Prohibition Against Certain Flights Within the Territory and Airspace of Afghanistan; Supplemental Regulatory Flexibility Analysis, 42015-42017 [2010-17762]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 138 / Tuesday, July 20, 2010 / Proposed Rules
of the airspace necessary to ensure the
safety of aircraft and the efficient use of
airspace. This regulation is within the
scope of that authority as it modifies
controlled airspace at the airport.
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71
[Docket No.: FAA–2010–0289; SFAR No.
110]
Airspace, Incorporation by reference,
Navigation (air).
RIN 2120–AJ69
The Proposed Amendment
Prohibition Against Certain Flights
Within the Territory and Airspace of
Afghanistan; Supplemental Regulatory
Flexibility Analysis
Accordingly, pursuant to the
authority delegated to me, the Federal
Aviation Administration proposes to
amend 14 CFR Part 71 as follows:
PART 71—DESIGNATION OF CLASS A,
B, C, D AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR
TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND
REPORTING POINTS
1. The authority citation for 14 CFR
Part 71 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40103, 40113,
40120; E.O. 10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959–
1963 Comp., p. 389.
§ 71.1
[Amended]
2. The incorporation by reference in
14 CFR Part 71.1 of the FAA Order
7400.9T, Airspace Designations and
Reporting Points, signed August 27,
2009, and effective September 15, 2009
is amended as follows:
Paragraph 6004 Class E airspace
Designated as an Extension to a Class D
Surface Area.
*
*
*
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS_PART 1
AWP CA E4
*
*
San Clemente, CA [Modified]
San Clemente Island NALF (Fredrick
Sherman Field), CA
(Lat. 33°01′22″ N., long. 118°35′19″ W.)
San Clemente Island TACAN
(Lat. 33°01′37″ N., long. 118°34′46″ W.)
That airspace extending upward from the
surface within 2.6 miles each side of the San
Clemente Island TACAN 334° radial
extending from the 4.3-mile radius of San
Clemente Island NALF (Fredrick Sherman
Field) to Control 1177L, and within 1.8 miles
each side of the 064° bearing from the San
Clemente Island NALF (Fredrick Sherman
Field) Airport, extending from the 4.3-mile
radius to 9 miles northeast. This Class E
airspace area is effective during the specific
dates and times established in advance by a
Notice to Airmen. The effective date and time
will thereafter be continuously published in
the Airport/Facility Directory.
Issued in Seattle, Washington, on July 1,
2010.
John Warner,
Manager, Operations Support Group, Western
Service Center.
[FR Doc. 2010–17625 Filed 7–19–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:03 Jul 19, 2010
Jkt 220001
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 91
AGENCY: Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Proposed rule; Notice of
availability and request for comments.
SUMMARY: This document announces the
availability of and request for comments
on the Supplemental Regulatory
Flexibility Analysis for the previously
published proposed rule entitled,
Prohibition Against Certain Flights
Within the Territory and Airspace of
Afghanistan.
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before August 4, 2010.
ADDRESSES: You may send comments
identified by Docket Number FAA–
2010–0289 using any of the following
methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to
https://www.regulations.gov and follow
the online instructions for sending your
comments electronically.
• Mail: Send comments to Docket
Operations, M–30; U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue, SE., Room W12–140, West
Building Ground Floor, Washington, DC
20590–0001.
• Hand Delivery or Courier: Take
comments to Docket Operations in
Room W12–140 of the West Building
Ground Floor at 1200 New Jersey
Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, between
9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays.
• Fax: Fax comments to Docket
Operations at 202–493–2251.
For more information on the
rulemaking process, see the Additional
Information section of this document.
Privacy: We will post all comments
we receive, without change, to https://
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information you provide.
Using the search function of the docket
Web site, anyone can find and read the
electronic form of all comments
received into any of our dockets,
including the name of the individual
sending the comment (or signing the
comment for an association, business,
labor union, etc.). You may review
DOT’s complete Privacy Act Statement
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
42015
in the Federal Register published on
April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477–78) or you
may visit https://DocketsInfo.dot.gov.
