|
|---|
|
Highway Investment Needs at and Approaching International Ports of Entry Publication: Federal Register Agency: Federal Highway Administration Byline: Rodney E. Slater Date: 13 March 1995 Subject: American Government  • Roads & Highways • Trucking
|
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 48 (Monday, March 13, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 13504-13510]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: X95-50313]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
[FHWA Docket No. 95-4]
Highway Investment Needs at and Approaching International Ports
of Entry
AGENCY: Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice; request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This document requests comments on a study of highway
investment needs at and approaching international ports of entry. This
study would supplement an earlier report on international ports of
entry and transportation corridors for North American trade which the
Department of Transportation (DOT) submitted to the Congress in January
1994, in accordance with sections 1089 and 6015 of the Intermodal
Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (ISTEA), Pub. L. 102-240,
105 Stat. 1914. The Congress has asked the FHWA to conduct a study to
review its distribution of funds to border regions, to develop and
report recommendations to improve the distributions of such funds, to
give high priority to the transportation needs of border regions, and
to work with State and local governments in border regions (including
requests for information about funding distribution) to assist them
with planning. This will be a two-part study. The States have asked for
the expansion of this study to include other international ports of
entry. This will be the second study conducted by the FHWA.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before April 1, 1995, for
inclusion in part one of the report to the Congress on international
border crossing ports of entry; on or before July 31, 1995, for the
second part of the border crossing report; and by September 1, 1995,
for a subsequent report which will cover other maritime, rail, air, and
intermodal international ports of entry. This docket will remain open
indefinitely to accept comments on the reports after they are issued.
ADDRESSES: Submit written, signed comments to the FHWA Docket No. 95-4,
Federal Highway Administration, Room 4232, HCC-10, Office of the Chief
Counsel, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington DC 20590. Interested
parties are requested to identify themselves for inclusion on a mailing
list for future notifications concerning the study by providing their
names and mailing addresses to the above docket. All comments received
will be available for examination at the above address between 8:30
a.m. and 3:30 p.m., e.t., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. Those desiring notification of receipt of comments must
include a self-addressed, stamped envelope or postcard.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Esther Strawder, Office of Policy
Development, Federal Highway Administration (HPP-22), 400 Seventh
Street, SW., Washington, D.C. 20590, Attention: Highway Investment
Study (telephone 202/366-6949, fax 202/366-3297).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The conference report (H.R. Conf. Rep. No. 752, 103d Cong., 2d
Sess. (1994)) of the Department of Transportation's Appropriations Act
for Fiscal Year 1995 (Pub. L. 103-331, 108 Stat. 2471) includes a
discussion of and requirements related to infrastructure issues of the
border regions.
The congressional report references an earlier report prepared by
the FHWA and submitted by the Secretary of Transportation to the
Congress in January 1994, in accordance with section 1089, Feasibility
of International Border Highway Infrastructure Discretionary Program,
and section 6015, Border Crossings, of the ISTEA. The report is
entitled ``Assessment of Border Crossings and Transportation
[[Page 13505]] Corridors for North American Trade.'' A copy of the
Executive Summary of the Report follows as background. A list of the
detailed reports which resulted from that study and are available from
the National Technical Information Service is also included.
In the conference report, Congress has asked the FHWA to review its
distribution of funds to border regions, including reexamination of a
dedicated border infrastructure investment program; to develop and
report recommendations to improve the distribution of such funds; to
give high priority to the transportation needs of border regions, and
to work with State and local governments in border regions, including
requests for information about funding distribution, to assist them
with planning. The House Appropriations Committee requested the
recommendations to improve the distribution of the funds by May 1,
1995. A draft of that report is expected to be completed by March 1,
1995. A second phase addressing broader issues and including
international ports of entry will be completed by the end of calendar
year 1995.
Through the American Association of Highway and Transportation
Officials Planning Committee, the States will be working with the FHWA
to develop the data to address these congressional concerns for the
land border crossing and the highway infrastructure investment issues
associated with all international ports of entry. Comments must be
received on or before April 1, 1995, for inclusion in part one of the
report to the Congress on international border crossing ports of entry;
on or before July 31, 1995, for the second part of the border crossing
report; and by September 1, 1995, for a subsequent report which will
cover other maritime, rail, air, and intermodal international ports of
entry. This docket will remain open indefinitely to accept comments on
the reports after they are issued.
