Technical Amendment to List of User Fee Airports: Addition of Naples Municipal Airport, Naples, FL, 30822-30823 [2011-13283]

Download as PDF 30822 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 103 / Friday, May 27, 2011 / Rules and Regulations DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY U.S. Customs and Border Protection 19 CFR Part 122 [CBP Dec. 11–12] Technical Amendment to List of User Fee Airports: Addition of Naples Municipal Airport, Naples, FL U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Department of Homeland Security. ACTION: Final rule; technical amendment. AGENCY: This document amends the regulations pertaining to the organization of U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) by revising the list of user fee airports to reflect the recent user fee airport designation for Naples Municipal Airport, in Naples, Florida. User fee airports are those airports which, while not qualifying for designation as international or landing rights airports, have been approved by the Commissioner of CBP to receive, for a fee, the services of CBP officers for the processing of aircraft entering the United States, and the passengers and cargo of those aircraft. DATES: Effective Date: May 27, 2011. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Roger Kaplan, Acting Director, Audits and Self-Inspection, Office of Field Operations, at 202–325–4543 or by e-mail at Roger.Kaplan@dhs.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: SUMMARY: jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES I. Background Title 19, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), sets forth at Part 122 the regulations relating to the entry and clearance of aircraft in international commerce and the transportation of persons and cargo by aircraft in international commerce. Generally, a civil aircraft arriving from a place outside of the United States is required to land at an airport designated as an international airport. Alternatively, the pilot of a civil aircraft may request permission to land at a specific airport, and, if landing rights are granted, the civil aircraft may land at that landing rights airport. Section 236 of Public Law 98–573 (the Trade and Tariff Act of 1984), codified at 19 U.S.C. 58b, created an option for civil aircraft desiring to land at an airport other than an international airport or a landing rights airport. A civil aircraft arriving from a place outside of the United States may ask for permission to land at an airport VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:21 May 26, 2011 Jkt 223001 designated by the Secretary of Homeland Security as a user fee airport. Pursuant to 19 U.S.C. 58b, an airport may be designated as a user fee airport if the Commissioner of CBP as delegated by the Secretary of Homeland Security determines that the volume of business at the airport is insufficient to justify customs services at the airport and the governor of the state in which the airport is located approves the designation. Generally, the type of airport that would seek designation as a user fee airport would be one at which a company, such as an air courier service, has a specialized interest in regularly landing. As the volume of business anticipated at this type of airport is insufficient to justify its designation as an international or landing rights airport, the availability of customs services is not paid for out of appropriations from the general treasury of the United States. Instead, customs services are provided on a fully reimbursable basis to be paid for by the user fee airport on behalf of the recipients of the services. The fees which are to be charged at user fee airports, according to the statute, shall be paid by each person using the customs services at the airport and shall be in the amount equal to the expenses incurred by the Commissioner of CBP in providing customs services which are rendered to such person at such airport, including the salary and expenses of those employed by the Commissioner of CBP to provide the customs services. To implement this provision, generally, the airport seeking the designation as a user fee airport or that airport’s authority agrees to pay a flat fee for which the users of the airport are to reimburse the airport/airport authority. The airport/airport authority agrees to set and periodically review the charges to ensure that they are in accord with the airport’s expenses. The Commissioner of CBP designates airports as user fee airports pursuant to 19 U.S.C. 58b. If the Commissioner decides that the conditions for designation as a user fee airport are satisfied, a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) is executed between the Commissioner of CBP and the local responsible official signing on behalf of the state, city or municipality in which the airport is located. In this manner, user fee airports are designated on a case-by-case basis. The regulation pertaining to user fee airports is 19 CFR 122.15. It addresses the procedures for obtaining permission to land at a user fee airport, the grounds for withdrawal of a user fee designation and includes the list of user fee airports designated by the Commissioner of CBP in accordance PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 with 19 U.S.C. 58b. Periodically, CBP updates the list of user fee airports at 19 CFR 122.15(b) to reflect those that have been recently designated by the Commissioner. On November 18, 2010, the Commissioner signed an MOA approving the designation of user fee status for Naples Municipal Airport. This document updates the list of user fee airports by adding Naples Municipal Airport, in Naples, Florida, to the list. II. Statutory and Regulatory Requirements A. Inapplicability of Public Notice and Delayed Effective Date Requirements Because this amendment merely updates the list of user fee airports to include an airport already designated by the Commissioner of CBP in accordance with 19 U.S.C. 58b and neither imposes additional burdens on, nor takes away any existing rights or privileges from, the public, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), notice and public procedure are unnecessary, and for the same reasons, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), a delayed effective date is not required. B. The Regulatory Flexibility Act and Executive Order 12866 Because no notice of proposed rulemaking is required, the provisions of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) do not apply. This amendment does not meet the criteria for a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ as specified in Executive Order 12866. C. