[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 23 (Friday, February 2, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 3849-3851]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-1880]



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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service

50 CFR Part 14

RIN 1018-AD33


Conferring Designated Port Status on Atlanta, GA

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Fish and Wildlife Service confers designated port status 
on Atlanta, Georgia, pursuant to section 9(f) of the Endangered Species 
Act of 1973. Designated port status will allow the direct importation 
and exportation of fish and wildlife, including parts and products, 
through Atlanta, Georgia, a growing international port. Under this 
final rule, 50 CFR 14.12 will be amended to add Atlanta, Georgia, to 
the list of Customs ports of entry designated for the importation and 
exportation of wildlife. A public hearing has been held on this 
proposal.

EFFECTIVE DATE: This rule is effective March 4, 1996.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Special Agent Thomas Striegler, [(703) 
358-1949], or Special Agent Cecil M. Halcomb, Assistant Regional 
Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, P.O. Box 49226, Atlanta, 
Georgia 30359, [(404) 679-7057].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    Designated ports are the cornerstones of the process by which the 
Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) regulates the importation and 
exportation of wildlife in the United States. With limited exceptions, 
all fish or wildlife must be imported and exported through such ports 
as required by section 9(f) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, 16 
U.S.C. 1538(f). The Secretary of the Interior is responsible for 
designating these ports by regulation, with the approval of the 
Secretary of the Treasury after notice and the opportunity for public 
hearing.
    Under Service regulations, wildlife must be imported and exported 
through one of the designated ports unless the importer/exporter meets 
one of the exceptions in the regulations. The most common exception is 
through a permit issued by the Service authorizing an importer or 
exporter to ship through a nondesignated port. The Service maintains a 
staff of Wildlife Inspectors at each designated port to inspect and 
clear wildlife shipments.

[[Page 3850]]

    The Service presently has twelve designated Customs ports of entry 
for the importation and exportation of wildlife; these include: the 
ports of Los Angeles, California; San Francisco, California; Miami, 
Florida; Honolulu, Hawaii; Chicago, Illinois; New Orleans, Louisiana; 
New York, New York; Seattle, Washington; Dallas/Fort Worth, Texas; 
Portland, Oregon; Baltimore, Maryland; and Boston, Massachusetts.

Summary of Comments and Information Received

    On October 20, 1995, between 10 a.m. and 12 p.m., the Fish and 
Wildlife Service held a public meeting at the Airport Manager's Office, 
Hartsfield International Airport, Atlanta, Georgia. The Service 
received comments from individuals in the wildlife import/export 
business, from individuals involved in the brokerage and freight 
forwarding business, and from individuals representing the city of 
Atlanta. All comments received during the public meeting supported the 
designation of Atlanta as a designated port for wildlife and wildlife 
products.
    One participant of the public meeting representing Hartsfield 
International Airport commented on the fact that the city of Atlanta 
and the Georgia Congressional delegation have supported the designation 
of Atlanta for several years. Atlanta is the second busiest airport in 
the world, according to the commenter, and is considered the aviation 
gateway to the southeast United States. The commenter stated that 
Hartsfield International Airport has experienced significant growth in 
cargo shipments over the past several years and for Atlanta to realize 
its full potential and take advantage of expanding world trade, Service 
designation as a designated port is important. A commenter at the 
public meeting representing brokers and freight forwarders, as well as 
the ``international community'' in Atlanta, stated that several 
businesses in the Atlanta area have quit importing wildlife products 
through Atlanta (by using Designated Port exception permits issued by 
the Service) because of the unavailability of Wildlife Inspectors to 
process importations on a timely basis. The commenter told the meeting 
that he has received numerous inquiries from those involved in the 
wildlife import/export business about using Atlanta to receive or ship 
wildlife internationally, but has told them they could not use Atlanta 
due to the lack of designation by the Service. The commenter stated 
that he sees designation of Atlanta as an ``ingredient to economic 
growth'' in the area.
    Another commenter formally representing the Association of Brokers 
and Freight Forwarders in Atlanta was fully supportive of designation 
by the Service of Atlanta as a port of entry for wildlife and wildlife 
products. A commenter representing a Congressman from Georgia told the 
meeting that the Congressman had worked for several years for the 
designation of Atlanta by the Service and was very pleased to see the 
proposed rule. A tropical fish importer told the meeting that he deals 
in such a highly perishable product that importing directly into 
Atlanta will mean his customers do not have to go to California for 
tropical fish, and that his business depends upon Atlanta being 
designated a wildlife port of entry. The commenter wishes to see the 
rulemaking process proceed towards designation of Atlanta. The Service 
has received one written comment on the proposed rule. That commenter, 
from the shipping industry, stated that it supports the designation of 
Atlanta as a designated port. This commenter also requested the Service 
to consider Memphis, Tennessee, as a designated port in the future.