Policy Questions and Comments
Responses to the following questions are solicited from any parties
interested in highway infrastructure issues associated with border
crossings and other international ports of entry. The following key
policy questions will be considered:
1. What are the current priority highway investments at or in the
vicinity of land border crossings or other international ports of
entry?
2. What factors define a high priority highway investment at or in
the vicinity of land border crossings or other international ports of
entry?
3. Historically, how have Federal funds been distributed to the
border regions?
4. (a) If there were no dedicated highway infrastructure investment
program for roads associated with international ports of entry and the
State and local governments made decisions through their usual planning
processes, what could be done to assure that each State's
transportation plan included consideration of highway or other access
to the international ports of entry? (b) If there were a dedicated
infrastructure investment program for highways associated with
international ports of entry, how should it be structured for highways
and for other surface transportation modes?
5. Comment on the following proposed criteria for defining roadway
segments that provide access to or egress from international ports of
entry. These roadway segments are often referred to as being ``at and/
or approaching the international ports of entry.'' The criteria are
intended to provide uniformity in the data used in analysis and in
developing highway investment strategies. The criteria described are
for international ports of entry for which the U.S. Customs Service has
listed a valid Automated Commercial System District/Port Code. These
ports of entry may be for land (highway and rail), water, or air.
Proposed Criteria
To be considered as a highway segment providing access to or egress
from an international port of entry one of the following three criteria
must apply:
1. The roadway segment from the international port of entry to its
intersection with the first principal arterial.
2. The roadway segment(s) on which half of the traffic is destined
for or is coming from the international port of entry.
3. The roadway segment(s) carrying more than half of the traffic
that crossed or entered at the international port of entry.
Authority: Secs. 1089 and 6015, Pub. L. 102-240, 105 Stat. 1914
(1991); 23 U.S.C. 315; 49 CFR 1.48.
Issued on: March 7, 1995.
Rodney E. Slater,
Federal Highway Administrator.
Assessment of Border Crossings and Transportation Corridors for North
American Trade--Executive Summary of Report to Congress Pursuant to
Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991--Public Law
102-240, Sections 1089 and 6015
Authority
Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (ISTEA),
Public Law 102-240
ISTEA Section 1089: Feasibility of International Border Highway
Infrastructure Discretionary Program
(a) The Secretary shall conduct a study of the advisability and
feasibility of establishing an international border highway
infrastructure discretionary program. The purpose of such a program
would be to enable States and Federal agencies to construct,
replace, and rehabilitate highway infrastructure facilities at
international borders when such States, agencies, and the Secretary
find that an international bridge or a reasonable segment of a major
highway providing access to such a bridge
(1) is important;
(2) is unsafe because of structural deficiencies, physical
deterioration, or functional obsolescence;
(3) poses a safety hazard to highway users;
(4) by its construction, replacement, or rehabilitation, would
minimize disruptions, delays, and costs to users; or
(5) by its construction, replacement, or rehabilitation, would
provide more efficient routes for international trade and commerce.
(b) Report.--Not later than September 30, 1993, the Secretary
shall transmit to Congress a report on the results of the study
conducted under this section, together with any recommendations to
the Secretary.
ISTEA Section 6015. Border Crossings
(a) Identification.--The Secretary, in cooperation with other
appropriate Federal agencies, shall identify existing and emerging
trade corridors and transportation subsystems that facilitate trade
between the United States, Canada, and Mexico.
(b) Priorities and Recommendations.--The Secretary shall
investigate and develop priorities and recommendations for rail,
highway, water, and air freight centers and all highway border
crossings for States adjoining Canada and Mexico, including the Gulf
of Mexico States and other States whose transportation subsystems
affect the trade corridors. The recommendations shall provide for
improvement and integration of transportation corridor subsystems,
methods for achieving the optimum yield from such subsystems,
methods for increasing productivity, methods for increasing the use
of advanced technologies, and methods to encourage the use of
innovative marketing techniques, such as just-in-time deliveries.
