Review of Unused Presidential Permit: Port of Brownsville (Texas) International Bridges, 65197-65200 [E9-29342]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 235 / Wednesday, December 9, 2009 / Notices
of the filing of such proposed rule
change, the Commission may summarily
abrogate such rule change if it appears
to the Commission that such action is
necessary or appropriate in the public
interest, for the protection of investors,
or otherwise in furtherance of the
purposes of the Act.
IV. Solicitation of Comments
Interested persons are invited to
submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the foregoing,
including whether the proposed rule
change is consistent with the Act.
Comments may be submitted by any of
the following methods:
WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with NOTICES
Electronic Comments
• Use the Commission’s Internet
comment form (https://www.sec.gov/
rules/sro.shtml); or
• Send an e-mail to rulecomments@sec.gov. Please include File
Number SR–ISE–2009–99 on the subject
line.
Number SR–ISE–2009–99 and should be
submitted on or before December 30,
2009.
DEPARTMENT OF STATE
For the Commission, by the Division of
Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated
authority.11
Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9–29241 Filed 12–8–09; 8:45 am]
Review of Unused Presidential Permit:
Port of Brownsville (Texas)
International Bridges
BILLING CODE 8011–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF STATE
[Delegation of Authority No. 328 ]
Re-Delegation From the Deputy
Secretary of State for Management and
Resources of the Authorities of the
Inspector General and the Assistant
Secretary for International Security
and Nonproliferation
By virtue of the authority vested in
the Secretary of State by the laws of the
United States, including 22 U.S.C.
Paper Comments
2651a, and delegated to me by
• Send paper comments in triplicate
Delegation of Authority 245–1, dated
to Elizabeth M. Murphy, Secretary,
February 13, 2009, I hereby delegate to
Securities and Exchange Commission,
the following officials, to the extent
100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC
authorized by law, all authorities vested
20549–1090.
in the specified positions, including all
All submissions should refer to File
authorities vested in the Secretary of
Number SR–ISE–2009–99. This file
State that may have been or may be
number should be included on the
delegated or re-delegated to those
subject line if e-mail is used. To help the positions:
Commission process and review your
• To Principal Deputy Assistant
comments more efficiently, please use
Secretary Vann Van Diepen, the
only one method. The Commission will authorities of the Assistant Secretary for
post all comments on the Commission’s International Security and
Internet Web site (https://www.sec.gov/
Nonproliferation.
rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the
• To Deputy Inspector General Harold
submission, all subsequent
W. Geisel, the authorities of the
amendments, all written statements
Inspector General.
with respect to the proposed rule
Any authorities covered by this
change that are filed with the
delegation may also be exercised by the
Commission, and all written
Secretary, the Deputy Secretary, and the
communications relating to the
Deputy Secretary for Management and
proposed rule change between the
Resources. Nothing in this delegation of
Commission and any person, other than authority shall be deemed to supersede
those that may be withheld from the
any existing delegation of authority,
public in accordance with the
which shall remain in full force and
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be
effect.
available for inspection and copying in
This delegation shall expire upon the
the Commission’s Public Reference
appointment and entry upon duty in
Room, 100 F Street, NE., Washington,
each specific case of an individual to
DC 20549, on official business days
serve in the respective position.
between the hours of 10 a.m. and 3 p.m.
This memorandum shall be published
Copies of the filing also will be available in the Federal Register.
for inspection and copying at the
Dated: November 24, 2009.
principal office of the ISE. All
Jacob J. Lew,
comments received will be posted
Deputy Secretary of State for Management
without change; the Commission does
and Resources, Department of State.
not edit personal identifying
[FR Doc. E9–29340 Filed 12–8–09; 8:45 am]
information from submissions. You
BILLING CODE 4710–10–P
should submit only information that
you wish to make available publicly. All
11 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12).
submissions should refer to File
VerDate Nov<24>2008
15:02 Dec 08, 2009
Jkt 220001
65197
PO 00000
Frm 00110
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
[Public Notice 6834]
SUMMARY: More than 12 years ago, the
Department of State issued to the
Brownsville Navigation District, a
Presidential permit for two new
international bridges, one for vehicular
traffic and one for railroad traffic,
between Brownsville, Texas, and
Matamoros, Tamaulipas, Mexico. To
date, the permit remains unused. The
Department and other federal agencies
are currently evaluating whether to
revoke, modify, or retain as written this
long-unused permit given the change of
circumstances in the project area,
development of nearby projects,
inaction by the permittee, and apparent
lack of interest in pursuing the
corresponding projects in Mexico. The
review is not a judgment regarding
either the need for a new bridge or the
merits of the Brownsville Navigation
District’s plan, but rather represents a
recognition that the project for which
this permit was issued has gone
unimplemented longer than similar
projects and, due to the passage of time,
may no longer be viable. The
Brownsville Navigation District
provided a project status update, which
is included in the Supplementary
Information section below.
DATES: Interested members of the public
are invited to submit written comments
regarding this permit review on or
before February 8, 2010 to Mr. Stewart
Tuttle, U.S.-Mexico Border Affairs
Coordinator, via e-mail at WHA–
BorderAffairs@state.gov, or by mail at
WHA/MEX—Room 3909, Department of
State, 2201 C St., NW., Washington, DC
20520.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.
