would
revise 22 CFR 53.1 to provide that it is
unlawful for a United States citizen,
except as provided in 22 CFR 53.2, to
depart from or enter, or attempt to
depart from or enter, the United States
unless he or she bears a valid passport.
They also revise 22 CFR 53.1 to provide
definitions of ‘‘commercial vessel,’’
‘‘ferry,’’ ‘‘pleasure vessel,’’ and ‘‘United
States.’’
22 CFR 53.2
The amendments to this part would
revise the exceptions to the passport
requirement stated in 22 CFR 53.2 so
that they are consistent with this
rulemaking. One change would narrow
the so-called ‘‘Western Hemisphere’’
exception so that it only applies to
entries to and departures from Canada
and Mexico by land, while another
provides exceptions for entries and
departures aboard pleasure vessels and
ferries. In addition, the amendments
would make it clear that the exception
for members of the U.S. Armed Forces
traveling on active duty will be
maintained. The amendment would also
contain an exception for U.S. citizen
seamen on maritime business who are
carrying Merchant Marine Documents
(MMDs or Z-cards). The amendment
would also contain an exception for
United States citizens who are carrying
a NEXUS Air membership card and
participating in the NEXUS Air program
by using a NEXUS Air kiosk.
The amendments would eliminate the
exception for cards of identity or
registration issued at consular offices
abroad because such cards are no longer
issued; for U.S. citizen children
included in a foreign passport of an
alien parent; for child of members of a
foreign government or the United
Nations included on a foreign passport;
and the current broad exception for
waivers authorized by the Secretary of
State in 22 CFR 53.2(h). Instead, new
exceptions that are consistent with
IRTPA would be substituted for those
that would be eliminated (i.e., providing
exceptions for documentation deemed
sufficient to denote identity and
citizenship by the Secretary of
Homeland Security, and allowing for
waiver in individual cases when an
unforeseen emergency occurs and
individual cases for humanitarian or
national interest reasons).
22 CFR 53.4
The amendments to this part would
clarify the point that nothing in this rule
would prevent a United States citizen
from presenting a U.S. passport in
circumstances where that passport is
not required.
IV. Regulatory Analyses
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory
Planning and Review
This rule is considered to be an
economically significant regulatory
action under Executive Order 12866
because it may result in the expenditure
46165
of over $100 million in any one year.
Accordingly, this proposed rule has
been reviewed by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB). The
following summary presents the costs
and benefits of the proposed rule plus
a range of alternatives considered. The
complete and detailed ‘‘Regulatory
Assessment’’ can be found in the docket
for this rulemaking: https://
www.regulations.gov (see also https://
www.cbp.gov). Comments regarding the
analysis and the underlying
assumptions are encouraged and may be
submitted by any of the methods
described under the ADDRESSES section
of this document.
This rule will affect certain travelers
to the Western Hemisphere countries for
whom there are no current requirements
to present a United States passport for
entry. While United States citizens may
not need a passport to enter these
countries, they would need to carry a
passport to leave the United States and
for inspection upon re-entry to the
United States. This analysis considers
air travelers on commercial flights,
travelers using general aviation, and
cruise ship passengers.
Based on data from the Department of
Commerce, approximately 22 million
travelers will be covered by the
proposed rule. Based on additional
available data sources, DHS and DOS
assume that a large portion of these
travelers already hold passports and
thus will not be affected (i.e., they will
not need to obtain a passport as a result
of this rule). If the provisions of the
proposed rule are finalized, DHS and
DOS estimate that approximately 6
million passports will be required in the
first year the rule is in effect, at a direct
cost to traveling individuals of $941
million. These estimates are presented
in Table 1.
TABLE 1.—FIRST YEAR DIRECT COSTS TO TRAVELERS OF THE PROPOSED RULE
Travelers to WHTI countries, first year ...........................................................................
21,792,788
1st quartile
............................
Median
............................
3rd quartile
Passports demanded:
Air travelers ..................................................................................................................
Cruise passengers .......................................................................................................
3,942,859
1,751,988
4,084,204
1,821,258
4,364,197
1,877,324
5,694,846
5,905,462
6,241,521
$579,379,344
259,398,916
$600,142,162
269,658,495
$641,283,623
277,962,482
Total ..........................................................................................................................
Expedited service fees (20% of passports):
Number of passports ....................................................................................................
Cost of expedited service ............................................................................................
$838,778,260
$869,800,657
$919,246,105
1,138,969
$68,338,158
1,181,092
$70,865,540
1,248,304
$74,898,252
Grand total cost ........................................................................................................
$907,116,418
$940,666,196
$994,144,357
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSAL
Total ..........................................................................................................................
Total cost of passports demanded:
Air travelers ..................................................................................................................
Cruise passengers .......................................................................................................
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:22 Aug 10, 2006
Jkt 208001
PO 00000
Frm 00038
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\11AUP1.SGM
11AUP1
46166
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 155 / Friday, August 11, 2006 / Proposed Rules
Following the first year, the costs will
diminish as most United States travelers
in the air and sea environments would
then hold passports. Because the
number of travelers to the affected
Western Hemisphere countries has been
growing, a small number of ‘‘new’’
travelers who did not previously hold
passports will now have to obtain them
in order to travel. The estimated costs
for new passport acquisition in the
second year the rule is in effect are
presented in Table 2.
TABLE 2.—SECOND YEAR DIRECT COSTS TO TRAVELERS OF THE PROPOSED RULE
‘‘New’’ travelers to WHTI countries, second year ...........................................................
1,313,091
1st quartile
............................
Median
............................
3rd quartile
Passports demanded:
Air travelers ..................................................................................................................
Cruise passengers .......................................................................................................
195,638
140,159
202,409
145,701
216,428
150,186
335,797
348,110
366,614
$28,744,708
20,751,913
$29,742,623
21,572,680
$31,801,499
22,236,999
Total ..........................................................................................................................
Expedited service fees (20% of passports):
Number of passports ....................................................................................................
Cost of expedited service ............................................................................................
$49,496,622
$51,315,302
$54,038,497
67,159
$4,029,570
69,622
$4,177,321
73,323
$4,399,366
Grand total cost ........................................................................................................
$53,526,192
$55,492,623
$58,437,863
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSAL
Total ..........................................................................................................................
Total cost of passports demanded:
Air travelers ..................................................................................................................
Cruise passengers .......................................................................................................
This rule could also impose indirect
costs to those industries that support the
traveling public. If some travelers do not
obtain passports because of the cost or
inconvenience and forego travel to
Western Hemisphere destinations,
certain industries would incur the
indirect consequences of the foregone
foreign travel. These industries include
(but are not limited to):
• Air carriers and cruise ship
companies;
• Airports, cruise terminals, and their
support services;
• Traveler accommodations; travel
agents; dining services; retail shopping;
• Tour operators;
• Scenic and sightseeing
transportation;
• Hired transportation (rental cars,
taxis, buses);
• Arts, entertainment, and recreation.
DHS and DOS expect that foreign
businesses whose services are
consumed largely outside of the United
States (with the exception of United
States air carriers, cruise ship
companies, travel agents, and airport
and cruise terminal services) will
primarily be impacted. If domestic
travel is substituted for international
travel, domestic industries in these
areas would gain. DHS and DOS expect,
however, that United States travel and
tourism could also be indirectly affected
by the proposed rule if fewer Canadian,
Mexican BCC holders, and Bermudan
travelers visit the United States (these
travelers do not currently need a
passport for entry to the United States
but will require one under the proposed
rule). In this case, United States
businesses in these sectors would be
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:01 Aug 10, 2006
Jkt 208001
affected. Thus, gains in domestic
consumption may be offset by losses in
services provided to the citizens and
residents of the Western Hemisphere
countries affected. In both cases, we
expect the gains and losses to be
marginal as the vast majority of travelers
(based on our Regulatory Assessment,
an estimated 96 percent of United States
air and sea travelers and 99 percent of
Canadian, Mexican, and Bermudan air
and sea travelers) are expected to obtain
passports and continue traveling
internationally.
The benefits of the proposed rule are
virtually impossible to quantify in
monetary terms. The benefits of the
proposed rule are significant and real in
terms of increased security in the air
and sea environments provided by more
secure documents and facilitation of
inspections provided by the limited
types of documents that would be
accepted. In fact, this proposed rule
addresses a vulnerability of the United
States to entry by terrorists or other
persons by false documents or fraud
under the current documentary
exemptions for travel within the
Western Hemisphere, which has been
noted extensively by Congress and
others:
• During the debate on IRTPA,
several members of Congress, including
the Chairman of the House Judiciary
Committee commented on the need for
more secure documents for travelers.50
50 ‘‘As the 9/11 staff report on terrorist travel
declared, ‘The challenge for national security in an
age of terrorism is to prevent the people who may
pose overwhelming risk from entering the United
States undetected.’ The Judiciary sections of title III
require Americans returning from most parts of the
PO 00000
Frm 00039
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
• The 9/11 Commission
recommendations, which provide much
of the foundation for IRTPA, specifically
include a recommendation to address
travel documents in the Western
Hemisphere.51
• Finally, in May 2003, a
subcommittee of the House Judiciary
Committee held a hearing focused on a
fraudulent U.S. document ring in the
Caribbean, the exploitation of which
allowed the notorious Washington D.C.
‘‘sniper,’’ John Allen Muhammad, to
support himself while living in Antigua.
A Government Accountability Office
(GAO) investigator at that hearing
testified as to the ease of entering the
United States with fraudulent birth
certificates and drivers’ licenses.
A uniform document requirement
would assist CBP officers in verifying
the identity and citizenship of travelers
who enter the United States, and
Western Hemisphere to possess passports; require
Canadians seeking entry into the United States to
present a passport or other secure identification;
authorize additional immigration agents and
investigators; reduce the risk of identity and
document fraud; provide for the expedited removal
of illegal aliens; limit asylum abuse by terrorists;
and streamline the removal of terrorists and other
criminal aliens. These provisions reflect both
commission recommendations and legislation that
was pending in the House.’’ Congressional Record,
October 7, 2004, H8685.
51 ‘‘Americans should not be exempt from
carrying biometric passports or otherwise enabling
their identities to be securely verified when they
enter the United States; nor should Canadians or
Mexicans. Currently U.S. persons are exempt from
carrying passports when returning from Canada,
Mexico, and the Caribbean. The current system
enables non-U.S. citizens to gain entry by showing
minimal identification. The 9/11 experience shows
that terrorists study and exploit America’s
vulnerabilities.’’ The 9/11 Commission Report, p.
388.
E:\FR\FM\11AUP1.SGM
11AUP1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 155 / Friday, August 11, 2006 / Proposed Rules
improving their ability to detect
fraudulent documents or false claims to
citizenship and deny entry to such
persons. Further, such standardized
documents would enable more rapid
processing of travelers who enter the
United States because an individual’s
identity would be easier to confirm and
he or she could be processed through
CBP more efficiently.
Alternatives to the Proposed Rule
CBP considered the following five
alternatives to the proposed rulemaking:
1. The No Action alternative (status
quo);
2. Require United States travelers to
present a state-issued photo ID and
proof of citizenship (such as birth
certificates) upon return to the United
States from countries in the Western
Hemisphere;
3. Allow United States citizens who
possess a Transportation Worker
Identification Card (TWIC) to use the
card as a travel document in the air and
sea environments;
4. Allow Mexican citizens to present
their Border Crossing Cards (BCCs) in
the air and sea environments in lieu of
a passport; and
5. Develop and designate a low-cost
PASS card as an acceptable document
for United States citizens.
Calculations of costs (if any) for the
alternatives can be found in the
Regulatory Assessment.
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSAL
Alternative 1: The No Action Alternative
The No Action alternative would have
zero costs (or benefits) associated with
it. This alternative was rejected because
section 7209 of the IRTPA specifically
provides that, by January 1, 2008,
United States citizens and
nonimmigrant aliens may enter the
United States only with passports or
such alternative documents as the
Secretary of Homeland Security may
designate as satisfactorily establishing
identity and citizenship. Current
documentation requirements leave
major gaps in security at U.S. airports
and seaports and do not satisfy the
requirements under the IRTPA that
travel documents for entry into the
United States must denote identity and
citizenship.
Alternative 2: Require United States
Travelers To Present a State-Issued
Photo ID and Proof of Citizenship
The second alternative would require
United States citizens to present stateissued photo identification in
combination with a birth certificate to
establish citizenship and identity. This
alternative is similar to the status quo.
The U.S. birth certificate can be used as
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:01 Aug 10, 2006
Jkt 208001
evidence of birth in the United States;
however, it does not provide definitive
proof of citizenship (e.g., children born
in the U.S. to foreign diplomats do not
acquire U.S. citizenship at birth). Highly
trained passport specialists and
consular officers abroad adjudicate
passport applications, utilizing identity
and citizenship documents (like U.S.
birth certificates, naturalization
certificates, consular reports of birth
abroad, etc.). These specialists have
resources available, including fraud and
document experts, to assist when
reviewing documents and are not faced
with the same time constraints as
officers at ports-of-entry. These factors
are critical in determining that a birth
certificate and driver’s license may be
presented as documentary evidence of
citizenship and identity for an
application for a passport but are not
sufficient under WHTI for entry to the
United States. There are, in addition,
other circumstances where a non-U.S.
birth certificate does not provide
definitive proof of citizenship (e.g.,
dual-nationals, foreign birth to U.S.
citizen parents, foreign-born adopted
children, and naturalized citizens). In
addition, there is no current way to
validate that the person presenting the
birth certificate for inspection is, in fact,
the same person to whom it was issued.