Service Response

    The Service appreciates public comments and support for designation 
of Atlanta as a designated port. At this time the Service has no plans 
to make Memphis, Tennessee, a designated port.

Need for Final Rulemaking

    Containerized air and ocean cargo has become the paramount means by 
which both live wildlife and wildlife products are transported into and 
out of the United States. The use of containerized cargo by the airline 
and shipping industries has compounded the problems encountered by the 
Service and by wildlife importers and exporters in the Atlanta area. In 
many instances, foreign suppliers will containerize entire shipments 
and route them directly by air to Atlanta. If, upon arrival, the 
shipment contains any wildlife, those items must be shipped under 
Customs bond to a designated port for clearance. In most cases, this 
has involved shipping wildlife products to either Miami, Florida; 
Chicago, Illinois; New York, New York; Baltimore, Maryland; or New 
Orleans, Louisiana, the nearest designated ports, but reshipment has 
been both time consuming and expensive. In other cases containerized 
maritime cargo is transhipped overland for post entry inspection at 
Atlanta. Atlanta is one of the Nation's busiest inland seaports, with 
an estimate of greater than 25,000 ocean containers arriving annually 
by rail on Atlanta ocean bills of lading. In addition there has been a 
steady increase in mail inspections being conducted at Atlanta.
    Atlanta area importers and exporters have attempted to direct 
entire shipments to a designated port prior to their arrival at Atlanta 
to alleviate problems, even though such shipments may contain only a 
small number of wildlife items. This method of shipment meets the 
current regulatory requirements of the Service; however, this is also 
time consuming and entails additional expense. It is also contrary to 
the increasing tendency of foreign suppliers to ship consignments 
directly to regional ports such as Atlanta. In addition, time is a key 
element when transporting live wildlife and perishable wildlife 
products. Without designated port status, businesses in Atlanta cannot 
import and export wildlife products directly, and consequently may be 
unable to compete economically with merchants in other international 
trading centers located in designated ports.
    With airborne shipments, mail, and transhipped maritime 
containerized cargo into and out of Atlanta steadily increasing, the 
Service has concluded that the port should be designated for wildlife 
imports and exports. A tremendous increase in the volume of shipments 
has made Atlanta the second largest port of entry in the Southeast. The 
Service's figures for fiscal year 1994 for the present nondesignated 
port of Atlanta indicate a total of 397 shipments occurred representing 
an estimated total value worth $3,801,043 of wildlife and wildlife 
products. The Service projects that with the establishment of Atlanta 
as a designated port that the number of shipments through the port 
would triple over the first 3 to 5 years. This projection is based upon 
the Service's previous experience at other newly designated ports such 
as Dallas/Fort Worth and Portland. As Atlanta prepares to host the 1996 
Summer Olympics, the Service expects even greater demands to be placed 
on its inspection capabilities. Conferring the status of a designated 
port on Atlanta, therefore, would serve not only the interests of 
businesses in the region, but would also facilitate the mission of the 
Service.
    The Service is making the decision to confer designated port status 
upon Atlanta, Georgia, contingent upon the continued funding of 
adequate Service inspection and administrative personnel to properly 
staff the port. The Hartsfield Atlanta International Airport, City of 
Atlanta, Department of Aviation (Airport), has agreed in principle to 
fund the operational costs of the port, 