Docket: To read background
documents or comments received, go to
https://www.regulations.gov at any time
and follow the online instructions for
accessing the docket or Docket
Operations in Room W12–140 of the
West Building Ground Floor at 1200
New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington,
DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Michael Lukacs, APO–300, Federal
Aviation Administration, 800
Independence Ave., SW., Washington,
DC 20591; telephone number: (202)
267–9641.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Later in
this preamble under the Additional
Information section, we discuss how
you can comment on this action and
how we will handle your comments.
Included in this discussion is related
information about the docket, privacy,
and the handling of proprietary or
confidential business information. We
also discuss how you can get a copy of
related rulemaking documents.
Background
On May 26, 2010, the FAA published
in the Federal Register the Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) entitled
Prohibition Against Certain Flights
Within the Territory and Airspace of
Afghanistan.1 The comment period for
the NPRM closed on June 10, 2010. The
FAA received several comments about
the agency’s economic assessment of the
proposed rule. Specifically, some
commenters did not agree with the
FAA’s determination that the NPRM
would not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small
entities. To address these concerns, the
FAA is publishing the below
Supplemental Regulatory Flexibility
Analysis for comment.
Supplemental Regulatory Flexibility
Analysis
The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980
(Pub. L. 96–354) (RFA) establishes ‘‘as a
principle of regulatory issuance that
agencies shall endeavor, consistent with
the objectives of the rule and of
applicable statutes, to fit regulatory and
informational requirements to the scale
of the businesses, organizations, and
governmental jurisdictions subject to
regulation. To achieve this principle,
agencies are required to solicit and
consider flexible regulatory proposals
1 Prohibition Against Certain Flights Within the
Territory and Airspace of Afghanistan: 75 FR 29466;
May 26, 2010.
E:\FR\FM\20JYP1.SGM
20JYP1
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS_PART 1
42016
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 138 / Tuesday, July 20, 2010 / Proposed Rules
and to explain the rationale for their
actions to assure that such proposals are
given serious consideration.’’ The RFA
covers a wide-range of small entities,
including small businesses, not-forprofit organizations, and small
governmental jurisdictions.
Agencies must perform a review to
determine whether a rule will have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities. If
the agency determines that it will, the
agency must prepare a regulatory
flexibility analysis as described in the
RFA.
Based on the comments received
following publication of the NPRM, we
have re-evaluated our certification
under the RFA that the proposed rule
will not, if promulgated, have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
Based on our re-evaluation, we have
determined that the proposed rule will,
if promulgated, have a significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. Consequently,
we have completed a Supplemental
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis and
request comments from affected small
entities. The purpose of this analysis is
to identify the number of small entities
affected, assess the economic impact of
the proposed regulation on them, and
consider less burdensome alternatives
and still meet the agency’s statutory
objectives. Under Section 603(b) and
603(c) of the RFA, the analysis must
address:
1. A description of the reasons why
the action by the agency is being
considered.
2. A succinct statement of the
objectives of, and legal basis for, the
proposed rule.
3. A description—and, where feasible,
an estimate of the number—of small
entities to which the proposed rule will
apply.
4. A description of the projected
reporting, recordkeeping, and other
compliance requirements of the
proposed rule, including an estimate of
the classes of small entities that will be
subject to the requirement and the types
of professional skills necessary for
preparation of the report or record.
5. An identification, to the extent
practicable, of all relevant federal rules
that may duplicate, overlap, or conflict
with the proposed rule.
6. Significant alternatives.
1. Description of the reasons why the
action by the agency is being
considered.
This action would permit certain U.S.
civil flight operations below flight level
(FL) 160 within the territory and
airspace of Afghanistan, when approved
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:03 Jul 19, 2010
Jkt 220001
by the FAA or when authorized by
exemption by the FAA. Otherwise,
flight operations below FL 160 within
the territory and airspace of Afghanistan
would be prohibited for all U.S. air
carriers; U.S. commercial operators;
persons exercising the privileges of a
U.S. airman certificate, except when
that person is operating a U.S.-registered
aircraft for a foreign air carrier; and
operators of U.S.-registered aircraft,
except when such operators are foreign
air carriers.