Stewart Tuttle, U.S.-Mexico Border
Affairs Coordinator, via e-mail at WHA–
BorderAffairs@state.gov; by phone at
202–647–9894; or by mail at Office of
Mexican Affairs—Room 3909,
Department of State, 2201 C St., NW,
Washington, DC 20520. Information
about Presidential permits is available at
https://www.state.gov/p/wha/rt/permit/.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Executive
Order 11423 of August 16, 1968, as
amended, authorizes the Secretary of
State to issue Presidential permits for
the construction, connection, operation,
and maintenance of facilities crossing
the international borders of the United
States, including, but not limited to,
bridges and pipelines connecting the
United States with Canada or Mexico. In
E:\FR\FM\09DEN1.SGM
09DEN1
WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with NOTICES
65198
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 235 / Wednesday, December 9, 2009 / Notices
order to issue a Presidential permit, the
Secretary or her delegate must find that
a border crossing is in the U.S. national
interest. Within the context of
appropriate border security, safety,
health, and environmental
requirements, it is in the U.S. national
interest to facilitate the efficient
movement of legitimate goods and
travelers across U.S. borders.
Since 1968, the Department has
issued 21 Presidential permits for nonpipeline border crossings on the U.S.Mexico border and one for the U.S.Canada border. Of the 21 U.S.-Mexican
border projects that have received
permits, most began construction within
two to five years. The Presidential
permit process, which emphasizes
interagency and binational
coordination, is designed to ensure that
border crossings are built if, and only if,
there is clear local, binational, and
interagency support for the project and
construction is in the U.S. national
interest. It is not in the U.S. national
interest to commit scarce government
resources (e.g., Customs and Border
Protection inspectors, highway
improvement funds, etc.) as well as
private resources (e.g., land, capital,
etc.) for border crossing projects that
cannot be successfully implemented
within a reasonable time period. While
the Department may find a project to be
in the U.S. national interest under a
certain set of circumstances, those
circumstances may change over time so
that, five or ten years later, the
Department may conclude that the
project is no longer in the national
interest or the relevant agencies may
reconsider their recommendations on
the Department’s initial grant of the
permit. The border region is dynamic
and fast-changing and it is important
that an outdated permit not be used to
build a border crossing on a site that is
no longer appropriate due to the passage
of time (e.g., due to changes in
transportation patterns, development
patterns, etc.). At the same time, the
Department recognizes that, by their
nature, border crossing projects are
complex, time consuming, and subject
to political, financial, regulatory, and
logistical setbacks.
In this review, the Department of
State seeks public input on whether to
revoke, modify, or retain as written the
Presidential permit that it issued in
1997 to the Brownsville Navigation
District for an international rail and
vehicular bridge. Interested members of
the public are invited to submit written
comments, as set forth above.
The following is the text of a
statement that the Brownsville
Navigation District submitted on
VerDate Nov<24>2008
15:02 Dec 08, 2009
Jkt 220001
September 1, 2009, to the Department,
providing its initial input to this review
process.
Begin text.
The Brownsville Navigation District
submits to the United States Department
of State this statement in support of the
Port of Brownsville International
Bridges project in response to the
August 7, 2009, request by U.S.-Mexico
Border Affairs Coordinator Daniel D.
Darrach. The Brownsville Navigation
District welcomes this opportunity to
reaffirm its commitment to the
construction and operation of these
international bridges. This statement
will review the reasons that initially led
the Brownsville Navigation District to
seek a Presidential permit for the project
and it will explain why the need for the
bridges remains unchanged. It will
recount the steps that the Brownsville
Navigation District has taken and will
take to implement this project, which is
vital to the region.
Background
The Brownsville Navigation District is
a political subdivision of the State of
Texas. It is guided by a Board of
Commissioners whose members are
elected by the local citizenry. The
Brownsville Navigation District governs
the Port of Brownsville.
The Port of Brownsville has been in
operation since 1936. The Port is
located at the western terminus of the
Brownsville Ship Channel, a 1,200-footwide waterway that extends 17 miles to
the Gulf of Mexico [map omitted]. The
Port is both a deep-water seaport,
serving world-wide shipping and also
the western terminus of the U.S. Inland
Waterway System. The Port owns more
than 40,000 acres of property, with
infrastructure already in place on 5,000
acres. It owns and operates ten transit
warehouses totaling more than 720,000
square feet of storage space. In addition,
there are 80 acres of surfaced open
storage available. The Port has 12 cargo
docks, four oil docks and one liquid
dock. For 25 years, it has operated the
Brownsville & Rio Grande International
Railroad, with 48 miles of track. In
addition, the Port operates a Free Trade
Zone (FTZ #62) that encompasses 2,000
acres of Port property and also has sites
at local airports and industrial parks.
The Port of Brownsville provides
excellent rail, truck and maritime
infrastructure to facilitate the
intermodal movement of goods between
Mexico and the United States. It is the
principal economic engine of the region.