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 This rule will not result in the expenditure by State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100 million or more in any one year, and it will not significantly or uniquely affect small governments. Therefore, no actions are necessary under the provisions of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995. D. Executive Order 13132 The rule will not have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the National Government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. Therefore, in accordance with section 6 of Executive Order 13132, this rule does not have sufficient federalism implications to warrant the preparation of a federalism summary impact statement. E. Signing Authority This document is limited to technical corrections of CBP regulations. E:\FR\FM\27MYR1.SGM 27MYR1 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 103 / Friday, May 27, 2011 / Rules and Regulations Accordingly, it is being signed under the authority of 19 CFR 0.1(b). List of Subjects in 19 CFR Part 122 Air carriers, Aircraft, Airports, Customs duties and inspection, Freight. Amendments to Regulations Part 122, Code of Federal Regulations (19 CFR part 122) is amended as set forth below: PART 122—AIR COMMERCE REGULATIONS 1. The authority citation for Part 122 continues to read as follows: ■ Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301; 19 U.S.C. 58b, 66, 1431, 1433, 1436, 1448, 1459, 1590, 1594, 1623, 1624, 1644, 1644a, 2071 note. § 122.15 [Amended] 2. The listing of user fee airports in § 122.15(b) is amended as follows: by adding, in alphabetical order, in the ‘‘Location’’ column ‘‘Naples, Florida’’ and by adding on the same line, in the ‘‘Name’’ column, ‘‘Naples Municipal Airport.’’ ■ Dated: May 20, 2011. Alan D. Bersin, Commissioner, U.S. Customs and Border Protection. Regulatory Information On April 11, 2011, we published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) entitled ‘‘Special Local Regulations for Marine Events; Patapsco River, Northwest Harbor, Baltimore, MD’’ in the Federal Register (76 FR 69). We received no comments on the proposed rule. No public meeting was requested, and none was held. [FR Doc. 2011–13283 Filed 5–26–11; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9111–14–P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard Basis and Purpose 33 CFR Part 100 [Docket No. USCG–2011–0182] RIN 1625–AA08 Special Local Regulations for Marine Events; Patapsco River, Northwest Harbor, Baltimore, MD Coast Guard, DHS. Temporary final rule. AGENCY: ACTION: The Coast Guard is establishing special local regulations during the ‘‘Baltimore Dragon Boat Challenge’’, a marine event to be held on the waters of the Patapsco River, Northwest Harbor, Baltimore, MD on June 25, 2011. These special local regulations are necessary to provide for the safety of life on navigable waters during the event. This action is intended to temporarily restrict vessel traffic in a portion of the Patapsco River during the event. DATES: This rule is effective from 6 a.m. on June 25, 2011 through 6 p.m. on June 26, 2011. jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES SUMMARY: VerDate Mar<15>2010 Comments and material received from the public, as well as documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in the docket, are part of docket USCG–2011–0182 and are available online by going to https:// www.regulations.gov, inserting USCG– 2011–0182 in the ‘‘Keyword’’ box, and then clicking ‘‘Search.’’ This material is also available for inspection or copying at the Docket Management Facility (M– 30), U.S. Department of Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this temporary rule, call or e-mail Mr. Ronald Houck, U.S. Coast Guard Sector Baltimore, MD; telephone 410–576–2674, e-mail Ronald.L.Houck@uscg.mil. If you have questions on viewing the docket, call Renee V. Wright, Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone 202–366– 9826. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: ADDRESSES: 15:21 May 26, 2011 Jkt 223001 On June 25, 2011, Baltimore Dragon Boat Club, Inc. will sponsor Dragon Boat Races in the Patapsco River, Northwest Harbor, at Baltimore, MD. The event will consist of approximately 15 teams rowing Chinese Dragon Boats in heats of 2 or 3 boats for a distance of 500-meters. Due to the need for vessel control during the event, the Coast Guard will temporarily restrict vessel traffic in the event area to provide for the safety of participants, spectators, and other transiting vessels. Discussion of Comments and Changes The Coast Guard received no comments in response to the NPRM. No public meeting was requested and none was held. Regulatory Analyses We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses based on 13 of these statutes or executive orders. PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 30823 Regulatory Planning and Review This rule is not a significant regulatory action under section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, as supplemented by Executive Order 13563, Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review, and does not require an assessment of potential costs and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of that Executive Order 12866 or under section 1 of Executive Order 13563. The Office of Management and Budget has not reviewed it under those Orders. Although this regulation will prevent traffic from transiting a portion of the Patapsco River during the event, the effect of this regulation will not be significant due to the limited duration that the regulated area will be in effect and the extensive advance notifications that will be made to the maritime community via the Local Notice to Mariners and marine information broadcasts, so mariners can adjust their plans accordingly. Additionally, the regulated area has been narrowly tailored to impose the least impact on general navigation yet provide the level of safety deemed necessary. Vessel traffic will be able to transit the regulated area at slow speed between heats, when the Coast Guard Patrol Commander deems it safe to do so. Small Entities Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601–612), we have considered whether this rule would have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The term ‘‘small entities’’ comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 50,000. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This rule may affect the following entities, some of which might be small entities: the owners or operators of vessels intending to transit or anchor in the effected portions of the Patapsco River during the event. Although this regulation prevents traffic from transiting a portion of the Patapsco River, Northwest Harbor during the event, this proposed rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities for the following reasons. This proposed rule would be in effect for only a limited period. Vessel traffic will be able to transit the regulated area between heats, E:\FR\FM\27MYR1.SGM 27MYR1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 103 (Friday, May 27, 2011)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 30822-30823]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-13283]