The FAA is considering this action
because insurgent activity in
Afghanistan has increased and threatens
the safety of U.S. civil aircraft and
operators operating within Afghan
airspace and overflying the territory of
Afghanistan. This insurgent activity has
adversely affected the safety of airfield
operations for these flights. The Afghan
insurgents, armed with various
weapons, pose a serious threat to U.S.
civil aircraft and operators at local
airports and to these aircraft on
approach to and departing from these
airports. Insurgents with small arms fire
capabilities have been targeting airfields
with rockets and have fired on aircraft
at these airfields. While U.S. civil
aircraft have not yet specifically been
targeted, there have been several
reported events of these aircraft being
hit by small arms fire. Also, foreign civil
aircraft that support the North Atlantic
Treaty Organization (NATO) have been
shot down by small arms and rocketpropelled grenade fire.
2. Objectives and legal basis for the
proposed rule.
The FAA is responsible for the safety
of flight in the United States and for the
safety of U.S.-registered aircraft and U.S.
operators throughout the world. Also,
the FAA is responsible for issuing rules
affecting the safety of air commerce and
national security. The FAA’s authority
to issue the rules on aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the United States
Code. Subtitle I, Section 106(g),
describes the authority of the FAA
Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation
Programs, describes in more detail the
scope of the agency’s authority. Section
40101(d)(1) provides that the
Administrator shall consider in the
public interest, among other matters,
assigning, maintaining, and enhancing
safety and security as the highest
priorities in air commerce. Section
40105(b)(1)(A) requires the
Administrator to exercise his authority
consistently with the obligations of the
United States Government under
international agreements. Further, the
FAA has broad authority under section
44701(a)(5) to prescribe regulations
governing the practices, methods, and
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
procedures the Administrator finds
necessary for safety in air commerce and
national security.
The FAA finds the proposed rule
necessary to prevent a potential hazard
to persons and aircraft engaged in
Afghanistan flight operations. The
nature of the hazard that the FAA seeks
to address is described in the preceding
section, ‘‘Description of the reasons why
the action by the agency is being
considered.’’
3. Description and Estimate of small
entities.
There are currently no operational
restrictions in Afghanistan. The
proposed rule would affect U.S.
operators, operators of U.S.-registered
aircraft (except foreign air carriers), and
U.S-certificated airmen (except those
U.S. certificated airmen engaged in the
operation of U.S.-registered aircraft for
foreign air carriers) who operate in
Afghanistan below FL 160.
In view of the threat escalation in the
territory and airspace of Afghanistan,
and in furtherance of the FAA
Administrator’s responsibilities to
promote the safe flight of U.S. civil
aircraft in air commerce and to issue
aviation rules in the interest of national
security of the United States, the
Administrator has determined that the
potential hazard to U.S-registered
aircraft and U.S.-certificated airmen
must be mitigated. Therefore, the FAA
proposes to issue an SFAR to restrict
flight below FL 160 within the airspace
and territory of Afghanistan, except in
compliance with the procedures set
forth in the proposed rule.
We expect as many as 25 small
entities would seek authorization from
the FAA to operate in Afghanistan
under this proposed rule. Depending on
the characteristics of the existing flight
operations, the number of flights could
be affected. The operators currently
operating are all-cargo, and all have less
than 1,500 employees. Generally, these
operators provide niche market services
and have available capacity to provide
military support. We are unable from
the comments we received to the NPRM
to determine the magnitude of the
economic impact of the proposed rule
on these operators. Separately, we are
also unable to document and publish
the revenue and number of operations
per operator.
4. Compliance requirements.
The proposed rule would allow flights
below FL 160 in the territory or airspace
of Afghanistan only with the approval of
the FAA or by an exemption issued by
the FAA. The required documentation
for the affected entities to be in
compliance with this proposed rule
would take each operator one hour to
E:\FR\FM\20JYP1.SGM
20JYP1
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS_PART 1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 138 / Tuesday, July 20, 2010 / Proposed Rules
fill out, endorse and file the required
paperwork. As such, the cost for a oneyear period would be $94 (1 hour × $94
per hour).