It is utilized by more than 270
companies with more than 8,000
employees, making it the region’s
leading employer. In 2008, it handled
PO 00000
Frm 00111
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
more than 1,100 vessels carrying 6.3
million metric tons of cargo. On land, it
handled more than 30,000 rail cars,
29,000 overweight trucks and 200,000
other trucks. Its overall economic value
was estimated at $2.8 billion, and it
generated $130 million in federal taxes
and $44 million in state and local taxes.
Its importance in an economically
distressed area (the second poorest
county in the United States) cannot be
overstated.
A large percentage of the products
passing through the Port of Brownsville
either originate in or are destined for
Mexico. For example, one of the main
commodities is steel that arrives by ship
and is then transported across the
border to Mexico’s industrial heart in
Monterrey, Nuevo Leon. In effect, the
Port of Brownsville serves as the deep
water port for both southern Texas and
northeast Mexico; it helps integrate the
binational regional economy as far
inland as San Antonio and Monterrey,
and even beyond.
The Brownsville Navigation District
has long believed that the future growth
of the Port of Brownsville—and the
economic development of the region
overall—could be enhanced
significantly by creating direct truck and
rail connections with Mexico. At the
time of the submission of the
application for a Presidential permit in
1991, there were serious issues that
constrained both modes of
transportation.
• Trucks traveling between the Port
and the border crossing to Mexico at the
Gateway Bridge were obligated to
traverse congested urban sectors of
Brownsville. Large numbers of loaded
trucks were routinely moving through
sensitive areas such as school zones,
creating worrisome safety issues. Weight
freight payload compliance with
transportation regulations made the
shipment of some products
uneconomical. The border crossing and
federal inspection facilities at the bridge
were also heavily congested.
• Rail traffic between the Port and the
railroad crossing at the B&M Bridge was
compelled to use a 6-mile stretch of
track owned by the Union Pacific
Railroad Company. This left all traffic
subject to whatever rates UP charged for
the use of the line and whatever
additional fees it charged for actually
crossing the bridge. Port rail traffic also
had an issue with access to the UP line;
rails cars had to wait until UP worked
them into the flow of its traffic to and
from other destinations. The UP’s
disparate rates and fees and the
uncertainty of access negatively affected
the competitiveness of the Port.
E:\FR\FM\09DEN1.SGM
09DEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 235 / Wednesday, December 9, 2009 / Notices
WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with NOTICES
The solution to these problems was to
construct new commercial and rail
bridges that would link the Port directly
with the Mexican market.
Current Situation
Mr. Darrach noted in his letter that
the Department’s current evaluation
process considered ‘‘the change in
circumstances in each of the project
areas, including the development of
nearby projects, inaction on the
proposed projects, and lack of interest
in pursuing the corresponding projects
in Mexico.’’ The Brownsville Navigation
District would like to respond to each of
these points.
In the 12 years since the Department
issued the Presidential permit for the
Port of Brownsville International
Bridges, circumstances in the project
area have changed considerably;
HOWEVER, NONE OF THESE
CHANGES DETRACT FROM THE
ORIGINAL RATIONALE FOR
BUILDING THE BRIDGES.
• For trucks, the principal
development has been the opening of
the Veterans International Bridge at Los
Tomates. This provided a muchimproved crossing with modern new
facilities for the federal inspection
agencies. Nevertheless, trucks traveling
between the Port and Los Tomates are
still obliged to traverse congested urban
sectors of Brownsville. A significant
number of these trucks are overweight,
carrying products such as steel coils. If
anything, the growth that has occurred
in these areas makes them even more
congested than they were when the
permit was issued, raising the safety
concerns still further. The local
community is developing plans for an
‘‘East Loop’’ that would circle to the
south and east of much of the urban
area. If constructed, this would provide
some temporary relief to the congestion
and would improve safety. Any relief
would be short-lived, however, as the
urban area is already spreading in this
direction, and in a decade or two, the
congestion problem would arise again.
The only long-term solution for trucks is
a dedicated route from the Port directly
south into Mexico that would totally
remove Port truck traffic from heavily
traveled and populated areas. It is worth
noting that the Los Tomates Bridge was
opened just a decade ago, and it already
is in need of a second span to
accommodate the much-faster-thananticipated growth in commercial
traffic. The Port truck bridge is a logical
solution to a situation that is likely to
occur in the foreseeable future when the
traffic demand may exceed even the
capacity of the new span at Los
Tomates. It is worth noting that in
VerDate Nov<24>2008
15:02 Dec 08, 2009
Jkt 220001
addition to alleviating roadway
congestion and improving
transportation safety and security, the
truck bridge would also substantially
lower emissions and reduce highway
infrastructure repair costs.
• The West Rail Project has been the
principal development for rail traffic.
This project will be beneficial to the
Brownsville community because it will
relocate the UP line out of the
downtown area to where it will connect
to a new bridge to the west of the city.
However, the West Rail Project will
yield little benefit to Port rail traffic.
Rail cars to and from the Port still will
be subject to whatever disparate rates
and noncompetitive fees UP may
establish. They will also continue to
face uncertain access to the UP line.
Again, the solution remains a new
dedicated rail bridge owned by the
public linking the Port directly with
Mexico.