[[Page 30822]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

U.S. Customs and Border Protection

19 CFR Part 122

[CBP Dec. 11-12]


Technical Amendment to List of User Fee Airports: Addition of 
Naples Municipal Airport, Naples, FL

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

ACTION: Final rule; technical amendment.

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

SUMMARY: This document amends the regulations pertaining to the 
organization of U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) by revising 
the list of user fee airports to reflect the recent user fee airport 
designation for Naples Municipal Airport, in Naples, Florida. User fee 
airports are those airports which, while not qualifying for designation 
as international or landing rights airports, have been approved by the 
Commissioner of CBP to receive, for a fee, the services of CBP officers 
for the processing of aircraft entering the United States, and the 
passengers and cargo of those aircraft.

DATES: Effective Date: May 27, 2011.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Roger Kaplan, Acting Director, Audits 
and Self-Inspection, Office of Field Operations, at 202-325-4543 or by 
e-mail at Roger.Kaplan@dhs.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background

    Title 19, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), sets forth at Part 122 
the regulations relating to the entry and clearance of aircraft in 
international commerce and the transportation of persons and cargo by 
aircraft in international commerce.
    Generally, a civil aircraft arriving from a place outside of the 
United States is required to land at an airport designated as an 
international airport. Alternatively, the pilot of a civil aircraft may 
request permission to land at a specific airport, and, if landing 
rights are granted, the civil aircraft may land at that landing rights 
airport.
    Section 236 of Public Law 98-573 (the Trade and Tariff Act of 
1984), codified at 19 U.S.C. 58b, created an option for civil aircraft 
desiring to land at an airport other than an international airport or a 
landing rights airport. A civil aircraft arriving from a place outside 
of the United States may ask for permission to land at an airport 
designated by the Secretary of Homeland Security as a user fee airport.
    Pursuant to 19 U.S.C. 58b, an airport may be designated as a user 
fee airport if the Commissioner of CBP as delegated by the Secretary of 
Homeland Security determines that the volume of business at the airport 
is insufficient to justify customs services at the airport and the 
governor of the state in which the airport is located approves the 
designation. Generally, the type of airport that would seek designation 
as a user fee airport would be one at which a company, such as an air 
courier service, has a specialized interest in regularly landing.
    As the volume of business anticipated at this type of airport is 
insufficient to justify its designation as an international or landing 
rights airport, the availability of customs services is not paid for 
out of appropriations from the general treasury of the United States. 
Instead, customs services are provided on a fully reimbursable basis to 
be paid for by the user fee airport on behalf of the recipients of the 
services.
    The fees which are to be charged at user fee airports, according to 
the statute, shall be paid by each person using the customs services at 
the airport and shall be in the amount equal to the expenses incurred 
by the Commissioner of CBP in providing customs services which are 
rendered to such person at such airport, including the salary and 
expenses of those employed by the Commissioner of CBP to provide the 
customs services. To implement this provision, generally, the airport 
seeking the designation as a user fee airport or that airport's 
authority agrees to pay a flat fee for which the users of the airport 
are to reimburse the airport/airport authority. The airport/airport 
authority agrees to set and periodically review the charges to ensure 
that they are in accord with the airport's expenses.