In addition to the paperwork that
would be required as a result of this
proposal, it is expected that some flight
operations would not be authorized.
Without authorization from the FAA to
conduct these flights, the operator’s
inability to conduct such operations
would result in a significant economic
impact.
The FAA has used Department of
Transportation Form 41 data for the
total operating revenue per flight for
international cargo operations of U.S.
Operators. In 2009, the reported median
revenue estimate was approximately
$70,000 per flight, although the profit
would be substantially less. As the
number of flights currently operating
would continue for the foreseeable
future, operators who eliminate flights
as a result of the proposed rule would
incur a significant economic loss. The
proposal would affect ‘‘more than just a
few’’ operators who fly in Afghanistan.
As such, we believe flights would be
eliminated for a substantial number of
operators.
The requirements of this proposal
would have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small
entities.
5. Relevant federal rules that may
duplicate, overlap, or conflict with the
proposed rule.
The FAA is unaware that the rule
would overlap, duplicate, or conflict
with existing federal rules.
6. Significant Alternatives
Considered.
Maintain the status quo: Continue to
allow all flights to occur without
requiring steps to manage the risks to
these operations from insurgent activity
or an approval or exemption from the
FAA.
The FAA is responsible for both the
safety of flight in the United States and
for the safety of U.S.-registered aircraft
and U.S. operators throughout the
world. The FAA rejected this alternative
and has not identified any significant
alternatives to the proposed rule which
accomplish the stated objectives of
applicable statutes and which minimize
any significant economic impact of the
proposed rule on small entities.
The FAA has determined that the
proposed rule would have a significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. Therefore, we
have prepared the above Supplemental
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis. We
solicit comments on this determination.
We also solicit comments on the
analysis of the number of small entities
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:03 Jul 19, 2010
Jkt 220001
that would be affected, the economic
impact of the proposed regulation on
these small entities, and whether there
are any less burdensome alternatives
that still meet the agency’s statutory
objectives.
Additional Information
Comments Invited
The FAA invites interested persons to
participate in this rulemaking by
submitting written comments, data, or
views. The most helpful comments will
reference a specific portion of the
Supplemental Regulatory Flexibility
Analysis or related rulemaking
document, explain the reason for any
recommended change, and include
supporting data. To ensure the docket
does not contain duplicate comments,
please submit a single copy of your
written or electronic comments only one
time.
All comments we receive will be filed
in the docket, as well as a report
summarizing each substantive public
contact with FAA personnel concerning
the proposed rulemaking. Before acting
on the proposal, we will consider all
comments we receive on or before the
closing date for comments. We will
consider comments filed after the
comment period has closed if it is
possible to do so without incurring
expense or delay. We may make changes
to the proposal in light of the comments
we receive.
Proprietary or Confidential Business
Information
Do not file in the docket information
that you consider to be proprietary or
confidential business information. Send
or deliver this information directly to
the person identified in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section of this
document. You must mark the
information that you consider
proprietary or confidential. If you send
the information on a disk or CD–ROM,
mark the outside of the disk or CD–ROM
and also identify electronically within
the disk or CD–ROM the specific
information that is proprietary or
confidential.
Under 14 CFR 11.35(b), when we are
aware of proprietary information filed
with a comment, we do not place it in
the docket. We hold it in a separate file
to which the public does not have
access, and we place a note in the
docket that we have received it. If we
receive a request to examine or copy
this information, we treat it as any other
request under the Freedom of
Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552). We
process such a request under the DOT
procedures found in 49 CFR part 7.
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
42017
Availability of Rulemaking Documents
You can get an electronic copy of
rulemaking documents using the
Internet by—
1. Searching the Federal eRulemaking
Portal (https://www.regulations.gov);
2. Visiting the FAA’s Regulations and
Policies web page at https://
www.faa.gov/regulations_policies; or
3. Accessing the Government Printing
Office’s web page at https://
www.gpoaccess.gov/fr/.
You can also get a copy by sending a
request to the Federal Aviation
Administration, Office of Rulemaking,
ARM–1, 800 Independence Avenue,
SW., Washington, DC 20591, or by
calling (202) 267–9680. Make sure to
identify the docket or SFAR number of
this rulemaking.