[[Page 3851]]
subject to a dollar cap, to the extent that those costs exceed the fees 
collected at the port for inspection services. This arrangement has 
been set forth in a Memorandum of Agreement between the Airport and the 
Service, to be executed within 30 days of the publication of this final 
rule. The Airport will provide such funds to the Service through a 
contributed fund mechanism. See 16 U.S.C. 742f(b). This agreement 
provides for $150,000, sufficient operational funding for the port, 
initially to include two Wildlife Inspectors and one clerical/
administrative support position.

Required Determinations

    This rule was not subject to review by the Office of Management and 
Budget (OMB) under Executive Order 12866. The Department of the 
Interior (Department) has determined that this final rule will not have 
a significant economic effect on a substantial number of small entities 
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). This rule 
will have a positive incidental effect upon small entities by reducing 
overland transportation costs.
    The Service anticipates that the addition of the Port of Atlanta to 
the list of Service Designated Ports for the importation and 
exportation of wildlife to have no adverse affects upon individual 
industries and cause no demographic changes in populations. In 
addition, the Service anticipates that this rule will not have the 
effect of increasing the direct costs of small entities. The Service, 
in light of the above analysis, has determined that the final rule will 
not have a significant economic effect on a substantial number of small 
entities as defined in the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601 et 
seq.
    This final rule has no private property takings implications as 
defined in Executive Order 12630. The only effect of this rule will be 
to make it easier for businesses to import and export wildlife directly 
through Atlanta, Georgia. This action does not contain any federalism 
impacts as described in Executive Order 12612. This final rule does not 
contain any information collection requirements which require approval 
by the Office of Management and Budget under the Paperwork Reduction 
Act of 1995. These changes in the regulations in Part 14 are regulatory 
and enforcement actions which are covered by a categorical exclusion 
from National Environmental Policy Act procedures under 516 Department 
Manual; the changes have no Environmental Justice implications under 
Executive Order 12898. A determination has been made pursuant to 
Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act that the revision of Part 14 
will not affect federally listed species. The Department has certified 
that these regulations meet the applicable standards provided in 
Section 2(a) and 2(b)(2) of Executive Order 12778.

Author

    The originator of this final rule is John M. Neal, Senior Special 
Agent, Division of Law Enforcement, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 
Washington, D.C.

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 14

    Animal welfare, Exports, Fish, Imports, Labeling, Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements, Transportation, Wildlife.

Regulation Promulgation

    For the reasons set out in the preamble, the Service amends Title 
50, Chapter I, Subchapter B of the Code of Federal Regulations as set 
forth below.

PART 14--IMPORTATION, EXPORTATION, AND TRANSPORTATION OF WILDLIFE

    1. The authority citation for Part 14 is revised to read as 
follows:

    Authority: 16 U.S.C. 704, 712, 1382, 1538(d)-(f), 1540(f), 3371-
3378, 4223-4244, and 4901-4916; 18 U.S.C. 42; 31 U.S.C. 483(a).


Sec. 14.12  [Amended]

    2. Section 14.12(k) is amended by removing the word ``and''.
    3. Section 14.12(l) is amended by removing the period and adding 
the word ``and'' preceded by a semicolon.
    4. Section 14.12 is amended by adding the following new paragraph 
(m):


Sec. 14.12  Designated ports.

* * * * *
    (m) Atlanta, Georgia.

    Dated: January 22, 1996.
George T. Frampton Jr.,
Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks.
[FR Doc. 96-1880 Filed 2-1-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-M