    The Commissioner of CBP designates airports as user fee airports 
pursuant to 19 U.S.C. 58b. If the Commissioner decides that the 
conditions for designation as a user fee airport are satisfied, a 
Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) is executed between the Commissioner of 
CBP and the local responsible official signing on behalf of the state, 
city or municipality in which the airport is located. In this manner, 
user fee airports are designated on a case-by-case basis. The 
regulation pertaining to user fee airports is 19 CFR 122.15. It 
addresses the procedures for obtaining permission to land at a user fee 
airport, the grounds for withdrawal of a user fee designation and 
includes the list of user fee airports designated by the Commissioner 
of CBP in accordance with 19 U.S.C. 58b. Periodically, CBP updates the 
list of user fee airports at 19 CFR 122.15(b) to reflect those that 
have been recently designated by the Commissioner. On November 18, 
2010, the Commissioner signed an MOA approving the designation of user 
fee status for Naples Municipal Airport. This document updates the list 
of user fee airports by adding Naples Municipal Airport, in Naples, 
Florida, to the list.

II. Statutory and Regulatory Requirements

A. Inapplicability of Public Notice and Delayed Effective Date 
Requirements

    Because this amendment merely updates the list of user fee airports 
to include an airport already designated by the Commissioner of CBP in 
accordance with 19 U.S.C. 58b and neither imposes additional burdens 
on, nor takes away any existing rights or privileges from, the public, 
pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), notice and public procedure are 
unnecessary, and for the same reasons, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), 
a delayed effective date is not required.

B. The Regulatory Flexibility Act and Executive Order 12866

    Because no notice of proposed rulemaking is required, the 
provisions of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) do 
not apply. This amendment does not meet the criteria for a 
``significant regulatory action'' as specified in Executive Order 
12866.

C. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995

    This rule will not result in the expenditure by State, local, and 
tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100 
million or more in any one year, and it will not significantly or 
uniquely affect small governments. Therefore, no actions are necessary 
under the provisions of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995.

D. Executive Order 13132

    The rule will not have substantial direct effects on the States, on 
the relationship between the National Government and the States, or on 
the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels 
of government. Therefore, in accordance with section 6 of Executive 
Order 13132, this rule does not have sufficient federalism implications 
to warrant the preparation of a federalism summary impact statement.

E. Signing Authority

    This document is limited to technical corrections of CBP 
regulations.

[[Page 30823]]

Accordingly, it is being signed under the authority of 19 CFR 0.1(b).

List of Subjects in 19 CFR Part 122

    Air carriers, Aircraft, Airports, Customs duties and inspection, 
Freight.

Amendments to Regulations

    Part 122, Code of Federal Regulations (19 CFR part 122) is amended 
as set forth below:

PART 122--AIR COMMERCE REGULATIONS

0
1. The authority citation for Part 122 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301; 19 U.S.C. 58b, 66, 1431, 1433, 1436, 
1448, 1459, 1590, 1594, 1623, 1624, 1644, 1644a, 2071 note.


Sec.  122.15  [Amended]

0
2. The listing of user fee airports in Sec.  122.15(b) is amended as 
follows: by adding, in alphabetical order, in the ``Location'' column 
``Naples, Florida'' and by adding on the same line, in the ``Name'' 
column, ``Naples Municipal Airport.''

    Dated: May 20, 2011.
Alan D. Bersin,
Commissioner, U.S. Customs and Border Protection.
[FR Doc. 2011-13283 Filed 5-26-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-14-P

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.