(c) Minimum Elements.--The highway border crossing assessment
under this section shall at a minimum--
(1) determine whether or not the border crossings are in
compliance with current [[Page 13506]] Federal highway regulations
and adequately designed for future growth and expansion;
(2) assess their ability to accommodate increased commerce due
to the United States-Canada Free Trade Agreement and increased trade
between the United States and Mexico; and
(3) assess their ability to accommodate increasing tourism-
related traffic between the United States, Canada, and Mexico.
The review shall specifically address issues related to the
alignment of United States and adjoining Canadian and Mexican
highways at the border crossings, the development of bicycle paths
and pedestrian walkways, and potential energy savings to be realized
by decreasing truck delays at the border crossings and related
parking improvements.
(d) Consultation.--In carrying out this section, the Secretary
shall consult with appropriate Governors and representatives of the
Republic of Mexico and Canada.
(e) Report.--Not later than 18 months after the date of the
enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall report to Congress and
border State Governors on transportation infrastructure needs,
associated costs, and economic impacts identified and propose an
agenda to develop systemwide integration of services for national
benefits.
Assessment of Border Crossings and Transportation Corridors for North
American Trade--ISTEA Section 1089 and Section 6015 Report to Congress
Executive Summary
Congressional Mandate
The Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA) of
1991, Public Law 102-240, directs the Secretary of Transportation to
conduct two studies relating to the movement of international trade.
Section 1089 calls for a study of the ``advisability and
feasibility of an international border highway infrastructure
discretionary program.''
Section 6015 calls for the Department of Transportation
(Department) to conduct an assessment of existing and emerging
international trade corridors between the United States, Mexico, and
Canada, and to make recommendations on how to improve the integration
and operation of trade-related transportation subsystems. Section 6015
requires that Mexico and Canada be consulted; both countries have
cooperated in the study effort.
While the Congressional mandate does not specifically mention the
North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), Section 6015 stipulates
that the ``review shall specifically address issues related to the
alignment of United States and adjoining Canadian and Mexican highways
at the border crossings.'' The legislation also requires an assessment
of the ability of highway border crossings to ``accommodate increased
commerce due to the United States-Canada Free Trade Agreement and
increased trade between the United States and Mexico.''
Much of the motivation for the study stems from long standing
complaints of lengthy delays and backups of trucks and cars at
international border crossings. There is a concern that trade among the
three North American nations, which has increased significantly over
the past seven years, may outstrip the ability of the nations'
transportation systems to handle additional traffic, further
exacerbating border congestion. The study team concluded that there are
several factors involved in border congestion, and a number of
difficulties in assessing the condition and future of trade corridors.
Study Approach and Methodology
The study team examined the border crossings and the access
channels leading to them. The team visited most of crossings on both
the northern and southern borders and drove over and observed traffic
on many of the access roads. With assistance from the U.S. Customs, the
team observed cargo and passenger clearance operations and
transportation operations at the border crossings.
In addition, the team conducted a series of public outreach and
information gathering meetings at locations throughout the United
States. Participants at these meetings included shippers, carriers,
customs brokers, and officials from concerned Federal, state,
provincial, and local governments. Much of the information gathered in
these sessions was anecdotal in nature, and reflective of local
perspectives. However, there was value in learning the views of border
communities and understanding the effects they perceive their proximity
to heavily travelled border crossings have on local and regional
transportation systems. Following completion of these studies and at
the invitation of the Federal governments of Canada and Mexico,
meetings were also held in Canada and Mexico to gain the perspectives
of interested parties in those countries. Results of these meetings
will be reported separately.
Statistical data on cross-border trade gathered from sources in all
three countries were also used to the extent possible in assessing
trade patterns and conditions at the borders. The statistical data,
however, suffer from a number of shortcomings. The U.S. Census Bureau,
for example, has not historically classified cross-border transits by
mode of transportation. Ideally, transportation statistics are compiled
in terms of ton miles or numbers of vehicles, but data were not readily
available in that form. Furthermore, the three countries involved do
not compile data in a standard way.
Current U.S. Trade With Canada and Mexico
Canada is the United States' largest trading partner. In 1992,
merchandise trade between the two countries totaled $189 billion, with
U.S. imports exceeding exports by about 9 percent. Trade between the
United States and Canada is growing. Between 1985 and 1992, the value
of U.S.-Canadian trade increased by about $33 billion, or 21 percent.
Trade with Canada currently accounts for about 20 percent of U.S. total
merchandise trade with the world.