Clearly the justification for the Port
bridges remains as strong and valid as
it was when the permit was issued in
1997.
The Port bridges will not negatively
affect other nearby projects. They
obviously are not an obstacle either to
the expansion of the Los Tomates Bridge
or to the building of the West Rail
Project, as is demonstrated by the fact
that both projects are moving forward
quickly and will soon be under
construction. Since the Port bridges will
handle only commercial traffic, they
will not hinder any new noncommercial crossing project that the
local community might propose in the
future. Finally, the geography of the area
does not lend itself to any new border
crossing projects being developed to the
east of the Port bridges.
Since receiving the Presidential
permit in 1997, the Brownsville
Navigation District has taken numerous
steps to advance the project. The
District has expended $4 million for
engineering documents for the roadway
and railway. It has also performed
annual updates for the extensive
environmental work originally
performed for the project. Because of the
political sensitivities surrounding the
project, much of the progress the
District has accomplished has been
evolutionary in the form of steady but
quiet, behind-the-scenes efforts to build
the necessary alliances on both sides of
the border.
The current Board of Commissioners
of the Brownsville Navigation District is
now redoubling its effort to advance the
Port bridges project, beginning with a
dialogue with officials from the City of
Brownsville and Cameron County,
including the Cameron County Mobility
PO 00000
Frm 00112
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
65199
Authority. [Exhibits omitted.] In these
conversations, the Board makes clear
that is prepared to be quite flexible in
the search for ways in which the project
can be beneficial for all involved. The
Board has also expanded its contacts
with officials from the State of Texas,
including particularly Gus de la Rosa of
TxDOT. These discussions include the
need to have the Port bridges
incorporated into the various State
planning processes, including the new
effort to develop a master plan for
border transportation that will be done
under the auspices of the U.S.-Mexico
Joint Working Committee.
The Board has reached out in a new
effort to engage Mexican officials, and
the initial response has been
encouraging. For example, the
Municipality of Matamoros sees
considerable merit in having a bridge to
the east of the city that could handle
commercial traffic, particularly
overweight trucks, operating between
the Port and Mexico. This would allow
the Los Tomates Bridge to handle an
increasing volume of traffic not
connected to the Port, such as trucks
servicing Mexican maquiladoras. The
Municipality is already constructing a
loop around the western side of
Matamoros, and it could include the
Port truck bridge in the future planning
of the eastern segment of the loop. The
Board also plans to work with the local
Consuls on both sides of the border to
have the Port bridges taken up by the
regional Border Liaison Mechanism.
The Board has renewed its longstanding
contacts with the State of Tamaulipas
and will further intensify that dialogue
when a new Administration takes office
there. The Board has initiated a new
round of contacts with the Mexican
Federal Government, and it
contemplates having representatives
travel to Mexico City in the fall. In all
these efforts, the Board is exploring
strategies that may broaden the benefits
for stakeholders in Mexico as well as the
United States. For example, it is
examining innovative ways to use
geography to create a ‘‘port alliance’’
with the emerging Mexican port at El
Mezquital, such as developing a ‘‘rail
canal’’ between the two ports.
Conclusion
The Brownsville Navigation District
remains strongly committed to the
implementation of the Port bridges
project. One quantifiable manifestation
of its commitment is the more than $20
million that it has invested to date and
the many tens of millions of dollars
more it is prepared to spend to construct
and operate the bridges. It seeks to work
with the local community and Mexico
E:\FR\FM\09DEN1.SGM
09DEN1
WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with NOTICES
65200
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 235 / Wednesday, December 9, 2009 / Notices
to define mutual interests, shape a
consensus and build the political will to
implement a new regional plan for
commerce and economic development
that includes the Port bridges.
The Brownsville Navigation District
calls upon the Department to refrain
from revoking or modifying the 1997
Presidential permit. It believes that such
action would not serve U.S. national
interests; to the contrary, this would be
harmful to U.S. interest.
A revocation would not benefit any
current or future border-crossing
project, as explained above. Nor would
such action benefit the United States
Government by relieving it of a
commitment to provide the financial
resources to build new federal facilities
at the bridges as the Port has committed
to constructing those facilities, and this
is stipulated in the permit. Put simply,
there is nothing to be gained by
revoking the permit.
Conversely, a revocation would result
in grave consequences. Its immediate
effect would be to erase the very sizable
investment that the Port, a public asset,
has made in the project over nearly 20
years. This action could well result in
killing the project, as securing the
resources to submit a new application
may well be problematic in the wake of
a revocation.
The Brownsville Navigation District
believes that if the Department sustains
the permit and allows the project to go
forward, the Port of Brownsville bridges
will facilitate the efficient movement of
legitimate goods across the U.S.-Mexico
border. The bridges promise to enhance
the economic competitiveness of our
nation by improving the connectivity of
the Port, increasing its rail-served
market access potential, lowering costs
and ensuring greater reliability. The
South Texas region will gain from
increased tax revenue, more reliable
freight service and improved highway
safety. The region will benefit from new,
higher value jobs, the diversion of heavy
trucks from the roadways and reduced
emissions and fuel usage. Shippers will
benefit from lower costs, improved
service reliability, reduced transport
times, and expanded access to rail
services. The Port will benefit from
increased throughput and an enhanced
competitive position that results from
additional transportation options. Given
all these benefits, the Brownsville
Navigation District is confident that the
project clearly will serve U.S. national
interests.