The lack of security features and the
plethora of birth certificates issued in
the United States (issued by more than
8,000 entities) currently make it difficult
to reliably verify or authenticate a birth
certificate. A state-issued photo
identification provides positive
identification with name, address, and
photograph. However, a state-issued
photo identification does not provide
proof of citizenship.
Alternative 2 was rejected for several
reasons. Because birth certificates and
driver’s licenses are issued by numerous
government entities, there is no
standard format for either document,
and, at present, it is not possible to
authenticate quickly and reliably either
document. Some states only issue
photocopies as replacements of birth
certificates, some states issue
replacement birth certificates by mail or
through the Internet, and some states
will not issue photo identification to
minors. Both documents lack security
features and are susceptible to
counterfeiting or alteration. While most
states require that driver’s licenses
contain correct address information, it is
not uncommon for the address
information to be outdated. Neither the
birth certificate nor the state-issued
identification was designed to be a
travel document. Birth certificates can
PO 00000
Frm 00040
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
46167
easily deteriorate when used frequently
as travel documents because they are
normally made from some sort of paper
with a raised seal, so they cannot be
laminated or otherwise protected when
under repeated use.
Because these documents are not
standardized, CBP officers require
additional time to locate the necessary
information on the documents. This
may result in cumulative delays at air
and sea ports of entry. If the information
is not current, travelers may need to be
referred to secondary inspection for
additional processing. CBP, DHS, and
DOS believe that the risk of
counterfeiting and fraud associated with
these documents makes them
unacceptable documents for travel
under IRTPA.
Because neither document has a
machine-readable zone, CBP will not be
able to front-load information on the
traveler to expedite the initial
inspection processing, including checks
necessary to protect the national
security of the United States. Birth
certificates are issued by thousands of
authorities, and are currently impossible
to validate or vet sufficiently. Both
documents are readily available for
purchase to assume a false identity.
Because the birth certificate and stateissued photo ID have limited or nonexistent security features, they are more
susceptible to alteration. Therefore, the
actual, rather than claimed, identity and
citizenship of the traveler using these
documents cannot always be
determined.
The costs of this alternative are
associated with minors obtaining photo
identification for travel. Currently, all
adult travelers in the air and sea
environments must present photo
identification (usually a driver’s license)
along with proof of citizenship (usually
a birth certificate) when they check in
for their flights and voyages (per the
requirements of the air and sea carriers).
Additionally, all countries in the
Western Hemisphere require a passport
or these documents for entry into their
countries. The exception, however, is
for minor travelers. Currently, parents
may orally vouch for their children
upon exit and entry into the United
States to and from the Western
Hemisphere, and some Western
Hemisphere countries allow children to
present school identification as
sufficient proof of identity. To comply
with a requirement that would allow a
photo ID in combination with a birth
certificate for travel in the Western
Hemisphere, minors would most likely
need to obtain state-issued photo
identification. There could also be
additional costs in the form of lost
E:\FR\FM\11AUP1.SGM
11AUP1
46168
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 155 / Friday, August 11, 2006 / Proposed Rules
alternative ID for minors would be $30.7
million.
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSAL
efficiency upon entry to United States
ports-of-entry. If CBP officers need to
spend more time examining a variety of
documents to determine what they are
and if they are fraudulent, and if CBP
officers need to enter data by hand
rather than routinely utilize machinereadable technology to obtain
information on arriving passengers, this
would have time-delay impacts at
airports and seaports. CBP is unable to
quantify this loss of efficiency and
presents only the cost to minors to
obtain a photo ID.
Based on data from the Department of
Commerce’s Office of Travel & Tourism
Industries (OTTI), eleven states with the
highest number of international
travelers (to the Western Hemisphere or
otherwise) (California, New York, New
Jersey, Florida, Texas, Illinois, Virginia,
Pennsylvania, Washington,
Massachusetts, and Ohio) account for
almost three-quarters of international air
travelers.52 Most requirements for
obtaining a photo identification are
similar across these states: completion
of a department of motor vehicles
(DMV) form, submission of a form or
declaration attesting that the applicant
is the parent or legal guardian of the
minor receiving the identification, and
presentation of a birth certificate and
social security card. If the applicant is
a minor, he or she must appear in
person with a parent or guardian. Fees
for these states range from $3 (Florida)
to $21 (California), and identifications
are valid for an average of five years.53
As stated previously, some states will
not issue photo ID to minors under a
certain age.54 For the purposes of this
analysis only, we assume all minors
would be able to obtain state-issued
photo identification.
CBP estimates that there are 1,643,606
minors that will be covered by this
proposed rule, 557,365 of whom do not
currently hold a passport. CBP has used
the average of the photo identification
fees from the 11 states above ($15) and
added the cost of the time it takes to
complete the forms and submit them to
the DMV ($41, the same time cost CBP
estimated to obtain the passport) for a
total of approximately $55 per minor.
Thus, assuming that a birth certificate is
readily available, the cost of this
The third alternative would allow
U.S. transportation workers to use their
TWICs in lieu of a passport. Section 102
of the Maritime Transportation Security
Act of 2002 requires the Secretary of
Homeland Security to issue a biometric
transportation security card to
individuals with unescorted access to
secure areas of vessels and facilities.55
In addition, these individuals must
undergo a security threat assessment to
determine that they do not pose a
security threat prior to receiving the
biometric card and access to the secure
areas. The security threat assessment
must include a review of criminal,
immigration, and pertinent intelligence
records in determining whether the
individual poses a threat, and
individuals must have the opportunity
to appeal an adverse determination or
apply for a waiver of the standards. The
regulations to implement the TWIC in
the maritime environment are in the
proposed rule stage and are pending
finalization subject to public comment
and revision.56 For the sake of
comparison, CBP assumes that TWICs
are available to all transportation
workers covered by the proposed rule.
Additionally, analysis of this alternative
assumes that CBP would accept the
TWIC for any travel.
The Transportation Security
Administration (TSA) and Coast Guard
estimate that the initial population of
cards holders will be approximately
750,000.57 This population includes
such individuals as United States MMD
holders, port truck drivers, contractors,
longshoremen, and rail workers. As
discussed previously, MMD holders will
not be affected by the proposed WHTI
air and sea rule, because the MMD will
be an acceptable document under the
proposed rule. The other TWIC holders
do not likely leave the country on
vessels for the purposes of work-related
activities. For the purposes of this
economic analysis only, CBP estimates
the cost savings to these individuals of
using TWICs in the air and sea
52 Table 22, U.S. Travelers to Overseas Countries
2004, State of Residence of Travelers, OTTI, 2005.
53 See the nationwide DMV guide at
www.dmv.org.
54 Of the 11 states examined in the analysis of this
alternative, Florida, Massachusetts, New Jersey, and
Pennsylvania have a minimum age requirement for
obtaining a photo ID. The minimum age to obtain
a photo ID in Florida is 12, in Massachusetts is 16,
in New Jersey is 17, and in Pennsylvania is 16.
55 Pub. L. 107–295, 116 Stat. 2064 (Nov. 25,
2002).
56 71 FR 29396 and 29462 (May 22, 2006).
57 Department of Homeland Security,
Transportation Security Administration, and U.S.
Coast Guard, Regulatory Evaluation for the Notice
of Proposed Rulemaking Transportation Worker
Identification Credential (TWIC) Implementation in
the Maritime Sector, 49 (2006). Dockets TSA–2006–
24191 or USCG–2006–24196.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:01 Aug 10, 2006
Jkt 208001
Alternative 3: Designate TWIC as an
Acceptable Document for United States
Citizens
PO 00000
Frm 00041
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
environments for non-work-related
travel.
CBP does not know how TWIC
holders overlap with the United States
population traveling to the affected
WHTI countries. As calculated
previously, CBP estimates there are
approximately 22 million unique
travelers covered by the proposed rule,
and approximately 6 million (27
percent) of them will require passports
since they do not already have them.
For the purposes of this analysis of
alternatives, CBP assumes that the
population requiring passports fully
encompasses TWIC holders. This is an
extreme best-case assumption, as most
of the TWIC holders will not be
traveling internationally in the air and
sea environments as part of their work.
Thus in the best-case, 27 percent of the
750,000 TWIC holders (approximately
203,000 individuals) would not need
passports. At a cost of $149 per passport
($97 application fee for an adult, $11 for
photos and $41 for the time costs of
completing the necessary paperwork),
this would result in a savings of, at best,
$30.2 million. This is approximately 3
percent of the total rule cost. The
savings are likely to be lower than that
because the TWIC-holding population
in the maritime environment is unlikely
to be entirely included in the United
States traveling population covered by
the proposed rule.
The TWIC cannot be read by current
CBP technology installed in air and sea
ports-of-entry. While there is
information embedded in the chip on
the TWIC, only the name of the
individual and a photo ID are apparent
to a CBP officer upon presentation. DHS
would have to install chip readers in all
air and sea ports-of-entry to access other
information and verify the validity of
the document. TSA estimates that this
cost could be $7,200 per card reader.
Additionally, CBP believes that it would
cost $500,000 to develop databases,
cross-reference information and
coordinate with TSA and Coast Guard,
and test equipment installed in airports
and seaports.
For this analysis CBP assumes that a
card reader would need to be installed
in each CBP booth in airports and 4
mobile readers would be required in
seaports that receive cruise passengers.
CBP estimates that there are 2,000 air
and sea ‘‘lanes’’ nationwide that would
need a TWIC reader. The cost for
readers is thus $14.4 million and with
the additional cost for reprogramming
and adapting existing systems, the total
cost is $14.9 million in the first year.
Following the first year, CBP would
expect to pay approximately 25 percent
of the initial cost for operations and
E:\FR\FM\11AUP1.SGM
11AUP1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 155 / Friday, August 11, 2006 / Proposed Rules
maintenance. The net first-year savings
would be, again at best, $15.3 million.
This is a 2 percent difference from the
costs of the chosen alternative (i.e.,
$15.3 million divided by $941 million).
This alternative was rejected because
the TWIC does not denote citizenship
on its face and it was not designed as
a travel document but rather, to
positively identify the holder and hold
the results of a security threat
assessment, and as a tool for use in
access control systems. Because the
TWIC does not provide citizenship
information on its face, the holder
would need to present at least one other
document that proves citizenship. CBP
would need to take additional time at
primary inspection to establish
citizenship, or the traveler would have
to be referred to secondary inspections
for further processing. The overall result
could be increased delays at ports of
entry.
Alternative 4: Designate the BCC as an
Acceptable Document for Mexican
Citizens
Alternative 4 would allow Mexican
citizens to present their BCCs upon
entry to this country. This alternative
would have no impact on the cost of the
rule to United States citizens. The BCC
is a credit card-size document with
many security features and 10-year
validity. Also called a ‘‘laser visa,’’ the
card is both a BCC and a B1/B2 visitor’s
visa. This alternative could be less
expensive for a percentage of Mexican
citizens. A Mexican passport is required
to obtain a BCC; however, there are
some Mexican citizens that hold a BCC
without a valid passport because the
passport has expired prior to the
expiration of the BCC. The BCC is
currently limited to use on the southern
land border and the traveler is required
to remain within 25 miles of the border
unless the traveler obtains an I–94 prior
to traveling further into the United
States.58
This alternative was rejected because
the BCC cannot be used with CBP’s
Advance Passenger Information System
(APIS), which collects data from
travelers prior to their arrival in and
departure from the United States.59 The
passport requirement for Mexican
citizens who hold BCC in the air and sea
environments is consistent with the
requirement for passports for most
United States citizens and foreign
nationals.
Alternative 5: Develop and Designate a
Low Cost PASS Card as an Acceptable
Document for United States Citizens
DOS, in consultation with DHS, has
begun developing an alternative travel
document, a card-format, limited use
passport called a People Access Security
Service card (PASS card). Like a
traditional passport booklet, the PASS
card will be a secure travel document
that establishes the identity and
citizenship of the bearer. The PASS card
is being designed to benefit those
citizens in border communities who
regularly cross the northern and
southern borders every day and where
such travel is an integral part of their
daily lives. As currently envisioned, it
will be the size of a credit card and will
have a fee structure that is lower than
for a traditional passport booklet. The
application process for the PASS card
will be comparable to that for the
passport booklet in that each applicant
will have to establish United States
46169
citizenship, personal identity, and
entitlement to obtain the document.
The cost of the PASS card has yet to
be determined. Strictly for the purposes
of this analysis of alternatives, we
assume the fee for a first-time adult
PASS card would be $45 and for a
minor would be $35. The cost for photos
is $11. Because the application process
would be comparable to that for a
traditional passport, the personal time
cost would continue to be $41, as
estimated previously for the primary
analysis of the cost of the proposed rule.
Using the same methodology as used for
the primary analysis (most likely
scenario) but assuming that all travelers
who do not currently hold a passport
obtain a PASS card rather than the
traditional passport booklet, we estimate
that the first-year cost would be $668
million. At this lower cost,
approximately 6.2 million PASS cards
would be demanded, approximately
300,000 more than under the proposed
rule, an increase of 5 percent.
Use of this alternative passport card
was rejected for the air and sea
environments for a number of reasons.