Total trade with Mexico has even stronger growth, fueled by
Mexico's liberalization of tariff and trade restrictions in 1986. From
1986 through 1992, total trade grew from approximately $30 billion to
$76 billion, an increase of 153 percent. Mexico is now the United
States' third largest export market; U.S. exports increased from $12.4
billion in 1986 to $40.6 billion in 1992.
North American Free Trade Agreement
The United States, Canada, and Mexico signed the North American
Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) on December 17, 1992. The NAFTA will
create the largest free trade zone in the world, comprising over 360
million consumers with a combined annual output of $6 trillion. Through
progressive reductions, the NAFTA eliminates all tariffs on industrial
and agricultural goods produced by the three countries. Approximately
50 percent of U.S. exports to Mexico will enter Mexico completely duty-
free on the day the agreement enters into force. Mexican tariffs on all
remaining industrial products and most agricultural items will be
phased out over 5 to 10 years. Reductions in tariffs on trade between
the United States and Canada were negotiated in 1987 and incorporated
into a U.S.-Canada Free Trade Agreement. This agreement remains in
effect, augmented by additional changes included in the NAFTA.
Judging from recent experience, the NAFTA should result in further
increases in U.S. trade with Mexico. For example, the U.S. Department
of Commerce estimates that the NAFTA will result in increases in U.S.
automotive exports to Mexico of up to $1 billion in the NAFTA's first
year alone due to the lowering of various Mexican tariff and non-tariff
barriers.
[[Page 13507]]
The dramatically increased trade with Mexico over the past seven
years has aggravated conditions at an already congested U.S.-Mexican
land border. Similar problems exist on the U.S.-Canadian border as
well. While the NAFTA would help boost trade among the three countries,
the degree to which it would increase border congestion is unclear. The
NAFTA will eliminate a number of transportation practices and
restrictions currently in place that contribute significantly to
congestion at land border crossings. At some crossings, as many as 20
percent of commercial vehicles cross empty because of current
limitations on access in both countries. Thus, while the NAFTA's tariff
reduction provisions will tend to boost trade and vehicle traffic
across the southern border, the NAFTA's provisions will also tend to
reduce the number of empty commercial vehicles crossing the border.
Both Mexico and the United States restrict access for motor
carriers from the other country. U.S. trucks are prohibited from
crossing the border into Mexico, for example, while Mexican trucks are
permitted in the United States only as far as the commercial zones
along the border which are designated by the Interstate Commerce
Commission.
The NAFTA creates a timetable for the removal of barriers to the
provision of cross-border motor carrier services, thereby permitting
international passengers and cargo to be transported more efficiently.
The NAFTA's transportation provisions will eliminate the need to
transfer cargoes and trailers at the border, thereby reducing the
number of trucks that cross the border empty and eliminating a
significant cause of congestion at border ports of entry.
Patterns of Trade
Canada
The largest concentration of trade with Canada, both to and from a
single region of the United States, is in the Great Lakes area,
including Wisconsin, Michigan, Ohio, Indiana, and Illinois. In 1992,
this region alone accounted for 39 percent of the value of U.S. imports
from Canada and 36 percent of the value of U.S. exports. Much of this
is accounted for by the high value automobile trade focused between
Michigan and Ontario.
The second largest regional concentration of trade is in the mid-
Atlantic area, which includes New York, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania.
The third largest is in the New England states. Together, states in the
three eastern regions account for 65 percent of Canada's exports to the
United States and 60 percent of U.S. exports to Canada when measured as
value of trade.
Mexico
The largest concentration of trade with Mexico to date has been in
the southern border region. Texas dominates U.S. export trade with
Mexico, with over $17 billion in 1992. California is second, followed
by Arizona, Michigan, and Illinois. The principal destinations in the
United States for imports from Mexico are Texas, California, and
Michigan.
Transportation Patterns
In terms of value, most cargo transported between the United States
and Canada and the United States and Mexico travels by highway or
rail--80.2 percent of total U.S.-Canadian trade in 1992; 86 percent of
total U.S.-Mexican trade in 1992. Between the United States and Canada,
movements by air account for about 10 percent of cargo transported.
Between the United States and Mexico, water transportation accounts for
a 10 percent share of total cargo transported in terms of value.