End Text.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
15:02 Dec 08, 2009
Jkt 220001
Dated: December 4, 2009.
Alex Lee,
Director, Office of Mexican Affairs,
Department of State.
[FR Doc. E9–29342 Filed 12–8–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710–29–P
DEPARTMENT OF STATE
[Public Notice 6833]
Review of Unused Presidential Permit:
Mission (Texas) International Bridge
SUMMARY: More than 30 years ago, the
Department of State issued to the City
of Mission, Texas, a Presidential permit
for an international rail and vehicular
bridge. To date, the permit remains
unused. The Department and other
federal agencies are currently evaluating
whether to revoke, modify, or retain as
written this long-unused permit given
the change of circumstances in the
project area, development of nearby
projects, inaction by the permittee, and
apparent lack of interest in pursuing the
corresponding projects in Mexico. The
review is not a judgment regarding
either the need for a new bridge or the
merits of Mission’s plan, but rather
represents a recognition that the project
for which this permit was issued has
gone unimplemented longer than
similar projects and, due to the passage
of time, may no longer be viable. The
City of Mission provided a project status
update, which is included in the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section
below.
DATES: Interested members of the public
are invited to submit written comments
regarding this permit review on or
before February 8, 2010 to Mr. Stewart
Tuttle, U.S.-Mexico Border Affairs
Coordinator, via e-mail at WHA–
BorderAffairs@state.gov, or by mail at
WHA/MEX—Room 3909, Department of
State, 2201 C St., NW., Washington, DC
20520.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.
Stewart Tuttle, U.S.-Mexico Border
Affairs Coordinator, via e-mail at WHA–
BorderAffairs@state.gov; by phone at
202–647–9894; or by mail at Office of
Mexican Affairs—Room 3909,
Department of State, 2201 C St., NW.,
Washington, DC 20520. Information
about Presidential permits is available at
https://www.state.gov/p/wha/rt/permit/.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Executive
Order 11423 of August 16, 1968, as
amended, authorizes the Secretary of
State to issue Presidential permits for
the construction, connection, operation,
and maintenance of facilities crossing
the international borders of the United
States, including, but not limited to,
PO 00000
Frm 00113
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
bridges and pipelines connecting the
United States with Canada or Mexico. In
order to issue a Presidential permit, the
Secretary or her delegate must find that
a border crossing is in the U.S. national
interest. Within the context of
appropriate border security, safety,
health, and environmental
requirements, it is in the U.S. national
interest to facilitate the efficient
movement of legitimate goods and
travelers across U.S. borders.
Since 1968, the Department has
issued 21 Presidential permits for nonpipeline border crossings on the U.S.Mexico border and one for the U.S.Canada border. Of the 21 U.S.-Mexican
border projects that have received
permits, most began construction within
two to five years. The Presidential
permit process, which emphasizes
interagency and binational
coordination, is designed to ensure that
border crossings are built if, and only if,
there is clear local, binational, and
interagency support for the project and
construction is in the U.S. national
interest. It is not in the U.S. national
interest to commit scarce government
resources (e.g., Customs and Border
Protection inspectors, highway
improvement funds, etc.) as well as
private resources (e.g., land, capital,
etc.) for border crossing projects that
cannot be successfully implemented
within a reasonable time period. While
the Department may find a project to be
in the U.S. national interest under a
certain set of circumstances, those
circumstances may change over time so
that, five or ten years later, the
Department may conclude that the
project is no longer in the national
interest or the relevant agencies may
reconsider their recommendations on
the Department’s initial grant of the
permit. The border region is dynamic
and fast-changing and it is important
that an outdated permit not be used to
build a border crossing on a site that is
no longer appropriate due to the passage
of time (e.g., due to changes in
transportation patterns, development
patterns, etc.). At the same time, the
Department recognizes that, by their
nature, border crossing projects are
complex, time consuming, and subject
to political, financial, regulatory, and
logistical setbacks.
In this review, the Department of
State seeks public input on whether to
revoke, modify, or retain as written the
Presidential permit that it issued in
1978 to the City of Mission, Texas, for
an international rail and vehicular
bridge. Interested members of the public
are invited to submit written comments,
as set forth above.
E:\FR\FM\09DEN1.SGM
09DEN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 235 (Wednesday, December 9, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 65197-65200]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-29342]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF STATE
[Public Notice 6834]
Review of Unused Presidential Permit: Port of Brownsville (Texas)
International Bridges
SUMMARY: More than 12 years ago, the Department of State issued to the
Brownsville Navigation District, a Presidential permit for two new
international bridges, one for vehicular traffic and one for railroad
traffic, between Brownsville, Texas, and Matamoros, Tamaulipas, Mexico.