This rule is proposed to take effect on
January 8, 2007, and there is not
sufficient time for the Department of
State to develop and issue the PASS
card by that time. The PASS card is
intended to be a limited-use passport
and will not meet all the international
standards for passports and other
official travel documents (for example,
the size of the PASS card does not
comport with the International Civil
Aviation Organization 9303 travel
document standards).
The following table presents a
comparison of the costs of the proposed
rule and the alternatives considered.
COMPARISON OF REGULATORY ALTERNATIVES IN FIRST YEAR
[Costs in millions]
Alternative
First-year cost
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSAL
Proposed rule (passports,
MMDs, Air Nexus).
Status quo .......................
State-issued photo ID +
birth certificate in lieu
of U.S. passport.
15:01 Aug 10, 2006
Cost compared to proposed rule
$941
+$941
$0
$31
n/a
+$31
¥$941 ............................
¥$910 ............................
Jkt 208001
Reason rejected
n/a ..................................
58 With the exception of Tucson, Arizona, where
travel is limited to 75 miles.
59 Information for aircraft to be submitted
includes: full name, date of birth, gender,
citizenship, country of residence, status on board
the aircraft, travel document type, passport
information if passport is required (number,
country of issuance, expiration date), alien
VerDate Aug<31>2005
Cost
compared to
status quo
registration number where applicable, address
while in the United States (unless a U.S. citizen,
lawful permanent resident, or person in transit to
a location outside the United States), Passenger
Name Record locator if available, foreign code of
foreign port/place where transportation to the
United States began, code of port/place of first
arrival, code of final foreign port/place of
PO 00000
Frm 00042
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Status quo does not meet requirements of IRTPA.
Identity and citizenship of the traveler cannot always be reasonably assumed or ascertained
using these documents; minors may not be able
to obtain IDs in all states; delays in processing
entries because neither document is standardized.
destination for in-transit passengers, airline carrier
code, flight number, and date of aircraft arrival.
Information for vessels is comparable, with
requirements appropriate to vessels: vessel name,
vessel country of registry/flag, vessel number, and
voyage number (for multiple arrivals on the same
calendar day).
E:\FR\FM\11AUP1.SGM
11AUP1
46170
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 155 / Friday, August 11, 2006 / Proposed Rules
COMPARISON OF REGULATORY ALTERNATIVES IN FIRST YEAR—Continued
[Costs in millions]
Alternative
First-year cost
Cost
compared to
status quo
Cost compared to proposed rule
Reason rejected
TWICs do not yet exist in the maritime environment; TWIC not designed as a travel document;
citizenship not included; CBP would have to install card readers and modify their own systems
to accept TWICs.
Cannot be used in conjunction with APIS in the air
and sea environments.
$910
+$910
¥$15 ..............................
BCCs in lieu of Mexican
passport.
No direct costs
for U.S. citizens
$0
PASS card in lieu of traditional passport booklet.
$668
+$668
May be slightly less
expensive for BCC
holders.
¥$273 ............................
TWICs in lieu of U.S.
passport.
Accounting Statement
As required by OMB Circular A–4
(available at www.whitehouse.gov/omb/
circulars/), CBP has prepared
an accounting statement showing the
classification of the expenditures
PASS cards cannot be used because they do not
yet exist.
associated with this rule. The table
provides an estimate of the dollar
amount of these costs and benefits,
expressed in 2005 dollars, at three
percent and seven percent discount
rates. DHS and DOS estimate that the
cost of this rule will be approximately
$237 million annualized (7 percent
discount rate) and approximately $233
million annualized (3 percent discount
rate). Non-quantified benefits are
enhanced security and efficiency.
ACCOUNTING STATEMENT: CLASSIFICATION OF EXPENDITURES, 2006 THROUGH 2016
[2005 dollars]
3% discount rate
7% discount rate
$233 million .................................
None ...........................................
Indirect costs to the travel and
tourism industry.
$237 million.
None.
Indirect costs to the travel and tourism
industry.
COSTS
Annualized monetized costs .............................................................
Annualized quantified, but un-monetized costs ................................
Qualitative (un-quantified) costs .......................................................
BENEFITS
Annualized monetized benefits .........................................................
Annualized quantified, but un-monetized costs ................................
Qualitative (un-quantified) costs .......................................................
In accordance with the provisions of
EO 12866, this regulation was reviewed
by OMB.
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSAL
B. Regulatory Flexibility Act
We have prepared this section to
examine the impacts of the proposed
rule on small entities as required by the
Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA).60 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).
When considering the impacts on
small entities for the purpose of
complying with the RFA, we consulted
the Small Business Administration’s
guidance document for conducting
60 5
U.S.C. 601–612.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:22 Aug 10, 2006
Jkt 208001
None quantified ...........................
None quantified ...........................
Enhanced security and efficiency
regulatory flexibility analysis.61 Per this
guidance, a regulatory flexibility
analysis is required when an agency
determines that the rule will have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities that
are subject to the requirements of the
rule.62 This guidance document also
includes a good discussion describing
how direct and indirect costs of a
regulation are considered differently for
the purposes of the RFA. We do not
believe that small entities are subject to
the requirements of the proposed rule;
individuals are subject to the
requirements, and individuals are not
considered small entities. To wit, ‘‘The
courts have held that the RFA requires
an agency to perform a regulatory
61 Small Business Administration, Office of
Advocacy, A Guide for Government Agencies: How
to Comply with the Regulatory Flexibility Act, May
2003.
62 Id. at 69.
PO 00000
Frm 00043
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
None quantified.
None quantified.
Enhanced security and efficiency.
flexibility analysis of small entity
impacts only when a rule directly
regulates them.’’ 63
As described in the Regulatory
Assessment for this rulemaking, we
could not quantify the indirect impacts
of the proposed rule with any degree of
certainty; we instead focused our
analysis on the direct costs to
individuals recognizing that some small
entities will face indirect impacts.
Many of the small entities indirectly
affected will be foreign owned and will
be located outside the United States.
Additionally, reductions in
international travel that result from the
proposed rule could lead to gains for the
domestic travel and tourism industry.
Most travelers—an estimated 96 percent
of United States travelers and 99 percent
of Canadian, Mexican, and Bermudan
travelers (based on the Regulatory
63 Id.
E:\FR\FM\11AUP1.SGM
at 20.
11AUP1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 155 / Friday, August 11, 2006 / Proposed Rules
Assessment summarized above)—are
expected to obtain passports and
continue traveling. Consequently,
indirect effects are expected to be
spread over wide swaths of domestic
and foreign economies.
Small businesses may be indirectly
affected by the proposed rule if
international travelers forego travel to
affected Western Hemisphere countries.
Industries likely affected include (but
may not be limited to):
• Air carriers;
• Cruise ship companies;
• Airports;
• Cruise terminals and their support
services;
• Traveler accommodations;
• Travel agents;
• Dining services;
• Retail shopping;
• Tour operators;
• Scenic and sightseeing
transportation;
• Hired transportation (rental cars,
taxis, buses);
• Arts, entertainment, and recreation.
Because this rule does not directly
regulate small entities, we do not
believe that this rule has a significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. However, we
welcome comments on that assumption.
The most helpful comments are those
that can provide specific information or
examples of a direct impact on small
entities. If we do not receive comments
that demonstrate that the rule causes
small entities to incur direct costs, we
may certify that this action does not
have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities
during the final rule.
The complete analysis of impacts to
small entities for this proposed
rulemaking is available on the CBP Web
site at: https://www.regulations.gov; see
also https://www.cbp.gov. Comments
regarding the analysis and the
underlying assumptions are encouraged
and may be submitted by any of the
methods described under the ADDRESSES
section of this document.
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSAL
C. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
Executive Order 13132 requires DHS
and DOS to develop a process to ensure
‘‘meaningful and timely input by State
and local officials in the development of
regulatory policies that have federalism
implications.’’ Policies that have
federalism implications are defined in
the Executive Order to include rules
that 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.’’ DHS and DOS
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:01 Aug 10, 2006
Jkt 208001
have analyzed the proposed rule in
accordance with the principles and
criteria in the Executive Order and have
determined that it does not have
federalism implications or a substantial
direct effect on the States. The proposed
rule requires United States citizens and
nonimmigrant aliens from Canada,
Bermuda and Mexico entering the
United States by air or sea from Western
Hemisphere countries to present a valid
passport. States do not conduct
activities with which this rule would
interfere. For these reasons, this
proposed rule would not have sufficient
federalism implications to warrant the
preparation of a federalism summary
impact statement.
D. Executive Order 12988: Civil Justice
Reform
This rule meets the applicable
standards set forth in sections 3(a) and
3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988.
Executive Order 12988 requires agencies
to conduct reviews on civil justice and
litigation impact issues before proposing
legislation or issuing proposed
regulations. The order requires agencies
to exert reasonable efforts to ensure that
the regulation identifies clearly
preemptive effects, effects on existing
federal laws or regulations, identifies
any retroactive effects of the regulation,
and other matters. DHS and DOS have
determined that this regulation meets
the requirements of Executive Order
12988 because it does not involve
retroactive effects, preemptive effects, or
the other matters addressed in the
Executive Order.
E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Assessment
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), enacted as
Public Law 104–4 on March 22, 1995,
requires each Federal agency, to the
extent permitted by law, to prepare a
written assessment of the effects of any
Federal mandate in a proposed or final
agency rule that may result in the
expenditure by State, local, and tribal
governments, in the aggregate, or by the
private sector, of $100 million or more
(adjusted annually for inflation) in any
one year. Section 204(a) of the UMRA,
2 U.S.C. 1534(a), requires the Federal
agency to develop an effective process
to permit timely input by elected
officers (or their designees) of State,
local, and tribal governments on a
proposed ‘‘significant intergovernmental
mandate.’’ A ‘‘significant
intergovernmental mandate’’ under the
UMRA is any provision in a Federal
agency regulation that will impose an
enforceable duty upon State, local, and
tribal governments, in the aggregate, of
PO 00000
Frm 00044
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
46171
$100 million (adjusted annually for
inflation) in any one year. Section 203
of the UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1533, which
supplements section 204(a), provides
that before establishing any regulatory
requirements that might significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, the
agency shall have developed a plan that,
among other things, provides for notice
to potentially affected small
governments, if any, and for a
meaningful and timely opportunity to
provide input in the development of
regulatory proposals.
This proposal would not impose a
significant cost or uniquely affect small
governments. The proposal does have
an effect on the private sector of $100
million or more. This impact is
discussed under the Executive Order
12866 discussion.
F. Paperwork Reduction Act
The collection of information
requirement for passports is contained
in 22 CFR 51.20 and 51.21. The required
information is necessary for DOS
Passport Services to issue a United
States passport in the exercise of
authorities granted to the Secretary of
State in 22 U.S.C. Section 211a et seq.
and Executive Order 11295 (August 5,
1966) for the issuance of passports to
United States citizens and non-citizen
nationals. The issuance of U.S.
passports requires the determination of
identity and nationality with reference
to the provisions of Title III of the
Immigration and Nationality Act (8
U.S.C. sections 1401–1504), the 14th
Amendment to the Constitution of the
United States, and other applicable
treaties and laws. The primary purpose
for soliciting the information is to
establish nationality, identity, and
entitlement to the issuance of a United
States passport or related service and to
properly administer and enforce the
laws pertaining to issuance thereof.
There are currently two OMBapproved application forms for
passports, the DS–11 Application for a
U.S. Passport (OMB Approval No. 1405–
0004) and the DS–82 Application for a
U.S. Passport by Mail. First time
applicants must use the DS–11. The
proposed rule would not create any new
collection of information requiring OMB
approval under the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3507).
It would result in an increase in the
number of persons filing the DS–11, and
a corresponding increase in the annual
reporting and/or record-keeping burden.
In conjunction with publication of the
final rule, DOS will amend the OMB
form 83I (Paperwork Reduction Act
Submission) relating to the DS–11 to
reflect these increases.
E:\FR\FM\11AUP1.SGM
11AUP1
46172
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 155 / Friday, August 11, 2006 / Proposed Rules
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSAL
The collection of information
encompassed within this proposed rule
has been submitted to the OMB for
review in accordance with the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44
U.S.C. 3507). An agency may not
conduct, and a person is not required to
respond to, a collection of information
unless the collection of information
displays a valid control number
assigned by OMB.
Estimated total reporting and/or
recordkeeping burden over 3 years: 37.4
million hours.
Estimated annual average reporting
and/or recordkeeping burden: 12.5
million hours.
Estimated total number of
respondents over 3 years: 26.4 million.
Estimated annual average number of
respondents: 8.8 million.
Estimated average burden per
respondent: 1 hour 25 minutes.
Estimated frequency of responses:
every 10 years (adult passport
application); every 5 years (minor
passport application).
Comments on the collection of
information should be sent to the Office
of Management and Budget, Attention:
Desk Officer of the Department of State,
Office of Information and Regulatory
Affairs, Washington, DC 20503.
Comments should be submitted within
the time frame that comments are due
regarding the substance of the proposal.