On the northern border, the eastern ports of entry in Michigan, New
York, and New England handle more than 80 percent of cross-border
traffic. Of the remaining traffic, the Washington ports of entry handle
about 70 percent of northwestern cross-border trade and highway traffic
volume. Along the U.S.-Mexico border trade flow is heavily concentrated
at seven major border ports of entry--El Paso, Otay Mesa, Laredo,
Brownsville, Calexico, Nogales, and Hidalgo. The busiest port of entry
for commercial trucks is at El Paso; the busiest port of entry for rail
traffic is Laredo.
Trade Flow Transportation Patterns
The report addresses trade flow patterns rather than trade
corridors for the major areas of North America. The study team did not
find a firm definition of what constitutes a trade corridor for all
modes of transportation.
Most trade flow patterns between the United States and Mexico and
the United States and Canada can best be described as intraregional in
nature. The communities on both sides of the northern and southern
borders have developed regional economies that are truly binational.
There are high levels of cross-border commuting, shopping, and
movement of goods and services to support these binational regional
economies. These movements are best accommodated by regional
transportation systems.
In addition, there are trade movements between production regions
and between production and consumption regions. Often, these areas are
far apart; occasionally, the trade is between contiguous regions, such
as between the densely populated manufacturing sections of the eastern
United States and Canada.
Eastern U.S.-Canadian Trade Flow Transportation Patterns
Groups of individual land border crossings are called frontiers or
gateways in this report. The Niagara and Michigan frontiers are at the
center of the major trade between the United States and Canada. In
addition, these frontiers account for the largest portion of U.S.-
Mexican trade that does not originate in Texas or California. While the
largest portion of freight to and from Mexico crosses the Texas border
at Laredo, it is carried on transportation routes originating in
Montreal, Toronto, Buffalo, southeast Michigan, and Chicago. These
routes are critical to an integrated North American market.
Western U.S.-Canadian Trade Flow Transportation Patterns
The pattern of U.S.-Canadian trade in the west tends to be
organized into three somewhat distinct cross-border trading subregions:
the Pacific Northwest, the Rocky Mountains, and the Upper Plains. The
flow of trade at the border is focused through relatively few major
crossings. While some dominant interregional flows are associated with
trade to and from these border gateways, trade flows beyond the border
are highly diffuse, with as many east-west flows as north-south flows
to and from the border.
U.S.-Mexican Trade Flow Transportation Patterns
Three existing and two emerging trade areas, linked to major border
ports of entry, were identified: South Texas, West Texas, New Mexico,
Arizona, and California. These are not broad continental corridors in
the sense that they connect regions of the United States with regions
in Mexico or regions in Mexico with regions in Canada. Rather, they
tend to be the funnels through which trade and people pass. Beyond the
border region, trade flows in a more diffuse pattern. In addition to
serving as convenient crossing points for binational trade, these areas
also serve local economies of integrated services, industries, and
trade. [[Page 13508]]
Principal Findings
Volumes of trade and traffic will continue to increase
among the three North American countries. The traffic growth rate at
both the U.S.-Canadian and U.S.-Mexican borders has been increasing at
rates significantly higher than average national growth rates,
particularly at the southern border.
Passenger traffic through U.S.-Canadian ports of entry in
the eastern region is projected to increase at a rate of 6.2 percent a
year through 1997. Total trade through eastern ports of entry is
projected to reach $160 billion by 1997, resulting in an increase in
commercial traffic to between 8 and 9 million vehicles or an average
annual growth rate of between 5 and 7 percent through 1997.
U.S.-Canadian trade processed through border ports of
entry in the western region is also expected to increase. U.S. exports
to Canada are projected to increase by 16 to 24 percent in the next ten
years. Canada exports to the United States are projected to increase 24
to 34 percent over the same period.
With ratification of the NAFTA, the projected increase in
trade between the United States and Mexico will be much larger. U.S.
exports to Mexico are projected to increase between 65 and 70 percent
by 2000. Mexican exports to the United States through the South Texas
ports of entry are projected to increase 120 percent; exports through
the West Texas-New Mexico ports of entry should increase by 110
percent; exports through Arizona are projected to grow by 85 percent;
and exports through California are projected to increase by over 200
percent.