You may access all documents the
FAA considered in developing the
proposed rule, including economic
analyses and technical reports, from the
internet through the Federal
eRulemaking Portal referenced in
paragraph (1).
Issued in Washington, DC, on July 15,
2010.
Pamela Hamilton-Powell,
Director, Office of Rulemaking.
[FR Doc. 2010–17762 Filed 7–19–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY
COMMISSION
16 CFR Part 1218
RIN 3041–AC81
Safety Standard for Bassinets and
Cradles
AGENCY: Consumer Product Safety
Commission.
ACTION: Notice of reopening of comment
period.
SUMMARY: The Consumer Product Safety
Commission (‘‘CPSC’’ or ‘‘Commission’’)
is reopening the comment period for its
proposed rule on the Safety Standard for
Bassinets and Cradles. The reopened
comment period will expire on
September 10, 2010.
DATES: Written comments in response to
this document must be received by the
Commission no later than September 10,
2010.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments,
identified by Docket No. CPSC–2010–
0028, by any of the following methods:
Electronic Submissions
Submit electronic comments in the
following way: Federal eRulemaking
E:\FR\FM\20JYP1.SGM
20JYP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 138 (Tuesday, July 20, 2010)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 42015-42017]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-17762]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 91
[Docket No.: FAA-2010-0289; SFAR No. 110]
RIN 2120-AJ69
Prohibition Against Certain Flights Within the Territory and
Airspace of Afghanistan; Supplemental Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Proposed rule; Notice of availability and request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This document announces the availability of and request for
comments on the Supplemental Regulatory Flexibility Analysis for the
previously published proposed rule entitled, Prohibition Against
Certain Flights Within the Territory and Airspace of Afghanistan.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before August 4, 2010.
ADDRESSES: You may send comments identified by Docket Number FAA-2010-
0289 using any of the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to https://www.regulations.gov and follow the online instructions for sending your
comments electronically.
Mail: Send comments to Docket Operations, M-30; U.S.
Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Room W12-
140, West Building Ground Floor, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
Hand Delivery or Courier: Take comments to Docket
Operations in Room W12-140 of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200
New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
Fax: Fax comments to Docket Operations at 202-493-2251.
For more information on the rulemaking process, see the Additional
Information section of this document.
Privacy: We will post all comments we receive, without change, to
https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you
provide. Using the search function of the docket Web site, anyone can
find and read the electronic form of all comments received into any of
our dockets, including the name of the individual sending the comment
(or signing the comment for an association, business, labor union,
etc.). You may review DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in the
Federal Register published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-78) or you
may visit https://DocketsInfo.dot.gov.
Docket: To read background documents or comments received, go to
https://www.regulations.gov at any time and follow the online
instructions for accessing the docket or Docket Operations in Room W12-
140 of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE.,
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael Lukacs, APO-300, Federal
Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Ave., SW., Washington, DC
20591; telephone number: (202) 267-9641.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Later in this preamble under the Additional
Information section, we discuss how you can comment on this action and
how we will handle your comments. Included in this discussion is
related information about the docket, privacy, and the handling of
proprietary or confidential business information. We also discuss how
you can get a copy of related rulemaking documents.
Background
On May 26, 2010, the FAA published in the Federal Register the
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) entitled Prohibition Against
Certain Flights Within the Territory and Airspace of Afghanistan.\1\
The comment period for the NPRM closed on June 10, 2010. The FAA
received several comments about the agency's economic assessment of the
proposed rule. Specifically, some commenters did not agree with the
FAA's determination that the NPRM would not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities. To address these
concerns, the FAA is publishing the below Supplemental Regulatory
Flexibility Analysis for comment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Prohibition Against Certain Flights Within the Territory and
Airspace of Afghanistan: 75 FR 29466; May 26, 2010.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Supplemental Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (Pub. L. 96-354) (RFA)
establishes ``as a principle of regulatory issuance that agencies shall
endeavor, consistent with the objectives of the rule and of applicable
statutes, to fit regulatory and informational requirements to the scale
of the businesses, organizations, and governmental jurisdictions
subject to regulation. To achieve this principle, agencies are required
to solicit and consider flexible regulatory proposals
[[Page 42016]]
and to explain the rationale for their actions to assure that such
proposals are given serious consideration.'' The RFA covers a wide-
range of small entities, including small businesses, not-for-profit
organizations, and small governmental jurisdictions.