Comments are invited on: (a) Whether
the collection is necessary for the proper
performance of the functions of the
agency, including whether the
information will have practical utility;
(b) the accuracy of the agency’s estimate
of the burden of the collection of the
information; (c) ways to enhance the
quality, utility, and clarity of the
information to be collected; (d) ways to
minimize the burden of the collection of
information on respondents, including
through the use of automated collection
techniques or other forms of information
technology; and (e) estimates of capital
or startup costs and costs of operations,
maintenance, and purchases of services
to provide information.
origin both within and without of the
Western Hemisphere. The rule expands
the number of individuals submitting
passport information for travel within
the Western Hemisphere, but does not
involve the collection of any new data
elements. Presently, CBP collects and
stores passport information from all
travelers, required to provide such
information pursuant to the Aviation
and Transportation Security Act of 2001
(ATSA) and the Enhanced Border
Security and Visa Reform Act of 2002
(EBSA), in the Treasury Enforcement
Communications System (TECS) (a
System of Records Notice for which is
published at 66 FR 53029). By removing
the exception for submitting passport
information from United States citizens
traveling within the Western
Hemisphere, DOS and CBP are requiring
these individuals to comply with the
general requirement to submit passport
information when traveling to and from
the United States.
G. Privacy Statement
A Privacy Impact Assessment (PIA) is
being posted to the DHS Web site (at
https://www.dhs.gov/dhspublic/
interapp/editorial/editorial_0511.xml)
in conjunction with the publication of
this proposed rule in the Federal
Register. The changes proposed in this
rule involve the removal of an exception
for United States citizens from having to
present a passport in connection with
Western Hemisphere travel, such that
those individuals must now present a
passport when traveling from points of
PART 212—DOCUMENTARY
REQUIREMENTS: NONIMMIGRANTS;
WAIVERS; ADMISSION OF CERTAIN
INADMISSIBLE ALIENS; PAROLE
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:01 Aug 10, 2006
Jkt 208001
List of Subjects
8 CFR Part 212
Administrative practice and
procedure, Aliens, Immigration,
Passports and visas, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
8 CFR Part 235
Administrative practice and
procedure, Aliens, Immigration,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
22 CFR Part 41
Aliens, Nonimmigrants, Passports and
visas.
22 CFR Part 53
Passport Requirement and Exceptions;
parameters for U.S. citizen travel and
definitions.
Amendment of the Regulations
For the reasons stated in the
preamble, DHS and DOS propose to
amend 8 CFR parts 211 and 235 and 22
CFR parts 41 and 53 as set forth below.
1. The authority citation for part 212
is amended to read as follows:
Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1101 and note, 1102,
1103, 1182 and note, 1184, 1187, 1223, 1225,
1226, 1227; 8 U.S.C. 1185 note (section 7209
of Pub. L. 108–458).
2. Section 212.1 is amended by:
a. Revising paragraphs (a)(1) and
(a)(2); and
PO 00000
Frm 00045
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
b. Revising paragraphs (c)(1)(i), as
follows:
§ 212.1 Documentary requirements for
nonimmigrants.
*
*
*
*
*
(a) Citizens of Canada or Bermuda,
Bahamian nationals or British subjects
resident in certain islands.—(1)
Canadian citizens. A visa is not
required. A passport is not required for
Canadian citizens entering the United
States from within the Western
Hemisphere by land, ferry, pleasure
vessel as defined in 22 CFR 53.1(b), or
as participants in the NEXUS Air
program pursuant to 8 CFR 235.1(e). A
passport is otherwise required for
Canadian citizens arriving in the United
States by aircraft or by commercial sea
vessels as defined in 22 CFR 53.1(b).
(2) Citizens of the British Overseas
Territory of Bermuda. A visa is not
required. A passport is not required for
Citizens of the British Overseas
Territory of Bermuda entering the
United States from within the Western
Hemisphere by land, ferry, or pleasure
vessel, as defined in 22 CFR 53.1(b). A
passport is otherwise required for
Citizens of the British Overseas
Territory of Bermuda arriving in the
United States by aircraft or by
commercial sea vessels as defined in 22
CFR 53.1(b).
*
*
*
*
*
(c) Mexican nationals. (1) A visa and
a passport are not required of a Mexican
national who:
(i) Is in possession of a Form DSP–
150, B–1/B–2 Visa and Border Crossing
Card, containing a machine-readable
biometric identifier, issued by the DOS
and is applying for admission as a
temporary visitor for business or
pleasure from a contiguous territory by
land, ferry, or pleasure vessel, as
defined in 22 CFR 53.1(b).
*
*
*
*
*
PART 235—INSPECTION OF PERSONS
APPLYING FOR ADMISSION
3. The authority citation for part 235
is amended to read as follows:
Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1101 and note, 1103,
1183, 1185 (pursuant to E.O. 13323,
published January 2, 2004), 1201, 1224, 1225,
1226, 1228, 1365a note, 1379, 1731–32; 8
U.S.C. 1185 note (section 7209 of Pub. L.
108–458).
4. Section 235.1 is amended by:
a. Redesignating current paragraphs
(d), (e), and (f) as paragraphs (f), (g), and
(h);
b. Adding a new paragraph (d); and
c. Adding a new paragraph (e).
The additions and revisions read as
follows:
E:\FR\FM\11AUP1.SGM
11AUP1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 155 / Friday, August 11, 2006 / Proposed Rules
§ 235.1
Scope of Examination.
*
*
*
*
*
(d) U.S. Merchant Mariners. United
States citizens who are holders of a
Merchant Mariner Document (MMD or
Z-card) issued by the U.S. Coast Guard
may present, in lieu of a passport, an
MMD used in conjunction with
maritime business when entering the
United States.
(e) NEXUS Air Program Participants.
United States citizens, Canadian
citizens, and permanent residents of
Canada who are traveling as participants
in the NEXUS Air program, may
present, in lieu of a passport, a valid
NEXUS Air membership card when
using a NEXUS Air kiosk prior to
entering the United States.
*
*
*
*
*
PART 41—VISAS: DOCUMENTATION
OF NONIMMIGRANTS UNDER THE
IMMIGRATION AND NATIONALITY
ACT, AS AMENDED
5. The authority citation for part 41 is
amended to read as follows:
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSAL
Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1104; Pub. L. 105–277,
112 Stat. 2681–795 through 2681–801; 8
U.S.C. 1185 note (section 7209 of Pub. L.
108–458).
6. Section 41.1 is amended revising
paragraph (b) to read as follows:
*
*
*
*
*
(b) American Indians born in Canada.
An American Indian born in Canada,
having at least 50 per centum of blood
of the American Indian race, entering
from contiguous territory by land, ferry,
pleasure vessel as defined in 22 CFR
53.1(b), or as participants in the NEXUS
Air program pursuant to 8 CFR 235.1(e)
(sec. 289, 66 Stat. 234; 8 U.S.C. 1359).
*
*
*
*
*
7. Section 41.2 is amended by:
a. Revising paragraphs (a) and (b);
b. Revising paragraph (g)(1);
c. Removing paragraphs (g)(2) and
(g)(4); and
d. Redesignating paragraphs (g)(3) as
(g)(2), (g)(5) as (g)(3), and (g)(6) as (g)(4);
*
*
*
*
*
(a) Canadian nationals. A visa is not
required. A passport is not required for
Canadian citizens entering the United
States from within the Western
Hemisphere by land, ferry, pleasure
vessel as defined in 22 CFR 53.1(b), or
as participants in the NEXUS Air
program pursuant to 8 CFR 235.1(e). A
passport is required for Canadian
citizens arriving in the United States by
aircraft or by commercial sea vessels as
defined in 22 CFR 53.1(b).
(b) Citizens of the British Overseas
Territory of Bermuda. A visa is not
required. A passport is not required for
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:01 Aug 10, 2006
Jkt 208001
Citizens of the British Overseas
Territory of Bermuda entering the
United States from within the Western
Hemisphere by land, ferry, or pleasure
vessel, as defined in 22 CFR 53.1(b). A
passport is required for Citizens of the
British Overseas Territory of Bermuda
arriving in the United States by aircraft
or by commercial sea vessels as defined
in 22 CFR 53.1(b).
*
*
*
*
*
(g) Mexican nationals. (1) A visa and
a passport are not required of a Mexican
national in possession of a Form DSP–
150, B–1/B–2 Visa and Border Crossing
Card, containing a machine-readable
biometric identifier, applying for
admission as a temporary visitor for
business or pleasure from a contiguous
territory by land, ferry, or pleasure
vessel, as defined in 22 CFR 53.1(b).
*
*
*
*
*
8. Part 53 is revised to read as follows:
PART 53—PASSPORT REQUIREMENT
AND EXCEPTIONS
Sec.
53.1
53.2
53.3
Passport requirement; definitions.
Exceptions.
Attempt of a citizen to enter without
a valid passport.
53.4 Optional use of a valid passport.
Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1185; 8 U.S.C. 1185
note (section 7209 of Pub.L. 108–458); E.O.
13323, 69 FR 241 (Dec. 30, 2003).
§ 53.1
Passport requirement; definitions.
(a) It is unlawful for a citizen of the
United States, unless excepted under 22
CFR 53.2, to enter or depart, or attempt
to enter or depart, the United States,
without a valid U.S. passport.
(b) For purposes of this part:
(1) Commercial sea vessel means any
civilian vessel being used to transport
persons or property for compensation or
hire to or from any port or place
including all cruise ships.
(2) Ferry means any vessel operating
on a pre-determined fixed schedule and
route, which is being used solely to
provide transportation between places
that are no more than 300 miles apart
and which is being used to transport
passengers, vehicles, and/or railroad
cars.
(3) Pleasure vessel means a vessel that
is used exclusively for recreational or
personal purposes and not to transport
passengers or property for hire.
(4) United States means ‘‘United
States’’ as defined in § 215(c) of the
Immigration and Nationality Act of
1952, as amended (8 U.S.C. 1185(c)).
§ 53.2
Exceptions.
A U.S. citizen is not required to bear
a valid U.S. passport to enter or depart
the United States:
PO 00000
Frm 00046
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
46173
(a) When traveling directly between
parts of the United States as defined in
§ 50.1 of this chapter; or
(b) When entering the United States
from, or departing the United States for,
Mexico or Canada by land; or
(c) When entering from or departing
to a foreign port or place within the
Western Hemisphere, excluding Cuba,
by pleasure vessel; or
(d) When entering from or departing
to a foreign port or place within the
Western Hemisphere, excluding Cuba,
by ferry; or
(e) When traveling as a member of the
Armed Forces of the United States on
active duty; or
(f) When traveling as a U.S. citizen
seaman, carrying a Merchant Marine
Document (MMD or Z-card) in
conjunction with maritime business.
The MMD is not sufficient to establish
citizenship for purposes of issuance of
a United States passport under 22 CFR
Part 51; or
(g) When traveling as a participant in
the NEXUS Air program with a valid
NEXUS Air membership card. United
States citizens who are traveling as
participants in the NEXUS Air program,
may present, in lieu of a passport, a
valid NEXUS Air membership card
when using a NEXUS Air kiosk prior to
entering the United States. The NEXUS
Air card is not sufficient to establish
citizenship for purposes of issuance of
a U.S. passport under 22 CFR Part 51;
or
(h) When the U.S. citizen bears
another document, or combination of
documents, that the Secretary of
Homeland Security has determined
under Section 7209(b) of Public Law
108–458 (8 U.S.C. 1185 note) to be
sufficient to denote identity and
citizenship; or
(i) When the U.S. citizen is employed
directly or indirectly on the
construction, operation, or maintenance
of works undertaken in accordance with
the treaty concluded on February 3,
1944, between the United States and
Mexico regarding the functions of the
International Boundary and Water
Commission (IBWC), TS 994, 9 Bevans
1166, 59 Stat. 1219, or other related
agreements provided that the U.S.
citizen bears an official identification
card issued by the IBWC; or
(j) When the Department of State
waives, pursuant to EO 13323 of
December 30, 2003, Sec 2, the
requirement with respect to the U.S.
citizen because there is an unforeseen
emergency; or
(k) When the Department of State
waives, pursuant to EO 13323 of
December 30, 2003, Sec 2, the
requirement with respect to the U.S.
E:\FR\FM\11AUP1.SGM
11AUP1
46174
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 155 / Friday, August 11, 2006 / Proposed Rules
citizen for humanitarian or national
interest reasons.
§ 53.3 Attempt of a citizen to enter without
a valid passport.
The appropriate officer at the port of
entry shall report to the Department of
State any citizen of the United States
who attempts to enter the United States
contrary to the provisions of this part,
so that the Department of State may
apply the waiver provisions of § 53.2 (i)
and § 53.2(j) to such citizen, if
appropriate.
§ 53.4
Optional use of a valid passport.
Nothing in this part shall be
construed to prevent a citizen from
using a valid U.S. passport in a case in
which that passport is not required by
this part 53, provided such travel is not
otherwise prohibited.
Dated: August 7, 2006,
Michael Chertoff,
Secretary of Homeland Security, Department
of Homeland Security.
Henrietta H. Fore,
Under Secretary for Management,
Department of State.
[FR Doc. 06–6854 Filed 8–10–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111–14–P
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms,
and Explosives
27 CFR Part 555
[Docket No. ATF 9P; AG Order No. 2830–
2006]
RIN 1140–AA24
Commerce in Explosives—Amended
Definition of ‘‘Propellant Actuated
Device’’ (2004R–3P)
Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco,
Firearms, and Explosives (ATF),
Department of Justice.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSAL
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The Department of Justice is
proposing to amend the regulations of
the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco,
Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) to
clarify that the term ‘‘propellant
actuated device’’ does not include
hobby rocket motors or rocket-motor
reload kits consisting of or containing
ammonium perchlorate composite
propellant (APCP), black powder, or
other similar low explosives.
DATES: Comments must be submitted on
or before November 9, 2006.