The facilities immediately at the border crossings,
principally bridges and tunnels plus facilities housing Federal
inspection agencies (the U.S. Customs Service, the U.S. Immigration and
Naturalization Service, the U.S. Department of Agriculture and their
Mexican and Canadian counterparts), are adequate and will remain so for
the foreseeable future, even with the anticipated increased in trade.
The General Services Administration (GSA) is completing a $364.5
million Southwest Border Capital Improvement Program that will enable
southern border crossing facilities to accommodate 8.4 million trucks
annually. Approximately 2.3 million trucks entered the United States
from Mexico during Fiscal Year 1992.
Arterials leading to and from border crossing sites are
part of the border approach infrastructure. Today they are under stress
and will be hard pressed to handle significantly greater amounts of
cross-border traffic. The GSA improvements cited above are confined to
facilities at border crossings which handle traffic and inspection. The
GSA improvements do not extend beyond the immediate crossing area to
roads and other transportation channels. These arterials connect border
crossings to the main interstate and interregional transportation
system within the United States. They are badly in need of repair and
upgrading.
In addition to needed improvements in access to the border
crossing points, some incremental improvements to transportation
systems in the United States may be necessary to handle increases in
both domestic and international trade. These include improvements in
access to inland ports, seaports, airports, and intermodal transfer
facilities.
Communities that adjoin busy international border
crossings face special problems resulting from the concentration of
trade-related traffic, including congestion of local arterials with
accompanying delays in travel times for local residents and
deterioration of air quality, safety risks associated with heavy
vehicle traffic, and increased deterioration of highway infrastructure.
Border states, in distributing Federal highway funds, seem
not to have allotted sufficient funds to border communities for
improvements to border crossing approaches. The reason, in some cases,
is because of competing priorities within states and in other cases
because of legal limitations prior to ISTEA on the use of such funds
for access roads to certain crossings (e.g. toll bridges). New sources
of infrastructure funding and improved methods for its allocation
appear necessary.
A significant proportion of the delays at border crossings
are not due to a lack of adequate infrastructure, but is caused by
volume of trade, by complexities of inspection requirements, and by
less than optimal traffic management and cargo clearance procedures.
The responsibilities of the inspection agencies require that many
vehicles undergo lengthy, thorough inspections. Inadequate or
incomplete paperwork accompanying cross-border shipments is common and
constitutes another source of delay. Improvements appear to be needed
in a combination of partnerships and technology applications to resolve
some delay problems.
Inspection agency staffing shortages can lead to excessive
waiting time at border crossings. Traffic at most crossings is
typically concentrated during peak hours, and border facilities often
are idle for long periods during off-peak hours. More efficient use of
border facilities could spread traffic over a longer period during the
day, and thus alleviate some congestion.
Policies and practices of foreign governments often
contribute to congestion at the border. For example, inspection
agencies on both sides of the border work different hours.
Infrastructure and facilitation planning for major border
crossings is fragmented and inadequate. The Federal government
maintains an interagency group that coordinates review of proposals for
additional crossings on the southwest border, but it does not deal with
border communities or with planning of ancillary roadway or other needs
beyond the crossings themselves. Adequate planning will require
improved coordination among public and private entities, and among
Federal, state, and local governments. Such planning should be
binational and applied to both the northern and southern borders. The
Federal Government should have the lead role as regards the involvement
of foreign government entities. The Federal Government should also take
on a leadership role as facilitator and convener of the mix of domestic
government entities.
There is insufficient linkage between available data on
trade and transportation to permit the establishment of a firm
definition of what constitutes existing or emerging international trade
corridors for all modes of transportation.
Principal Recommendations
Transportation Infrastructure InvestmentSection 1089 of the ISTEA
directs the Department to evaluate the feasibility and advisability of
establishing a discretionary border infrastructure investment program.
While the Department is certainly capable of implementing such a
program if it were established by the Congress, we do not believe it to
be an advisable course of action. Even though the Department finds that
investment is needed to address deficiencies in highway approaches to
ports of entry and intermodal facilities, a number of alternative
actions to the discretionary program are recommended:
Fully fund the ISTEA to provide additional resources for
states to allocate to trade-related and other high priority projects.