To date, the permit remains unused. The Department and other federal
agencies are currently evaluating whether to revoke, modify, or retain
as written this long-unused permit given the change of circumstances in
the project area, development of nearby projects, inaction by the
permittee, and apparent lack of interest in pursuing the corresponding
projects in Mexico. The review is not a judgment regarding either the
need for a new bridge or the merits of the Brownsville Navigation
District's plan, but rather represents a recognition that the project
for which this permit was issued has gone unimplemented longer than
similar projects and, due to the passage of time, may no longer be
viable. The Brownsville Navigation District provided a project status
update, which is included in the Supplementary Information section
below.
DATES: Interested members of the public are invited to submit written
comments regarding this permit review on or before February 8, 2010 to
Mr. Stewart Tuttle, U.S.-Mexico Border Affairs Coordinator, via e-mail
at WHA-BorderAffairs@state.gov, or by mail at WHA/MEX--Room 3909,
Department of State, 2201 C St., NW., Washington, DC 20520.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Stewart Tuttle, U.S.-Mexico Border
Affairs Coordinator, via e-mail at WHA-BorderAffairs@state.gov; by
phone at 202-647-9894; or by mail at Office of Mexican Affairs--Room
3909, Department of State, 2201 C St., NW, Washington, DC 20520.
Information about Presidential permits is available at https://www.state.gov/p/wha/rt/permit/.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Executive Order 11423 of August 16, 1968, as
amended, authorizes the Secretary of State to issue Presidential
permits for the construction, connection, operation, and maintenance of
facilities crossing the international borders of the United States,
including, but not limited to, bridges and pipelines connecting the
United States with Canada or Mexico. In
[[Page 65198]]
order to issue a Presidential permit, the Secretary or her delegate
must find that a border crossing is in the U.S. national interest.
Within the context of appropriate border security, safety, health, and
environmental requirements, it is in the U.S. national interest to
facilitate the efficient movement of legitimate goods and travelers
across U.S. borders.
Since 1968, the Department has issued 21 Presidential permits for
non-pipeline border crossings on the U.S.-Mexico border and one for the
U.S.-Canada border. Of the 21 U.S.-Mexican border projects that have
received permits, most began construction within two to five years. The
Presidential permit process, which emphasizes interagency and
binational coordination, is designed to ensure that border crossings
are built if, and only if, there is clear local, binational, and
interagency support for the project and construction is in the U.S.
national interest. It is not in the U.S. national interest to commit
scarce government resources (e.g., Customs and Border Protection
inspectors, highway improvement funds, etc.) as well as private
resources (e.g., land, capital, etc.) for border crossing projects that
cannot be successfully implemented within a reasonable time period.
While the Department may find a project to be in the U.S. national
interest under a certain set of circumstances, those circumstances may
change over time so that, five or ten years later, the Department may
conclude that the project is no longer in the national interest or the
relevant agencies may reconsider their recommendations on the
Department's initial grant of the permit. The border region is dynamic
and fast-changing and it is important that an outdated permit not be
used to build a border crossing on a site that is no longer appropriate
due to the passage of time (e.g., due to changes in transportation
patterns, development patterns, etc.). At the same time, the Department
recognizes that, by their nature, border crossing projects are complex,
time consuming, and subject to political, financial, regulatory, and
logistical setbacks.
In this review, the Department of State seeks public input on
whether to revoke, modify, or retain as written the Presidential permit
that it issued in 1997 to the Brownsville Navigation District for an
international rail and vehicular bridge. Interested members of the
public are invited to submit written comments, as set forth above.
The following is the text of a statement that the Brownsville
Navigation District submitted on September 1, 2009, to the Department,
providing its initial input to this review process.
Begin text.
The Brownsville Navigation District submits to the United States
Department of State this statement in support of the Port of
Brownsville International Bridges project in response to the August 7,
2009, request by U.S.-Mexico Border Affairs Coordinator Daniel D.
Darrach. The Brownsville Navigation District welcomes this opportunity
to reaffirm its commitment to the construction and operation of these
international bridges. This statement will review the reasons that
initially led the Brownsville Navigation District to seek a
Presidential permit for the project and it will explain why the need
for the bridges remains unchanged. It will recount the steps that the
Brownsville Navigation District has taken and will take to implement
this project, which is vital to the region.
Background
The Brownsville Navigation District is a political subdivision of
the State of Texas. It is guided by a Board of Commissioners whose
members are elected by the local citizenry. The Brownsville Navigation
District governs the Port of Brownsville.
The Port of Brownsville has been in operation since 1936. The Port
is located at the western terminus of the Brownsville Ship Channel, a
1,200-foot-wide waterway that extends 17 miles to the Gulf of Mexico
[map omitted]. The Port is both a deep-water seaport, serving world-
wide shipping and also the western terminus of the U.S. Inland Waterway
System. The Port owns more than 40,000 acres of property, with
infrastructure already in place on 5,000 acres. It owns and operates
ten transit warehouses totaling more than 720,000 square feet of
storage space. In addition, there are 80 acres of surfaced open storage
available. The Port has 12 cargo docks, four oil docks and one liquid
dock. For 25 years, it has operated the Brownsville & Rio Grande
International Railroad, with 48 miles of track. In addition, the Port
operates a Free Trade Zone (FTZ 62) that encompasses 2,000
acres of Port property and also has sites at local airports and
industrial parks.