ADDRESSES: Send written comments to:
James P. Ficaretta, Program Manager;
Room 5250; Bureau of Alcohol,
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:01 Aug 10, 2006
Jkt 208001
Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives; P.O.
Box 50221; Washington, DC 20091–
0221; ATTN: ATF 9P. Written
comments must include your mailing
address and be signed, and may be of
any length.
Comments may also be submitted
electronically to ATF at nprm@atf.gov
or to https://www.regulations.gov by
using the electronic comment form
provided on that site. You may also
view an electronic version of this
proposed rule at the https://
www.regulations.gov site. Comments
submitted electronically must contain
your name, mailing address and, if
submitted by e-mail, your e-mail
address. They must also reference this
document docket number, as noted
above, and be legible when printed on
81⁄2″ x 11″ paper. ATF will treat
comments submitted electronically as
originals and ATF will not acknowledge
receipt of comments submitted
electronically. See the Public
Participation section at the end of the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for
requirements for submitting written
comments by facsimile.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
James P. Ficaretta; Enforcement
Programs and Services; Bureau of
Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and
Explosives; U.S. Department of Justice;
650 Massachusetts Avenue, NW.,
Washington, DC 20226, telephone (202)
927–8203.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
ATF is responsible for implementing
Title XI, Regulation of Explosives (18
United States Code chapter 40), of the
Organized Crime Control Act of 1970
(‘‘Title XI’’). One of the stated purposes
of that Act is to reduce the hazards to
persons and property arising from
misuse and unsafe or insecure storage of
explosive materials. Under section 847
of title 18, United States Code, the
Attorney General ‘‘may prescribe such
rules and regulations as he deems
reasonably necessary to carry out the
provisions of this chapter.’’ Regulations
that implement the provisions of
chapter 40 are contained in title 27,
Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), part
555 (‘‘Commerce in Explosives’’).
Section 841(d) of title 18 sets forth the
definition of ‘‘explosives.’’ ‘‘Propellant
actuated devices’’ along with gasoline,
fertilizers, and propellant actuated
industrial tools manufactured,
imported, or distributed for their
intended purposes are exempted from
this statutory definition by 27 CFR
555.141(a)(8).
In 1970, when Title XI was enacted by
Congress, the Judiciary Committee of
PO 00000
Frm 00047
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
the United States House of
Representatives specifically considered
and supported an exception for
propellant actuated devices. H.R. Rep.
No. 91–1549, 91st Cong., 2nd Sess. 64
(1970), reprinted in 1970 U.S.C.C.A.N.
4007, 4041. Neither the statute nor the
legislative history defines ‘‘propellant
actuated device.’’ In 1981, however,
ATF added the following definition of
‘‘propellant actuated device’’ to its
regulations: ‘‘[a]ny tool or special
mechanized device or gas generator
system which is actuated by a
propellant or which releases and directs
work through a propellant charge.’’ 27
CFR 555.11.
In applying the regulatory definition,
ATF has classified certain products as
propellant actuated devices: aircraft
slide inflation cartridges, inflatable
automobile occupant restraint systems,
nail guns, and diesel and jet engine
starter cartridges. ATF also examined
hobby rocket motors to determine
whether they could be classified as
propellant actuated devices. To be
classified as a ‘‘propellant actuated
device,’’ it is, in view of the definition
set forth at 27 CFR 555.11, at a
minimum necessary that a particular
item be susceptible of being deemed a
‘‘tool,’’ a ‘‘special mechanized device,’’
or a ‘‘gas generator system.’’
Additionally, logic dictates that it is
necessary that a propellant actuated
device contain and be actuated by
propellant.
To ascertain the common,
contemporary meanings of ‘‘tool,’’
‘‘special mechanized device,’’ and ‘‘gas
generator system,’’ it is useful to look to
Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary
(10th Ed., 1997) (‘‘Webster’s’’).
Webster’s defines ‘‘tool’’ in pertinent
part as follows: ‘‘a handheld device that
aids in accomplishing a task * * *[;]
the cutting or shaping part in a machine
or machine tool * * *[;] a machine for
shaping metal * * * ’’ Id. at 1243.
‘‘Device’’ is defined as ‘‘something
* * * contrived’’ and, more
specifically, as ‘‘a piece of equipment or
a mechanism designed to perform a
special function.’’ Id. at 317. For a
particular device to be a ‘‘special
mechanized device,’’ Webster’s suggests
it would be necessary that it be both
unique and of a mechanical nature. (See
definition of ‘‘special,’’ id. at 1128;
definition of ‘‘mechanize,’’ id. at 721.)
As to the term ‘‘gas generator system,’’
Webster’s defines ‘‘generator’’ as ‘‘an
apparatus in which vapor or gas is
formed’’ and as ‘‘a machine by which
mechanical energy is changed into
electrical energy.’’ Id. at 485. Further,
Webster’s defines ‘‘system’’ as ‘‘a
regularly interacting or interdependent
E:\FR\FM\11AUP1.SGM
11AUP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 155 (Friday, August 11, 2006)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 46155-46174]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 06-6854]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Bureau of Customs and Border Protection
8 CFR Parts 212 and 235
[USCBP 2006-0097]
RIN 1651-AA66
DEPARTMENT OF STATE
22 CFR Parts 41 and 53
RIN 1400-AC10
Documents Required for Travelers Arriving in the United States at
Air and Sea Ports-of-Entry From Within the Western Hemisphere
AGENCY: Bureau of Customs and Border Protection, Department of Homeland
Security; Bureau of Consular Affairs, Department of State.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004
provides that by January 1, 2008, United States citizens and
nonimmigrant aliens may enter the United States only with passports or
such alternative documents as the Secretary of Homeland Security may
designate as satisfactorily establishing identity and citizenship. This
notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) is the first phase of a joint
Department of Homeland Security and Department of State plan to
implement these new requirements. This NPRM proposes that, beginning
January 8, 2007, United States citizens and nonimmigrant aliens from
Canada, Bermuda, and Mexico entering the United States at air ports-of-
entry and most sea ports-of-entry, with certain limited exceptions,
will generally be required to present a valid passport. This NPRM does
not propose to change the requirements for United States citizens and
nonimmigrant aliens from Canada, Bermuda, and Mexico entering the
United States at land border ports-of-entry and certain types of
arrivals by sea (ferries and pleasure vessels) which will be addressed
in a separate, future rulemaking.
DATES: Written comments must be submitted on or before September 25,
2006.
ADDRESSES: Comments, identified by docket number USCBP 2006-0097, must
be submitted by one of the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
Mail: Comments by mail are to be addressed to the Bureau
of Customs and Border Protection, Office of Regulations and Rulings,
Border Security Regulations Branch, 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW.,
Washington, DC 20229. Submitted comments by mail may be inspected at
the Bureau of Customs and Border Protection at 799 9th Street, NW.,
Washington, DC. To inspect comments, please call (202) 572-8768 to
arrange for an appointment.
Instructions: All submissions must include the agency name and
docket number USCBP 2006-0097. All comments will be posted without
change to https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal
information sent with each comment. For detailed instructions on
submitting comments and additional information on the rulemaking
process, see the ``Public Participation in Rulemaking Process'' heading
of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document.
Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
submitted comments, go to https://www.regulations.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Department of Homeland Security:
Robert Rawls, Office of Field Operations, Bureau of Customs and Border
Protection, 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Room 5.4-D, Washington, DC
20229, telephone number (202) 344-2847.
Department of State: Consuelo Pachon, Office of Passport Policy,
Planning and Advisory Services, Bureau of Consular Affairs, telephone
number (202) 663-2662.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Public Participation
II. Background
A. Current Entry Requirements for United States Citizens
Arriving by Air or Sea
B. Current Entry Requirements for Nonimmigrant Aliens Arriving
by Air or Sea
1. Canadian Citizens and Citizens of the British Overseas
Territory of Bermuda
2. Mexican Citizens
C. Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004
D. Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
1. Passport as Only Acceptable Document for WHTI Air-and-Sea
Arrivals
2. Alternative Forms of Identification
3. One Implementation Date of January 1, 2008
4. Effective Communications Plan
5. Passport Exemption for Children Under the Age of 16
6. Reduce Cost of Passports or Institute Pricing Incentives
7. Bilateral or Multilateral Process
8. Native Americans
9. Mobile Offshore Drilling Units Working on the United States
Outer Continental Shelf
10. Passengers Traveling by Ferry
11. Military Personnel
III. Proposed Requirements for United States Citizens and
Nonimmigrant Aliens Traveling by Air and Sea to the United States
A. Passports for Air and Sea Arrivals
B. Exceptions to the Passport Proposal
1. Pleasure Vessels
[[Page 46156]]
2. Passengers Arriving by Ferry
3. Members of the United States Armed Forces
C. Other Documents Deemed Acceptable To Denote Citizenship and
Identity
1. Merchant Mariner Document
2. Nexus Air Program Membership Card
D. Impact of This Rulemaking on Specific Groups and Populations
1. Charter and Commercial Vessels
2. Aviation Passengers and Crew
3. Lawful Permanent Residents
4. Mexican Citizens
5. Children Under the Age of 16
6. Alien Members of the United States Armed Forces
7. Members of NATO Armed Forces
8. Native Americans Born in Canada
9. Native Americans Born in the United States
10. American Indian Card Holders From Kickapoo Band of Texas and
Tribe of Oklahoma
11. Travel From Territories Subject to the Jurisdiction of the
United States
12. Outer Continental Shelf Employees
13. International Boundary and Water Commission Employees
E. Section-by-Section Discussion of Proposed Amendments
IV. Regulatory Analyses
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review
B. Regulatory Flexibility Act
C. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
D. Executive Order 12988: Civil Justice Reform
E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act Assessment
F. Paperwork Reduction Act
G. Privacy Statement
List of Subjects
Abbreviations and Terms Used in This Document
ANPRM--Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
APIS--Advance Passenger Information System
BCC--Form DSP-150, B-1/B-2 Visa and Border Crossing Card
CBP--Bureau of Customs and Border Protection
DHS--Department of Homeland Security
DMV--Department of Motor Vehicles
DOS--Department of State
FAST--Free and Secure Trade
IBWC--International Boundary and Water Commission
INA--Immigration and Nationality Act
INS--Immigration and Naturalization Service
IRTPA--Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004
LPR--Lawful Permanent Resident
MMD--Merchant Mariner Document
MODU--Mobile Offshore Drilling Unit
NATO--North Atlantic Treaty Organization
NPRM--Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
OCS--Outer Continental Shelf
OTTI--Office of Travel & Tourism Industries
SENTRI--Secure Electronic Network for Travelers Rapid Inspection
TSA--Transportation Security Administration
TWIC--Transportation Worker Identification Card
US-VISIT--United States Visitor and Immigrant Status Indicator
Technology Program
WHTI--Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative
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. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the
Department of State (DOS) also invite comments that relate to the
economic or environmental effects or the federalism implications that
might result from this proposed rule. Comments that will provide the
most assistance to DHS and DOS in developing these procedures 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. See ADDRESSES above for
information on how to submit comments.
II. Background
A. Current Entry Requirements for United States Citizens Arriving by
Air or Sea
In general, under federal law it is ``unlawful for any citizen of
the United States to depart from or enter * * * the United States
unless he bears a valid United States passport.'' \1\ However, the
statutory passport requirement has not been applied to United States
citizens when departing from or entering into the United States from
within the Western Hemisphere other than from Cuba.\2\ Currently, a
United States citizen entering the United States from within the
Western Hemisphere, other than from Cuba, is inspected at an air or sea
port-of-entry by a DHS Bureau of Customs and Border Protection (CBP)
officer.\3\ To lawfully enter the United States, a person need only
satisfy the CBP officer of his or her United States citizenship.\4\ In
addition to assessing the verbal declaration and examining the
documentation the person submits, the CBP officer may ask for
additional identification and evidence of citizenship until the officer
is satisfied that the person is a United States citizen.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Section 215(b) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA),
8 U.S.C. 1185(b).
\2\ See 22 CFR 53.2(b), which waived the passport requirement
pursuant to section 215(b) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1185(b).
\3\ United States citizens entering the United States at land
border ports-of-entry from within the Western Hemisphere are also
inspected by a CBP officer. However, such travelers are outside the
scope of this proposed rulemaking and will be addressed in a
separate, future rulemaking.
\4\ 8 CFR 235.1(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As a result of this procedure, United States citizens arriving at
air or sea ports-of-entry from within the Western Hemisphere currently
produce a variety of documents to establish their citizenship and right
to enter the United States. A driver's license issued by a state motor
vehicle administration or other competent state government authority is
a common form of identity document now accepted by CBP at the border
even though such documents do not denote citizenship. Citizenship
documents currently accepted at ports-of-entry generally include birth
certificates issued by a United States jurisdiction, Consular Reports
of Birth Abroad, Certificates of Naturalization, and Certificates of
Citizenship.
B. Current Entry Requirements for Nonimmigrant Aliens Arriving by Air
or Sea
Currently, each nonimmigrant alien arriving in the United States
must present to the CBP officer at the port-of-entry a valid unexpired
passport issued by his or her country of citizenship and, if required,
a valid unexpired visa issued by a United States embassy or consulate
abroad.\5\ Nonimmigrant aliens entering the United States must also
satisfy any other applicable entry requirements (e.g., United States
Visitor and Immigrant Status Indicator Technology Program (US-VISIT)).