With state and local governments, private financial
institutions, carriers, and other private interests, develop a
[[Page 13509]] range of funding options for infrastructure
improvements, emphasizing existing Federal, non-Federal, and potential
private sources. Identify, and eliminate wherever possible, impediments
in Federal programs to innovative public/private collaborative efforts.
As part of a future surface transportation authorization
bill, develop Federal-aid program options to improve transportation
infrastructure related to international trade, including border
approach roads and connections to port, airport, and other intermodal
facilities.
Border Station CongestionThe Department will support a task force
or multi-task forces composed of Federal, state and local government
agencies, and the private sector to address congestion at border
crossings in general or at specific gateways or crossings. The purpose
of the task force(s) is to identify critical border initiatives and to
aggressively promote the use of new technologies and other non-capital
intensive methods of facilitating the movement of people, cargo, and
vehicles through major border crossings. Any initiatives should be
closely coordinated with the Mexican and Canadian governments. A
limited number of pilot projects could be undertaken through a
competitive process to address congestion at various gateways. Funding
for these projects could include a variety of Federal, state, local or
private resources.
Transportation Planning and Data NeedsTo assure that planning for
future border trade-related infrastructure and technology requirements
for all modes is included in state and national planning processes, the
Department of Transportation and other Federal agencies should
establish binational planning zones to engage in an integrated
binational planning process. Planning for infrastructure and technology
improvements in these zones would be coordinated with Federal, state,
local, and private sector organizations that would identify improvement
priorities. Cross-border consultation and coordination would be an
integral part of the overall process.
To further assist in future border region and trade corridor
transportation system planning, it is advisable to develop and
implement a program for improving methods of collecting and analyzing
data on cross-border trade and traffic flows.
These detailed reports are (where PB numbers are listed) or will be
available from the National Technical Information Service, 5285 Port
Royal Road, Springfield, VA 22161, (703) 487-4634. All reports are
numbered FHWA-PL-94-009-xx. The suffix (xx) is shown following the
title listed below.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Title PB
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ASSESSMENT OF BORDER CROSSINGS AND TRANSPORTATION
CORRIDORS FOR NORTH AMERICAN TRADE: REPORT TO CONGRESS. 94-215806
ISTEA SECTION 1089 STUDY:
Feasibility Study for an International Border
Highway Infrastructure.............................
Discretionary Program (01).......................... 94-214319
ISTEA SECTION 6015 STUDY:
SOUTHEAST:
An Assessment of the Adequacy of East Coast and Gulf
of Mexico Port Infrastructure to Accommodate Trade
with Mexico. (02).................................. 95-124111
U.S. Border Crossings with Canada and Mexico-Port
Facilities, Inventory, and Constraints. Volume 1
(03)............................................... 95-124228
U.S. Border Crossings with Canada and Mexico-Port
Facilities, Inventory, and Constraints. Volume 2.
(04)............................................... 95-112215
NORTHEAST:
An Assessment of the Adequacy of U.S.-Canadian
Infrastructure to Accommodate Trade through Eastern
Border Crossings. (05)............................. 95-112041
Appendices:
1. Descriptive Profiles of Maine Frontier. (06). 95-106860
2. Descriptive Profiles of Montreal South
Frontier. (07)................................. 95-112223
3. Descriptive Profiles of Eastern New York
Frontier. (08)................................. 95-112231
4. Descriptive Profiles of Niagara Frontier.
(09)........................................... 95-112249
5. Descriptive Profiles of Michigan Frontier.
(10)........................................... 95-112256
Summary of International Border Crossings Roundtable
Meeting Held in Buffalo, New York, June 7, 1993.
(11)............................................... 95-124194
Summary of International Border Crossings Roundtable
Meeting Held in St. Louis, Missouri, June 9, 1993.
(12)............................................... 95-124178
Summary of International Border Crossings Roundtable
Meeting Held in Norfolk, Virginia, June 11, 1993.