The Port of Brownsville provides excellent rail, truck and maritime
infrastructure to facilitate the intermodal movement of goods between
Mexico and the United States. It is the principal economic engine of
the region. It is utilized by more than 270 companies with more than
8,000 employees, making it the region's leading employer. In 2008, it
handled more than 1,100 vessels carrying 6.3 million metric tons of
cargo. On land, it handled more than 30,000 rail cars, 29,000
overweight trucks and 200,000 other trucks. Its overall economic value
was estimated at $2.8 billion, and it generated $130 million in federal
taxes and $44 million in state and local taxes. Its importance in an
economically distressed area (the second poorest county in the United
States) cannot be overstated.
A large percentage of the products passing through the Port of
Brownsville either originate in or are destined for Mexico. For
example, one of the main commodities is steel that arrives by ship and
is then transported across the border to Mexico's industrial heart in
Monterrey, Nuevo Leon. In effect, the Port of Brownsville serves as the
deep water port for both southern Texas and northeast Mexico; it helps
integrate the binational regional economy as far inland as San Antonio
and Monterrey, and even beyond.
The Brownsville Navigation District has long believed that the
future growth of the Port of Brownsville--and the economic development
of the region overall--could be enhanced significantly by creating
direct truck and rail connections with Mexico. At the time of the
submission of the application for a Presidential permit in 1991, there
were serious issues that constrained both modes of transportation.
Trucks traveling between the Port and the border crossing
to Mexico at the Gateway Bridge were obligated to traverse congested
urban sectors of Brownsville. Large numbers of loaded trucks were
routinely moving through sensitive areas such as school zones, creating
worrisome safety issues. Weight freight payload compliance with
transportation regulations made the shipment of some products
uneconomical. The border crossing and federal inspection facilities at
the bridge were also heavily congested.
Rail traffic between the Port and the railroad crossing at
the B&M Bridge was compelled to use a 6-mile stretch of track owned by
the Union Pacific Railroad Company. This left all traffic subject to
whatever rates UP charged for the use of the line and whatever
additional fees it charged for actually crossing the bridge. Port rail
traffic also had an issue with access to the UP line; rails cars had to
wait until UP worked them into the flow of its traffic to and from
other destinations. The UP's disparate rates and fees and the
uncertainty of access negatively affected the competitiveness of the
Port.
[[Page 65199]]
The solution to these problems was to construct new commercial and
rail bridges that would link the Port directly with the Mexican market.
Current Situation
Mr. Darrach noted in his letter that the Department's current
evaluation process considered ``the change in circumstances in each of
the project areas, including the development of nearby projects,
inaction on the proposed projects, and lack of interest in pursuing the
corresponding projects in Mexico.'' The Brownsville Navigation District
would like to respond to each of these points.
In the 12 years since the Department issued the Presidential permit
for the Port of Brownsville International Bridges, circumstances in the
project area have changed considerably; HOWEVER, NONE OF THESE CHANGES
DETRACT FROM THE ORIGINAL RATIONALE FOR BUILDING THE BRIDGES.
For trucks, the principal development has been the opening
of the Veterans International Bridge at Los Tomates. This provided a
much-improved crossing with modern new facilities for the federal
inspection agencies. Nevertheless, trucks traveling between the Port
and Los Tomates are still obliged to traverse congested urban sectors
of Brownsville. A significant number of these trucks are overweight,
carrying products such as steel coils. If anything, the growth that has
occurred in these areas makes them even more congested than they were
when the permit was issued, raising the safety concerns still further.
The local community is developing plans for an ``East Loop'' that would
circle to the south and east of much of the urban area. If constructed,
this would provide some temporary relief to the congestion and would
improve safety. Any relief would be short-lived, however, as the urban
area is already spreading in this direction, and in a decade or two,
the congestion problem would arise again. The only long-term solution
for trucks is a dedicated route from the Port directly south into
Mexico that would totally remove Port truck traffic from heavily
traveled and populated areas. It is worth noting that the Los Tomates
Bridge was opened just a decade ago, and it already is in need of a
second span to accommodate the much-faster-than-anticipated growth in
commercial traffic. The Port truck bridge is a logical solution to a
situation that is likely to occur in the foreseeable future when the
traffic demand may exceed even the capacity of the new span at Los
Tomates. It is worth noting that in addition to alleviating roadway
congestion and improving transportation safety and security, the truck
bridge would also substantially lower emissions and reduce highway
infrastructure repair costs.
The West Rail Project has been the principal development
for rail traffic. This project will be beneficial to the Brownsville
community because it will relocate the UP line out of the downtown area
to where it will connect to a new bridge to the west of the city.
However, the West Rail Project will yield little benefit to Port rail
traffic. Rail cars to and from the Port still will be subject to
whatever disparate rates and noncompetitive fees UP may establish. They
will also continue to face uncertain access to the UP line. Again, the
solution remains a new dedicated rail bridge owned by the public
linking the Port directly with Mexico.
Clearly the justification for the Port bridges remains as strong
and valid as it was when the permit was issued in 1997.