For nonimmigrant aliens arriving in the United States, the only current
general exceptions to the passport requirement apply to the admission
of (1) citizens of Canada and Bermuda arriving from anywhere in the
Western Hemisphere and (2) Mexican nationals with a Border Crossing
Card (BCC) arriving from contiguous territory.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Section 212(a)(7)(B)(i) of the INA, 8 U.S.C.
1182(a)(7)(B)(i).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Canadian Citizens and Citizens of the British Overseas Territory of
Bermuda
In most cases, Canadian citizens and citizens of the British
Overseas Territory of Bermuda (Bermuda) currently are not required to
present a valid passport and visa when entering the United States as
nonimmigrant visitors from countries in the Western Hemisphere.\6\
Nevertheless, these travelers are currently required to satisfy the
inspecting CBP officer of their identity and citizenship at the time of
their application for admission. Entering aliens may present any
evidence of identity and citizenship in their possession. Individuals
who
[[Page 46157]]
initially fail to satisfy the examining CBP officer may then be
required to provide further identification and evidence of citizenship
such as a birth certificate, passport, or citizenship card.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ 8 CFR 212.1(a)(1)(Canadian citizens) and 8 CFR
212.1(a)(2)(Citizens of Bermuda). See also 22 CFR 41.2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Mexican Citizens
Mexican citizens arriving in the United States at ports-of-entry
who possess a Form DSP-150, B-1/B-2 Visa and Border Crossing Card (BCC)
are currently admitted without presenting a valid passport if they are
coming from contiguous territory.\7\ A BCC is a machine-readable,
biometric card, issued by the Department of State, Bureau of Consular
Affairs. The use of a BCC without a passport is atypical in the air/sea
environment, but it continues to be permitted. Although the use of a
BCC is much more common in the land environment, this NPRM deals solely
with arrivals at air and sea ports-of-entry.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ 8 CFR 212.1(c)(1)(i). See also 22 CFR 41.2(g). If they are
only traveling within a certain geographic area along the United
States border with Mexico: usually up to 25 miles from the border
but within 75 miles under the exception for Tucson, Arizona, they do
not need to obtain a form I-94. If they travel outside of that
geographic area, they must obtain an I-94 from CBP at the port-of-
entry. 8 CFR 235.1(f)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004
This NPRM is the first phase of the joint DHS and DOS
implementation of section 7209 of the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism
Prevention Act of 2004 (IRTPA), Pub. L. 108-458, 118 Stat. 3638 (Dec.
17, 2004). Section 7209 of IRTPA requires that the Secretary of
Homeland Security, in consultation with the Secretary of State, develop
and implement a plan to require travelers entering the United States to
present a passport, other document, or combination of documents, that
are ``deemed by the Secretary of Homeland Security to be sufficient to
denote identity and citizenship.'' Section 7209 expressly limits the
waiver of documentation requirements for United States citizens under
section 215(b) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) \8\ and
eliminates the waiver of documentation requirements for categories of
individuals for whom documentation requirements have previously been
waived (citizens of Canada, Mexico, and Bermuda) under section
212(d)(4)(B) of the INA.\9\ United States citizens and nonimmigrant
aliens from Canada, Mexico, and Bermuda will be required to comply with
the new document requirements of section 7209.\10\ IRTPA requires that
the Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the Secretary
of State, develop and implement the plan by January 1, 2008.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ 8 U.S.C. 1185(b).
\9\ 8 U.S.C. 1182(d)(4)(B).
\10\ Section 7209 does not apply to Lawful Permanent Residents,
who will continue to be able to enter the United States upon
presentation of a valid Form I-551, Alien Registration Card, or
other valid evidence of permanent resident status. Section 211(b) of
the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1181(b). It also does not apply to alien members
of United States Armed Forces traveling under official orders.
Section 284 of INA, 8 U.S.C. 1354. Additionally, section 7209 does
not apply to nonimmigrant aliens from anywhere other than Canada,
Mexico, or Bermuda. See section 212(d)(4)(B) of the INA, 8 U.S.C.
1182(d)(4)(B) and 8 C.F.R. 212.1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 7209 limits the Secretaries' respective authorities \11\ to
waive generally applicable documentation requirements by providing
that, after the complete implementation of the plan, neither the
Secretary of State nor the Secretary of Homeland Security may exercise
the authority of section 212(d)(4)(B) of the INA \12\ to waive the
passport requirement on the basis of reciprocity for nonimmigrant
aliens who are nationals of foreign contiguous territory or adjacent
islands. In addition, section 7209 of IRTPA provides that the President
may exercise the authority of section 215(b) of the INA \13\ to waive
the new documentation requirements for United States citizens departing
from or entering the United States only in three specific
circumstances: (1) When the Secretary of Homeland Security determines
that ``alternative documentation'' different from what is required
under section 7209 is sufficient to denote citizenship and identity;
(2) in an individual case of an unforeseen emergency; or (3) in an
individual case based on ``humanitarian or national interest reasons.''
\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ See section 212(d)(4)(B) of the INA, 8 U.S.C.
1182(d)(4)(B), and section 215(b) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1185(b).
\12\ 8 U.S.C. 1182(d)(4)(B).
\13\ 8 U.S.C. 1185(b).
\14\ Section 7209(c)(2) of IRTPA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
United States citizens and nonimmigrant aliens, who currently are
not required to have passports pursuant to sections 215(b) and
212(d)(4)(B) of the INA \15\ respectively, would be required to present
a passport or other identity and citizenship document deemed sufficient
by the Secretary of Homeland Security when entering the United States
from countries within the Western Hemisphere. The principal groups
affected by this provision of IRTPA are United States citizens,
Canadian citizens, citizens of Bermuda, and Mexican citizens holding
BCC cards. These groups of individuals are currently exempt from the
general passport requirement when entering the United States from
within the Western Hemisphere.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ 8 U.S.C. 1185(b) and 8 U.S.C. 1182(d)(4)(B).
\16\ Section 212(d)(4)(B) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1182(d)(4)(B) and
section 215(b) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1185(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
D. Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
On September 1, 2005, DHS and DOS published in the Federal Register
(70 FR 52037) an advance notice of proposed rulemaking (ANPRM) that
announced that DHS and DOS were planning to amend their respective
regulations to implement section 7209 of IRTPA. The DHS and DOS plan to
implement section 7209 is also known as the Western Hemisphere Travel
Initiative (WHTI). As stated in the ANPRM, DHS and DOS proposed to
develop a plan that would require citizens of the United States,
Canada, Bermuda, and Mexico to possess a passport or other acceptable
secure document to enter the United States from within the Western
Hemisphere by January 1, 2008. The ANPRM invited comments on the
possible means of implementation and specifically invited comments on
what documents, other than passports, should be accepted as sufficient
under section 7209.
The ANPRM announced that DHS and DOS anticipated implementing the
documentation requirements of section 7209 in two stages. The first
stage would affect travelers entering the United States at air and sea
ports-of-entry beginning January 1, 2007. The second stage would
address travelers arriving at land border ports-of-entry beginning
January 1, 2008. The two-stage approach is intended to ensure an
orderly transition, provide affected persons with adequate notice to
obtain necessary documents, and ensure that adequate resources are
available to issue additional passports or other authorized documents.
In the ANPRM, DHS and DOS sought public comment to assist the
Secretary of Homeland Security to make a final determination of which
document or combination of documents other than valid passports will be
accepted at ports-of-entry to satisfy section 7209. DHS and DOS also
solicited public comments regarding the economic impact of implementing
section 7209, the costs anticipated to be incurred by United States
citizens and others as a result of new document requirements, potential
benefits of the rulemaking, alternative methods of complying with the
legislation, and the proposed stages for implementation. In addition to
receiving written comments, DHS and
[[Page 46158]]
DOS representatives attended over 30 public sessions and town hall
meetings throughout the country and met with community leaders and
stakeholders to discuss the initiative.
DHS and DOS received 2,062 written comments in response to the
ANPRM. The majority of the comments (1,910) addressed only potential
changes to the documentation requirements at land border ports-of-
entry. One hundred and fifty-two comments addressed changes to the
documentation requirements for persons arriving at air or sea ports-of-
entry. Comments were received from a wide range of United States and
Canadian sources including: private citizens; businesses and
associations; local, state, federal, and tribal governments; and
members of the United States Congress and Canadian Parliament.
Some of the comments pertaining to arrivals at air and sea ports-
of-entry were also applicable to land border crossings and will
therefore be addressed in both this rulemaking and a separate, future
rulemaking specific to land border crossings. As this proposed rule
deals only with changes to arrivals at air and sea ports-of-entry, the
comments received regarding only land border crossings will not be
addressed here.
A general discussion of the comments relevant to this rulemaking
follows. Complete responses to the comments from both the ANPRM and
this NPRM regarding air and sea travel will be presented in the final
rule.
1. Passport as Only Acceptable Document for WHTI Air-and-Sea Arrivals
Forty commenters contended that DHS should accept only a valid
passport to satisfy documentary requirements for air and sea arrivals
beginning January 1, 2007. Thirty-six of the 40 comments were submitted
by United States citizens and four comments were submitted by
associations or businesses located in the United States. Eight
commenters recommended that the implementation of a ``passport only''
requirement should not be delayed. Among the reasons for supporting a
``passport only'' requirement, commenters expressed the need to enhance
border security, prevent document forgeries, and simplify document
review for CBP officers by utilizing one standardized document.
One hundred and twelve commenters opposed any proposal that would
require a valid passport to satisfy the documentation requirements for
air and sea arrivals, but supported the goal of improving border
security.
Thirty-two comments stated that a ``passport only'' requirement
would significantly impede travel and tourism either by causing lengthy
delays at the border or by preventing individuals who did not possess a
passport from traveling. Some of these comments asserted that requiring
passports could essentially prevent travelers from making spontaneous
decisions to travel by air or sea within the Western Hemisphere.
Thirty-four comments contended that due to the cost of a passport,
a passport only requirement would be an unreasonable financial burden
for many families. Citing the $97 cost of an initial adult passport and
the $82 cost of a child's passport, several commenters asserted that
the costs are multiplied for a family traveling together. Thirty-nine
comments contended that a ``passport only'' requirement would have a
significant negative economic impact on businesses and local economies.
Many of these commenters provided quantitative and qualitative
information to illustrate their proffered economic impact.
In addition, five commenters raised the concern that the demand for
passports could exceed the passport processing capacity of DOS.
2. Alternative Forms of Identification
Eighty-one commenters submitted recommendations about the types of
alternate documentation that could satisfy the requirements of section
7209 of IRTPA. Many of these commenters noted that section 7209 of
IRTPA provides that a passport substitute could be another document or
combination of documents that sufficiently denote identity and
citizenship. Fifty-nine commenters asserted that DHS should identify
acceptable alternative documents that would be more convenient,
affordable and easier to obtain than a passport. Many of these
commenters noted that DHS has not identified other low-cost and easily
obtainable documents in lieu of a passport. Several commenters also
recommended that any new document should be small enough to carry in a
wallet as opposed to the current booklet-style passport.
Ten commenters recommended that DHS continue to accept a state-
issued driver's license and an original birth certificate as evidence
of identity and citizenship. Numerous commenters asserted that a
driver's license combined with a birth certificate is the best-known
and most generally accepted combination of documents that denote
identity and citizenship. Several commenters reasoned that since these
documents are sufficient to establish nationality and identity for the
purpose of obtaining a passport, they should be acceptable at the
border as well.
One commenter recommended that the current NEXUS Air program \17\
should be expanded to additional Canadian airports. Another commenter
noted that acquiring a NEXUS Air card requires a lengthy processing
time of approximately 6 to 8 weeks for the individual to become
enrolled.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ NEXUS Air is an airport border clearance pilot project
implemented at one airport in Vancouver, Canada by CBP and the
Canada Border Services Agency, pursuant to the Shared Border Accord
and Smart Border Declaration between the United States and Canada.
The NEXUS Air alternative inspection program allows pre-screened,
low-risk travelers to be processed more efficiently by United States
and Canadian border officials.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. One Implementation Date of January 1, 2008
Fifty-seven comments recommended that DHS and DOS delay the first
stage of implementation for air and sea travelers by changing the
implementation date from January 1, 2007, to January 1, 2008, or an
unspecified later date. Many of these commenters asserted that the
January 1, 2007, implementation date for air and sea travel does not
allow adequate time for the traveling public and industry to prepare
for the new regulations.
Some commenters expressed concern that a phased-in approach would
unnecessarily discriminate against one mode of travel in favor of
another because those traveling by air and sea will be subject to more
stringent documentation requirements than those traveling by land
during 2007. Several comments asserted that there is no basis for
treating travelers who arrive by air or sea any differently from those
who travel over land borders.
One commenter argued that the statutory deadline for implementation
is January 1, 2008, and that IRTPA does not require implementation to
be phased-in prior to that date. Several comments suggested that one
implementation date would be less confusing to the traveling public and
allow more time to educate the public about the new requirements and
for proper consideration of alternative secure documents other than a
passport.
Finally, a few commenters recommended delaying the implementation
date of January 1, 2007, for air and sea travelers by at least one
week, until after the holiday travel season.
4. Effective Communications Plan
Thirty-eight commenters recommended that DHS and DOS work
[[Page 46159]]
with the travel industry to launch an effective communications campaign
to inform and educate the traveling public about any new documentation
requirements. According to several commenters, some Canadian and United
States citizens mistakenly believe that a ``passport only'' requirement
is already in effect. One commenter noted that due to confusion around
the implementation phase-in dates, many members of the public believe
that the first phase-in period will apply to all persons traveling to
the United States whether or not they travel by air, sea or land.