Agencies must perform a review to determine whether a rule will
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities. If the agency determines that it will, the agency must
prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis as described in the RFA.
Based on the comments received following publication of the NPRM,
we have re-evaluated our certification under the RFA that the proposed
rule will not, if promulgated, have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities. Based on our re-evaluation, we
have determined that the proposed rule will, if promulgated, have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
Consequently, we have completed a Supplemental Regulatory Flexibility
Analysis and request comments from affected small entities. The purpose
of this analysis is to identify the number of small entities affected,
assess the economic impact of the proposed regulation on them, and
consider less burdensome alternatives and still meet the agency's
statutory objectives. Under Section 603(b) and 603(c) of the RFA, the
analysis must address:
1. A description of the reasons why the action by the agency is
being considered.
2. A succinct statement of the objectives of, and legal basis for,
the proposed rule.
3. A description--and, where feasible, an estimate of the number--
of small entities to which the proposed rule will apply.
4. A description of the projected reporting, recordkeeping, and
other compliance requirements of the proposed rule, including an
estimate of the classes of small entities that will be subject to the
requirement and the types of professional skills necessary for
preparation of the report or record.
5. An identification, to the extent practicable, of all relevant
federal rules that may duplicate, overlap, or conflict with the
proposed rule.
6. Significant alternatives.
1. Description of the reasons why the action by the agency is being
considered.
This action would permit certain U.S. civil flight operations below
flight level (FL) 160 within the territory and airspace of Afghanistan,
when approved by the FAA or when authorized by exemption by the FAA.
Otherwise, flight operations below FL 160 within the territory and
airspace of Afghanistan would be prohibited for all U.S. air carriers;
U.S. commercial operators; persons exercising the privileges of a U.S.
airman certificate, except when that person is operating a U.S.-
registered aircraft for a foreign air carrier; and operators of U.S.-
registered aircraft, except when such operators are foreign air
carriers.
The FAA is considering this action because insurgent activity in
Afghanistan has increased and threatens the safety of U.S. civil
aircraft and operators operating within Afghan airspace and overflying
the territory of Afghanistan. This insurgent activity has adversely
affected the safety of airfield operations for these flights. The
Afghan insurgents, armed with various weapons, pose a serious threat to
U.S. civil aircraft and operators at local airports and to these
aircraft on approach to and departing from these airports. Insurgents
with small arms fire capabilities have been targeting airfields with
rockets and have fired on aircraft at these airfields. While U.S. civil
aircraft have not yet specifically been targeted, there have been
several reported events of these aircraft being hit by small arms fire.
Also, foreign civil aircraft that support the North Atlantic Treaty
Organization (NATO) have been shot down by small arms and rocket-
propelled grenade fire.
2. Objectives and legal basis for the proposed rule.
The FAA is responsible for the safety of flight in the United
States and for the safety of U.S.-registered aircraft and U.S.
operators throughout the world. Also, the FAA is responsible for
issuing rules affecting the safety of air commerce and national
security. The FAA's authority to issue the rules on aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, Section
106(g), describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII,
Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's
authority. Section 40101(d)(1) provides that the Administrator shall
consider in the public interest, among other matters, assigning,
maintaining, and enhancing safety and security as the highest
priorities in air commerce. Section 40105(b)(1)(A) requires the
Administrator to exercise his authority consistently with the
obligations of the United States Government under international
agreements. Further, the FAA has broad authority under section
44701(a)(5) to prescribe regulations governing the practices, methods,
and procedures the Administrator finds necessary for safety in air
commerce and national security.
The FAA finds the proposed rule necessary to prevent a potential
hazard to persons and aircraft engaged in Afghanistan flight
operations. The nature of the hazard that the FAA seeks to address is
described in the preceding section, ``Description of the reasons why
the action by the agency is being considered.''