The Port bridges will not negatively affect other nearby projects.
They obviously are not an obstacle either to the expansion of the Los
Tomates Bridge or to the building of the West Rail Project, as is
demonstrated by the fact that both projects are moving forward quickly
and will soon be under construction. Since the Port bridges will handle
only commercial traffic, they will not hinder any new non-commercial
crossing project that the local community might propose in the future.
Finally, the geography of the area does not lend itself to any new
border crossing projects being developed to the east of the Port
bridges.
Since receiving the Presidential permit in 1997, the Brownsville
Navigation District has taken numerous steps to advance the project.
The District has expended $4 million for engineering documents for the
roadway and railway. It has also performed annual updates for the
extensive environmental work originally performed for the project.
Because of the political sensitivities surrounding the project, much of
the progress the District has accomplished has been evolutionary in the
form of steady but quiet, behind-the-scenes efforts to build the
necessary alliances on both sides of the border.
The current Board of Commissioners of the Brownsville Navigation
District is now redoubling its effort to advance the Port bridges
project, beginning with a dialogue with officials from the City of
Brownsville and Cameron County, including the Cameron County Mobility
Authority. [Exhibits omitted.] In these conversations, the Board makes
clear that is prepared to be quite flexible in the search for ways in
which the project can be beneficial for all involved. The Board has
also expanded its contacts with officials from the State of Texas,
including particularly Gus de la Rosa of TxDOT. These discussions
include the need to have the Port bridges incorporated into the various
State planning processes, including the new effort to develop a master
plan for border transportation that will be done under the auspices of
the U.S.-Mexico Joint Working Committee.
The Board has reached out in a new effort to engage Mexican
officials, and the initial response has been encouraging. For example,
the Municipality of Matamoros sees considerable merit in having a
bridge to the east of the city that could handle commercial traffic,
particularly overweight trucks, operating between the Port and Mexico.
This would allow the Los Tomates Bridge to handle an increasing volume
of traffic not connected to the Port, such as trucks servicing Mexican
maquiladoras. The Municipality is already constructing a loop around
the western side of Matamoros, and it could include the Port truck
bridge in the future planning of the eastern segment of the loop. The
Board also plans to work with the local Consuls on both sides of the
border to have the Port bridges taken up by the regional Border Liaison
Mechanism. The Board has renewed its longstanding contacts with the
State of Tamaulipas and will further intensify that dialogue when a new
Administration takes office there. The Board has initiated a new round
of contacts with the Mexican Federal Government, and it contemplates
having representatives travel to Mexico City in the fall. In all these
efforts, the Board is exploring strategies that may broaden the
benefits for stakeholders in Mexico as well as the United States. For
example, it is examining innovative ways to use geography to create a
``port alliance'' with the emerging Mexican port at El Mezquital, such
as developing a ``rail canal'' between the two ports.
Conclusion
The Brownsville Navigation District remains strongly committed to
the implementation of the Port bridges project. One quantifiable
manifestation of its commitment is the more than $20 million that it
has invested to date and the many tens of millions of dollars more it
is prepared to spend to construct and operate the bridges. It seeks to
work with the local community and Mexico
[[Page 65200]]
to define mutual interests, shape a consensus and build the political
will to implement a new regional plan for commerce and economic
development that includes the Port bridges.
The Brownsville Navigation District calls upon the Department to
refrain from revoking or modifying the 1997 Presidential permit. It
believes that such action would not serve U.S. national interests; to
the contrary, this would be harmful to U.S. interest.
A revocation would not benefit any current or future border-
crossing project, as explained above. Nor would such action benefit the
United States Government by relieving it of a commitment to provide the
financial resources to build new federal facilities at the bridges as
the Port has committed to constructing those facilities, and this is
stipulated in the permit. Put simply, there is nothing to be gained by
revoking the permit.
Conversely, a revocation would result in grave consequences. Its
immediate effect would be to erase the very sizable investment that the
Port, a public asset, has made in the project over nearly 20 years.
This action could well result in killing the project, as securing the
resources to submit a new application may well be problematic in the
wake of a revocation.
The Brownsville Navigation District believes that if the Department
sustains the permit and allows the project to go forward, the Port of
Brownsville bridges will facilitate the efficient movement of
legitimate goods across the U.S.-Mexico border. The bridges promise to
enhance the economic competitiveness of our nation by improving the
connectivity of the Port, increasing its rail-served market access
potential, lowering costs and ensuring greater reliability. The South
Texas region will gain from increased tax revenue, more reliable
freight service and improved highway safety. The region will benefit
from new, higher value jobs, the diversion of heavy trucks from the
roadways and reduced emissions and fuel usage. Shippers will benefit
from lower costs, improved service reliability, reduced transport
times, and expanded access to rail services. The Port will benefit from
increased throughput and an enhanced competitive position that results
from additional transportation options. Given all these benefits, the
Brownsville Navigation District is confident that the project clearly
will serve U.S. national interests.
End Text.
Dated: December 4, 2009.
Alex Lee,
Director, Office of Mexican Affairs, Department of State.
[FR Doc. E9-29342 Filed 12-8-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-29-P