Another commenter suggested that educating the public about changes to
the documentation requirements is best accomplished by beginning
outreach and public relations efforts far in advance of any new
requirement.
5. Passport Exemption for Children Under the Age of 16
Thirty-one commenters recommended that children under the age of 16
should be exempt from a passport requirement and instead be able to use
a citizenship document such as a birth certificate. Several commenters
asserted that very few children possess passports so that for children
under the age of 16 from both Canada and the United States, the current
documentation requirements should be maintained.
6. Reduce Cost of Passports or Institute Pricing Incentives
Eleven commenters recommended that passports should be either less
expensive or pricing incentives should be introduced for United States
citizens who are obtaining a passport for the first time in advance of
the implementation deadline. One commenter asserted that financial
incentives would encourage United States citizens to obtain a first-
time passport or renew an existing passport. Several commenters
specifically requested that passport costs be reduced for children less
than 16 years of age, students, senior citizens, and families. One
commenter recommended that the federal government provide a financial
subsidy or discount the cost of passports for low-income earners,
welfare recipients, and families with more than two children.
7. Bilateral or Multilateral Process
Three commenters recommended that the implementation of new
documentation requirements should be a collaborative, multilateral
process with a United States-Canadian partnership and a United States-
Mexican partnership. Commenters recommended that the United States and
Canadian governments work together to explore acceptable forms of
documents in lieu of a passport for Canadian citizens. Certain
commenters noted that if the United States unilaterally develops a new
form of alternative document for entry into the United States, there
would be no guarantee that the Canadian and Mexican governments would
accept the new form of documentation as an entry document. These
commenters suggested that the United States Government should not act
unilaterally because of the potential negative effects that this
rulemaking might have on the economy, and international relations,
including a negative public reaction.
8. Native Americans
Three commenters opposed any regulation that would require Native
Americans traveling from Canada into the United States to carry and
produce a United States or Canadian passport as identification. These
commenters asserted that such a requirement would infringe upon the
treaty rights of indigenous peoples living within the United States and
Canada to travel freely across the border on the basis of their
membership in a particular Native American tribe or nation.
9. Mobile Offshore Drilling Units Working on the United States Outer
Continental Shelf
Three commenters recommended that offshore workers of United States
citizenship working aboard Mobile Offshore Drilling Units (MODUs) on
the United States Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) be specifically
excluded from any new documentation requirements when traveling between
the United States and MODUs.
10. Passengers Traveling by Ferry
Eight commenters raised concerns that the new documentation
requirements might create long waits and substantial disruption at
ferry terminals, resulting in a decrease in ferry traffic. Some of
these commenters recommended that any change to the documentation
requirements for ferry passengers should be postponed until the
implementation of any new documentation requirements at land border
ports-of-entry.
11. Military Personnel
Two commenters recommended that fees for passports, including fees
for expedited processing, be eliminated for active duty military
personnel and their dependents.
III. Proposed Requirements for United States Citizens and Nonimmigrant
Aliens Traveling by Air and Sea to the United States
This NPRM proposes that, with some exceptions, United States
citizens and nonimmigrant aliens from Canada, Bermuda, and Mexico
traveling into the United States by air and sea from Western Hemisphere
countries, be required to show a passport. This NPRM does not propose
changes to the documentation requirements at land border ports-of-
entry.
This passport requirement would apply to most air and sea travel,
including commercial air travel and commercial sea travel (including
cruise ships). There are two categories of travel and one category of
traveler, discussed in more detail below, which would not be subject to
the passport requirement proposed here. First, this proposal would not
apply to pleasure vessels used exclusively for pleasure and which are
not for the transportation of persons or property for compensation or
hire. Second, this proposal would not apply to travel by ferry.
Finally, this proposal would not apply to United States citizen members
of the Armed Forces on active duty.
This NPRM also proposes to designate two documents, in addition to
the passport, as sufficient to denote identity and citizenship under
section 7209, and acceptable for air and sea travel. The first document
is the Merchant Mariner Document (MMD) or ``z-card'' issued by the
United States Coast Guard (Coast Guard) to Merchant Mariners. The
second document is the NEXUS Air card when used with a NEXUS Air kiosk.
Finally, this proposal would not apply to United States citizen members
of the Armed Forces on active duty.
A. Passports for Air and Sea Arrivals
After reviewing the comments received and taking them into
consideration, DHS and DOS jointly propose that, beginning January 8,
2007, most United States citizens and nonimmigrant aliens from Canada,
Bermuda, and Mexico entering the United States at air or sea ports-of-
entry from Western Hemisphere countries will be required to present a
valid passport. DHS and DOS note that in response to comments, the
originally proposed implementation date of January 1, 2007, for air and
sea travelers is being delayed until January 8, 2007, to better
accommodate the holiday travel season. The Departments do not believe
that there will be an adverse effect on national security by delaying
the implementation of this rule by one
[[Page 46160]]
week. Persons traveling prior to the effective date of the final rule
implementing the air and sea stages of WHTI should plan to depart from
the United States with documents sufficient to meet requirements that
will be in place when they return.
This proposed rule would implement Congress' direction in IRTPA by
eliminating the passport waiver for United States citizens,\18\ who
enter the United States at air and sea ports-of-entry when traveling
between the United States and any country, territory, or island
adjacent thereto in North, South or Central America.\19\ In addition,
this proposed rule would eliminate the passport waiver for nonimmigrant
aliens who are Canadian citizens, citizens of Bermuda, and Mexican
nationals entering the United States at air and sea ports-of-entry from
any country, territory, or island adjacent thereto in North, South or
Central America.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ In addition to affecting U.S. citizens who currently leave
and enter the United States without a passport for travel within the
Western Hemisphere, section 7209 requires the elimination of the
exception to the U.S. passport requirement for U.S. citizen children
under the age of 12 included in the foreign parent's passport and
for U.S. citizens under age 21 who are members of the household of
an official or employee of a foreign government or the United
Nations and in possession of or included in a foreign passport. See
22 CFR 53.2 (e) and (f).
\19\ See 22 CFR 53.2(b).
\20\ See 8 CFR 212.1 and 22 CFR 41.2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As required by IRTPA, both DHS and DOS reviewed a variety of
options for implementing the WHTI requirements, and jointly decided to
phase-in the documentation requirement based upon risk management and
operational considerations. As the ANPRM discussed, this phased
approach is essential because a staggered implementation at air and sea
ports-of-entry one year before the statutory deadline will enhance
security requirements using existing infrastructure while allowing the
Departments time to acquire and develop resources to meet the increased
demand for the largest sector, the land border crossings.
Requiring travelers to carry and produce passports for the air and
sea environments has multiple security and operational benefits. WHTI
will reduce the vulnerabilities identified in the final report of the
National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States (9/11
Commission). WHTI is intended not only to enhance security efforts at
our Nation's borders, but also to expedite the movement of legitimate
travel within the Western Hemisphere.
As the report of the 9/11 Commission observed, travel documents are
as valuable as weapons to terrorists, and the passport is regarded as
the most secure travel identity document in the world. After a review
of current international travel documents and the available
alternatives, DHS and DOS believe that the passport is the most
reliable travel document to optimize safety and efficiency in the air
and sea environments.
Standardizing documentation requirements for all air and sea
travelers entering the United States will enhance our national security
and secure and streamline the entry process into the United States. A
passport requirement for the majority of travelers would allow border
security officials to quickly, efficiently, accurately, and reliably
review documentation, identify persons of concern to national security,
and determine eligibility for entry of legitimate travelers without
disrupting the critically important movement of people and goods across
our air and sea borders. Implementing standardized travel documents
(i.e., passports) for citizens of the United States, Canada, Bermuda,
and Mexico entering the United States at air and sea ports-of-entry
would also reduce confusion for the airline industry and make the entry
process more efficient for CBP officers and the public alike since the
majority of travelers traveling internationally to or from an airport
or seaport would require the passport as a travel document, regardless
of destination.
The 9/11 Commission noted that the current exemptions to the
passport requirement are a weak link in our layered approach to
security that can no longer be ignored. Cognizant of this concern and
the realities of the modern world, DHS and DOS agree that any
acceptable alternative documents must establish the identity and
citizenship of the bearer in a way that can be electronically verified
and must include significant security features.
Passports incorporate a host of security features not normally
found or available on other documents such as birth certificates and
driver's licenses. Security features include, but are not limited to,
rigorous adjudication standards and document security features. The
adjudication standards establish the individual's citizenship and
identity and ensure that the individual meets the qualifications for a
United States passport. The document authentication features include
digitized photographs, embossed seals, watermarks, ultraviolet and
fluorescent light verification features, security laminations, micro-
printing, and holograms. A United States passport is a document that is
adjudicated by trained DOS experts and issued to persons who have
documented their United States identity and citizenship by birth,
naturalization or derivation. Applications are subject to additional
Federal government checks to ensure the applicants are eligible to
receive a U.S. passport under applicable standards (for example, those
subject to outstanding federal warrants for arrest are not eligible for
a U.S. passport). Finally, CBP Officers can verify and authenticate a
U.S. passport through connectivity with the DOS passport database,
allowing a real-time check on the validity of the passport. The primary
purpose of the passport has always been to establish citizenship and
identity. It has been used to facilitate travel to foreign countries by
displaying any appropriate visas or entry/exit stamps. Passports are
globally interoperable, consistent with worldwide standards, and usable
regardless of the international destination of the traveler.
Requiring passports for most air and sea travel would allow CBP
officers to more efficiently process these travelers because there is a
standard document to review which contains features that allow for
quick reading of the relevant information. Reducing the number of
acceptable travel documents would eliminate the need to examine a host
of distinct and sometimes illegible, birth certificates and other
documents--over 8,000 types may be presented today. By requiring most
air and sea passengers to possess a passport, CBP officers would reduce
the time and effort used to manually enter passenger information into
the computer system on arrival because the officer can quickly scan the
machine-readable zone of the passport to process the information using
standard passport readers used for all machine readable passports
worldwide. It is difficult to precisely determine the improved
efficiencies resulting from limiting the acceptable documents at air
and sea environments. Based on information from CBP field operations,
CBP estimates that presenting secure and machine-readable documentation
may typically save CBP officers from 5 to 30 seconds per air and sea
passenger processed. This could result in an annual cost savings of
$2.5 million to $15.0 million.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ This is based on the estimated time savings (5 to 30
seconds) multiplied by the number of new passengers with a passport
(5,905,462; from Chapter 2 of the Regulatory Assessment) multiplied
by the hourly cost of a CBP officer. The annual base salary for a
GS-11/1 (in 2005) is $45,239. This is multiplied by a load factor of
1.4 to account for fringe benefits and locality pay, for an annual
salary of $63,335. This is divided by 2,080 hours to reach an hourly
rate of $30.45.
(5,905,462 travelers)(5 seconds)($30.45/hour) = $2,497,463
(5,905,462 travelers)(30 seconds)($30.45/hour) = $14,984,778.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 46161]]
Protecting the national security is a fundamental mission of DHS.
Initiating the first phase for all air and most sea travelers by
January 8, 2007, will remedy significant vulnerabilities identified by
the 9/11 Commission associated with the millions of travelers who enter
the United States through air and sea ports-of-entry. This improvement
will utilize the existing operational capabilities of both Departments
without unduly burdening the traveling public. Phasing in the air and
sea travel prior to land border crossings will provide near term border
security benefits with regard to a significant number of arriving
passengers without significant investment in new port-of-entry
infrastructure. DHS estimates that CBP will be able to facilitate the
processing of arriving passengers more efficiently when all arriving
air and sea passengers carry and produce passports, MMD, or NEXUS Air
card, instead of the broad range of documents now presented by arriving
United States citizens and citizens of Canada, Bermuda, and Mexico.
CBP estimates that approximately 21 million United States citizens
travel to Canada, Mexico, and the Caribbean annually, and that
approximately six million of those air and sea travelers do not possess
a passport (see section IV below, regarding the Regulatory Analyses).
Airports and seaports currently have the personnel and equipment to
inspect incoming passengers who carry passports, so the major
operational requirement of the final rule resulting from this NPRM is
for DOS to expand passport production capacity to meet passport demand.
DOS is already expanding passport production capacity to meet the
additional demand for passports and will be able to meet a significant
increase in demand from the more than 10 million passports produced in
fiscal year 2005. DOS reports an estimated 25 percent increase in
passport applications so far in fiscal year 2006. DOS has increased
passport production capacity with an aim towards processing 16 million
passports in fiscal year 2007 and 19 million passports in fiscal year
2008.
B. Exceptions to the Passport Proposal
DHS and DOS do not propose any change in the requirements for
travel by pleasure vessel and ferry at this time. The Departments also
propose to postpone any change in the requirements for United States
citizen members of the United States Armed Forces also discussed below.
1. Passengers Arriving by Pleasure Vessel
For purposes of this proposed rule, a pleasure vessel will be
defined as a vessel that is used exclusively for recreational or
personal purposes and not to transport passengers or property for hire.
A day sailer or bareboat charter that is rented without a captain or
crew and is used for recreational or personal purposes would be
considered a pleasure vessel. This rule would not propose changes to
the documentation requirements for United States citizens and
nonimmigrant aliens from Canada, Bermuda, and Mexico who are aboard
pleasure vessels arriving in the United States from a foreign port or
place from within the Western Hemisphere.