(13)............................................... 95-124186
WEST:
Making Things Work: Transportation and Trade
Expansion in Western North America
Volume 1: A Summary Report. (14)................ 95-141263
Volume 2: Transportation and Trade Expansion in
Western U.S. and Canada. (15).................. 95-112264
Volume 3: Transportation and Trade Expansion
between the U.S. and Mexico. (16).............. 95-122891
Volume 4: Profiles of Western U.S.-Canada Border
Crossings. (17)................................ 94-192218
Volume 5: Profiles of U.S.-Mexico Border
Crossings. (18)................................ 95-122453
Volume 6: Reaching Out: A Compendium of
Stakeholder Views. (19) 95-106852
Trade and Transportation in the
Intermountain West. (20)................... 95-112066
U.S.-Mexico Transportation: A Trade
Perspective (21)........................... 95-124236
Western U.S.-Canada Trade and Transportation
Perspectives from the Northern Border. (22) 95-112272
Western U.S.-Mexico Trade and Transportation
Perspectives from the Southern Border. (23) 95-123949
Future Assessment of North American Border:
Perspectives on Key Factors Affecting North
American Trade and Transportation. (24).... 95-106837
Volume 7: Commissioned Special Reports. (25).... 95-
Disparities in the Law and Practice of
Surface Transportation of Goods between the
U.S. and Mexico. (26)...................... 95-142733
Financing Options for U.S.-Mexico Border
Transportation Projects. (27).............. 95-106845
Transportation Technology Trends and North
American Trade. (28)....................... 95-112280
Case Study: The Sweetgrass, Montana and
Coutts, Alberta Border Crossing. (29)...... 95-112298
Working Paper on Trends in International
Trade and Impacts on North American
Transportation. (30)....................... 94-192226
Working Paper on the Impact of Expanded U.S.-
Mexico Trade on the Western States (31).... 95-112306
Section 6015 Study: Results of the Futures
Assessment Process. (32)........................... 95-112314
[[Page 13510]]
Future Assessment Reference Book, Whitefish,
Montana, July 8-9, 1993. (33)...................... 95-123816
Future Assessment Workbook, Whitefish, Montana, July
8-9, 1993. (34).................................... 95-123824
Future Assessment Reference Book, New Orleans,
Louisiana, July 21-22, 1993. (35).................. 95-123832
Future Assessment Workbook, New Orleans, Louisiana,
July 21-22, 1993. (36)............................. 95-123840
Future Assessment Reference Book, Detroit, Michigan,
July 12-13, 1993. (37)............................. 95-123857
Future Assessment Workbook, Detroit, Michigan, July
12-13, 1993. (38).................................. 95-
Future Assessment Reference Book, Tucson, Arizona,
July 23-24, 1993. (39)............................. 95-123865
Descriptive Report on Trade and Transportation
Patterns in the Western U.S.-Canada Region. (40)... 95-123873
Descriptive Report of Cross-border Traffic and
Transportation in the Western U.S.-Canada Region.
(41)............................................... 95-112322
Working Paper on Intermodal Requirements on the U.S.-
Canadian Border in Western North America. (42)..... 95-112881
Working Paper on the Role of Government in Trade and
Transportation between U.S.-Canada in Western North
America. (43)...................................... 95-144622
Working Paper Analysis of Sub-Regional Economic
Trends Potentially Affecting U.S.-Canada Trade
Patterns. (44)..................................... 95-123899
Descriptive Report on Trade and Traffic Patterns
between U.S.-Mexico. (45).......................... 94-192234
Working Paper on the Impact of Western Economic
Growth on Trade with Mexico. (46).................. 95-112348
Working Paper on the Role of Government in Trade and
Transportation Between U.S.-Mexico. (47)........... 95-112355
Working Paper on Intermodal Requirements on the U.S.-
Mexico Border. (48)................................ 95-112363
Descriptive Report on Cross-Border Travel Activity
between the U.S., Canada and Mexico. (49).......... 95-
Working Paper Inventory of Institutional and Legal
Barriers to Seamless Interstate Borders within the
United States. (50)................................ 95-112371
Regional Data Base and Working Paper on Regional
Computerized Data Base. (51)....................... 95-142865
Institutional Profile Data Base and Working Paper on
Institutional Profiles for Continental Trade and
Transportation in the Western United States. (52).. 95-142741
Inventory of Existing Trade, Traffic and Visitor
Flow Data Sources. (53)............................ 95-112389
Working Summary of Key Methods of Forecasting Trade
and Traffic Patterns. (54)......................... 95-142758
Working Paper on Data Requirements for Intermodal
Planning and Analysis. (55)........................ 95-112397
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[R Doc. 95-6145 Filed 3-10-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-22-P