Pleasure vessel arrivals are treated similarly to land border
crossings rather than like commercial vessel arrivals. These pleasure
vessel passengers, who are frequent, short duration travelers, are
similar to land border crossers and will be addressed in the WHTI
second phase rulemaking. This will allow for more consistent processing
of these travelers and the use of land border based inspection systems
including registered/trusted traveler programs. Many of the pleasure
vessel crossings are similar to bridge crossings because they are
crossings of a short expanse of river or other waterway and are
relatively short in duration.
2. Passengers Arriving by Ferry
For purposes of this proposed rule, a ferry is defined as any
vessel: (1) Operating on a pre-determined fixed schedule; (2) providing
transportation only between places that are no more than 300 miles
apart; and (3) transporting passengers, vehicles, and/or railroad cars.
Since ferries will be subject to land border type entry processing on
arrival from or departure to a foreign port or place, DHS and DOS
propose that ferries be exempt from the new requirements of this
rulemaking. Ferries will be addressed in the second phase rulemaking.
Thus, current documentation requirements for ferry passengers will not
change at this time.
3. Members of the United States Armed Forces
When this rule is promulgated, all active duty members of the
United States Armed Forces regardless of citizenship will be exempt
from the requirement to present a valid passport when entering the
United States. Currently, under 22 CFR 53.2(d), citizens of the United
States are not required to possess a valid passport to enter or depart
the United States when traveling as a member of the Armed Forces of the
United States on active duty.\22\ Under this proposed rule, travel
document requirements for United States citizens who are members of the
United States Armed Forces would not change from the current
requirements. Future changes, if any, to the current documentation
requirements will be addressed during the second phase of the WHTI
rulemaking process.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\22\ For a discussion regarding the documentation requirements
for alien members of the United States Armed Forces, see section
III.D.6. of this document.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Spouses and dependents of these military members would be required
to present a passport or other document or combination of documents
sufficient to denote identity and citizenship as discussed below, and a
valid visa, if required, when entering the United States at air or sea
ports-of-entry.
C. Other Documents Deemed Acceptable To Denote Citizenship and Identity
This NPRM also proposes to designate two documents, in addition to
the passport, as sufficient to denote identity and citizenship under
section 7209, and acceptable for air and sea travel. IRTPA gives the
Secretary of Homeland Security the authority to determine what
documents other than the passport are sufficient to denote identity and
citizenship for all travel into the United States by United States
citizens and citizens of Canada, Mexico, and Bermuda.\23\ Accordingly,
the Merchant Mariner Document (MMD) when used in conjunction with
maritime business, and the NEXUS Air card when used at a designated
kiosk, are proposed as acceptable for air and sea travel into the
United States from within the Western Hemisphere.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\23\ Section 7209(b)(1) of IRTPA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Merchant Mariner Document
Currently, an MMD or ``z-card'' is accepted for United States
citizen crewmembers in lieu of a passport.\24\ To obtain an MMD, United
States citizen Merchant Mariners must provide proof of their
citizenship, must provide proof of their identity and must undergo an
application process that includes a fingerprint background check
submitted to the Federal Bureau of Investigation, a National Driver
Register check, and a drug test from an authorized official that
administers a drug testing program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\24\ See 22 CFR 53.2(c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Secretary of Homeland Security proposes that an MMD when used
in
[[Page 46162]]
conjunction with maritime business would be sufficient to denote
identity and citizenship when presented upon arrival at an air or sea
port-of-entry. Accordingly, under this proposed rule, United States
citizens who possess an MMD would continue to be exempt from the
requirement to present a passport when arriving in the United States at
air or sea ports-of-entry. However, the Coast Guard has proposed to
phase-out the MMD over the next five years and streamline all existing
Merchant Mariner credentials.\25\ DHS proposes to accept the MMD as
long as it is an unexpired document. We also note that United States
citizen Merchant Marines serving on U.S. flag vessels are eligible for
no fee U.S. passports upon presentation of a letter from the employer
and an MMD, in addition to the standard evidence of citizenship and
identity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\25\ 71 FR 29462 (May 22, 2006).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. NEXUS Air Program Membership Card
NEXUS Air is an airport border clearance pilot project implemented
by CBP and the Canada Border Services Agency, pursuant to the Shared
Border Accord and Smart Border Declaration between the United States
and Canada. The NEXUS Air program is an alternative inspection program
designed to facilitate the entry formalities by registered users which
allows pre-screened, low-risk travelers to be processed more
efficiently by United States and Canadian border officials.
Enrollment in the program is limited to citizens of the United
States and Canada, Lawful Permanent Residents (LPRs) of the United
States, and permanent residents of Canada. To enroll in the NEXUS Air
program, a participant must provide acceptable proof of citizenship or
permanent resident status in Canada or the United States. United States
citizens must provide an original birth certificate, along with a
government-issued photo identification, a valid passport, or a
certificate of naturalization. Canadian citizens must provide an
original birth certificate, along with a government-issued photo
identification, a valid passport, citizenship certificate with photo
identification, or a citizenship card.
LPRs of the United States must provide evidence of citizenship and
of permanent resident status to enroll in NEXUS Air. Because the scope
of section 7209 of IRTPA does not include LPRs, membership in Nexus Air
does not change their document requirements. Therefore, LPRs of the
United States, whether or not participating in the NEXUS Air program,
will continue to be required to present a valid Form I-551, Alien
Registration Card, or other valid evidence of permanent resident status
to enter the United States. Canadian permanent residents must provide
an original birth certificate, along with a government-issued photo
identification, a valid passport (and visa if applicable), and proof of
permanent resident status when applying for NEXUS Air enrollment.
An extensive background check against law enforcement databases and
terrorist indices, including fingerprint checks, as well as a personal
interview with a CBP officer is required of each applicant. Each NEXUS
Air membership card has physical security features including digital
photographs of the participant's face. When a participant uses a NEXUS
Air kiosk, he or she is prompted to look into a camera, which then
biometrically verifies membership in NEXUS Air by taking a picture of
the participant's iris and matching it to the image stored in the
database.
The Secretary of Homeland Security proposes that a NEXUS Air
membership card would be a document sufficient to denote identity and
citizenship for United States citizens, Canadian citizens, and
permanent residents of Canada when arriving in the United States as a
NEXUS Air program participant and when using a NEXUS Air kiosk at
designated airports.
LPRs of the United States, whether or not participating in the
NEXUS Air program, will continue to be required to present a valid Form
I-551, Alien Registration Card, or other valid evidence of permanent
resident status to enter the United States.
D. Impact of This Rulemaking on Specific Groups and Populations
1. Charter and Commercial Vessels
Under this proposed rule, a commercial vessel will be defined as
any civilian vessel being used to transport persons or property for
compensation or hire to or from any port or place including all cruise
ships. A charter vessel, that is leased or contracted to transport
persons or property for compensation or hire to or from any port or
place, would be considered a commercial vessel. In contrast, a day
sailer or bareboat charter that is rented without a captain or crew and
is used for recreational or personal purposes would be considered a
pleasure vessel as described above in section III.B.1. Under this
proposed rule, commercial vessels will be treated as arrivals at sea
ports-of-entry under this proposed rule. Passengers and crew aboard
commercial vessels will need to possess a valid passport when arriving
in the United States from a foreign port or place.
Under applicable immigration law, sailing from a United States port
into international waters, without a call at a foreign port, and
returning to the United States, does not constitute a ``departure''
from the United States and, consequently, is not an ``entry'' into the
United States that requires a passport under section 215(b) of the
INA.\26\ Therefore, passports will not be required for persons
(including commercial fishermen) onboard a vessel that sails from a
United States port and returns without calling at a foreign port or
place as the vessel is not considered to have departed the United
States. Therefore, commercial fishermen would not be required to
possess a passport unless they call at a foreign port or place.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\26\ 8 U.S.C. 1185(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Aviation Passengers and Crew
Under this proposed rule, all aviation passengers and crew,
including commercial flights and general aviation flights (i.e.,
private planes), who arrive at air ports-of-entry in the United States
from countries within the Western Hemisphere will be required to
possess a valid passport beginning January 8, 2007. The only exceptions
to this requirement would be for United States citizens who are members
of the United States Armed Forces traveling on active duty and
travelers who possess either an MMD or NEXUS Air card, as described
above.
3. Lawful Permanent Residents
Section 7209 of IRTPA applies to documentation requirements waived
under section 212(d)(4)(B) of the INA27,\27\ which applies to
nonimmigrant aliens, and section 215(b) of the INA,\28\ which applies
to United States citizens. LPRs are exempt from the requirement to
present a passport when arriving in the United States under Section 211
of the INA \29\--section 7209 does not apply to LPRs. LPRs will
continue to be able to enter the United States upon presentation of a
valid Form I-551, Alien Registration Card, or other valid evidence of
permanent resident status.\30\ Form I-551 is a secure, fully
adjudicated document that can be verified and authenticated
[[Page 46163]]
by CBP at ports-of-entry. DHS published a notice of proposed rulemaking
in the Federal Register on July 27, 2006, that proposes to collect and
verify the identity of LPRs arriving at air and sea ports-of-entry, or
requiring secondary inspection at land ports of entry, through US-
VISIT.\31\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\27\ 8 U.S.C. 1182(d)(4)(B).
\28\ 8 U.S.C. 1185(b).
\29\ 8 U.S.C. 1181.
\30\ See section 211(b) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1181(b).
\31\ See 71 FR 42605.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
4. Mexican Citizens
Currently, Mexican citizens traveling to the United States for
business or pleasure who are in possession of a BCC may be admitted,
subject to certain limitations,\32\ without presenting a valid passport
when coming from a contiguous territory.\33\ IRTPA, however, does not
exempt Mexican citizens who possess a BCC from providing a passport or
other document designated by DHS upon arrival in the United States. By
this rulemaking, Mexican citizens, whether in possession of a BCC or
not, would be required to present a valid passport when entering the
United States by air or commercial sea vessel, except by ferry or
pleasure vessel.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\32\ See 8 CFR 235.1(f).
\33\ 8 CFR 212.1(c)(1)(i). Also, Mexican citizens who enter the
United States from Mexico solely to apply for a Mexican passport or
other ``official Mexican document'' at a Mexican consulate in the
United States have not been required to present a valid passport.
This type of entry generally occurs at land borders. Land border
entry for this purpose will be addressed in a separate, future
rulemaking regarding documentation requirements at land border
ports-of-entry. See 8 CFR 212.1(c)(1)(ii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This requirement for Mexican BCC holders is consistent with the
requirements that are imposed on both other aliens and United States
citizens.
5. Children Under the Age of 16
The United States government currently requires children under the
age of 16 arriving from countries outside the Western Hemisphere to
provide a passport when entering the United States. IRTPA does not
contain an exemption from providing a passport or other document
designated by DHS for children under the age of 16 when entering the
United States from Western Hemisphere countries. Consequently, as there
is no other statutory exemption, children under the age of 16 arriving
from Western Hemisphere countries would be required to present a
passport when entering the United States by air or commercial sea
vessel, except by ferry or pleasure vessel.
6. Alien Members of the United States Armed Forces
Pursuant to section 284 of the INA ,\34\ alien members of the
United States Armed Forces entering under official orders presenting
military identification are not required to present a passport and
visa.\35\ Because this statutory exemption does not fall within the
scope of section 7209 of IRTPA, under this proposed rule alien members
of the United States Armed Forces traveling on orders would continue to
be exempt from the requirement to present a passport when arriving in
the United States at air or sea ports-of-entry. Accordingly, under this
NPRM, these individuals would continue to be required to present a
military identification card and official orders. However, spouses and
dependents of military members are not covered by the exemption set
forth in section 284 of the INA.\36\ Under the proposed regulation they
would continue to be required to present a passport (and visa if
required) when entering the United States at air or sea ports-of-entry
even when returning from travel in the Western Hemisphere.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\34\ 8 U.S.C. 1354.
\35\ See also 8 CFR 235.1(c).
\36\ 8 U.S.C. 1354.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
7. Members of NATO Armed Forces
Pursuant to Article III of the Agreement Between the Parties to the
North Atlantic Treaty Regarding the Status of Their Forces, June 19,
1951,\37\ North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) military personnel
on official duty are normally exempt from passport and visa regulations
and immigration inspection on entering and leaving the territory of a
NATO party, but if asked must present a personal I.D. card issued by
their NATO party of nationality and official orders from an appropriate
agency of that country or from NATO.\38\ Because their exemption from
the passport requirement is based on the NATO Status of Forces
Agreement rather than a waiver under section 212(d)(4)(B) of the INA
,\39\ they are not subject to section 7209 of IRTPA. Therefore,
notwithstanding this proposed rule, NATO military personnel would not
be subject to the requirement to present a passport when arriving in
the United States at air or sea ports-of-entry.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\37\ Agreement Between the Parties to the North Atlantic Treaty
Regarding the Status of Their Forces, June 19, 1951, [1953, pt.2] 4
U.S.T. 1792, T.I.A.S. No. 2846 (effective Aug. 23, 1953). NATO
member countries are: Belgium, Bulgaria, Canada, the Czech Republic,
Denmark, Estonia, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Italy,
Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Poland,
Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Turkey, the United
Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, and the United
States.
\38\ See also 8 CFR 235.1(c).
\39\ 8 U.S.C. 1182(d)(4)(B).
-----------