3. Description and Estimate of small entities.
There are currently no operational restrictions in Afghanistan. The
proposed rule would affect U.S. operators, operators of U.S.-registered
aircraft (except foreign air carriers), and U.S-certificated airmen
(except those U.S. certificated airmen engaged in the operation of
U.S.-registered aircraft for foreign air carriers) who operate in
Afghanistan below FL 160.
In view of the threat escalation in the territory and airspace of
Afghanistan, and in furtherance of the FAA Administrator's
responsibilities to promote the safe flight of U.S. civil aircraft in
air commerce and to issue aviation rules in the interest of national
security of the United States, the Administrator has determined that
the potential hazard to U.S-registered aircraft and U.S.-certificated
airmen must be mitigated. Therefore, the FAA proposes to issue an SFAR
to restrict flight below FL 160 within the airspace and territory of
Afghanistan, except in compliance with the procedures set forth in the
proposed rule.
We expect as many as 25 small entities would seek authorization
from the FAA to operate in Afghanistan under this proposed rule.
Depending on the characteristics of the existing flight operations, the
number of flights could be affected. The operators currently operating
are all-cargo, and all have less than 1,500 employees. Generally, these
operators provide niche market services and have available capacity to
provide military support. We are unable from the comments we received
to the NPRM to determine the magnitude of the economic impact of the
proposed rule on these operators. Separately, we are also unable to
document and publish the revenue and number of operations per operator.
4. Compliance requirements.
The proposed rule would allow flights below FL 160 in the territory
or airspace of Afghanistan only with the approval of the FAA or by an
exemption issued by the FAA. The required documentation for the
affected entities to be in compliance with this proposed rule would
take each operator one hour to
[[Page 42017]]
fill out, endorse and file the required paperwork. As such, the cost
for a one-year period would be $94 (1 hour x $94 per hour).
In addition to the paperwork that would be required as a result of
this proposal, it is expected that some flight operations would not be
authorized. Without authorization from the FAA to conduct these
flights, the operator's inability to conduct such operations would
result in a significant economic impact.
The FAA has used Department of Transportation Form 41 data for the
total operating revenue per flight for international cargo operations
of U.S. Operators. In 2009, the reported median revenue estimate was
approximately $70,000 per flight, although the profit would be
substantially less. As the number of flights currently operating would
continue for the foreseeable future, operators who eliminate flights as
a result of the proposed rule would incur a significant economic loss.
The proposal would affect ``more than just a few'' operators who fly in
Afghanistan. As such, we believe flights would be eliminated for a
substantial number of operators.
The requirements of this proposal would have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities.
5. Relevant federal rules that may duplicate, overlap, or conflict
with the proposed rule.
The FAA is unaware that the rule would overlap, duplicate, or
conflict with existing federal rules.
6. Significant Alternatives Considered.
Maintain the status quo: Continue to allow all flights to occur
without requiring steps to manage the risks to these operations from
insurgent activity or an approval or exemption from the FAA.
The FAA is responsible for both the safety of flight in the United
States and for the safety of U.S.-registered aircraft and U.S.
operators throughout the world. The FAA rejected this alternative and
has not identified any significant alternatives to the proposed rule
which accomplish the stated objectives of applicable statutes and which
minimize any significant economic impact of the proposed rule on small
entities.
The FAA has determined that the proposed rule would have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
Therefore, we have prepared the above Supplemental Regulatory
Flexibility Analysis. We solicit comments on this determination. We
also solicit comments on the analysis of the number of small entities
that would be affected, the economic impact of the proposed regulation
on these small entities, and whether there are any less burdensome
alternatives that still meet the agency's statutory objectives.
Additional Information
Comments Invited
The FAA invites interested persons to participate in this
rulemaking by submitting written comments, data, or views. The most
helpful comments will reference a specific portion of the Supplemental
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis or related rulemaking document, explain
the reason for any recommended change, and include supporting data. To
ensure the docket does not contain duplicate comments, please submit a
single copy of your written or electronic comments only one time.
All comments we receive will be filed in the docket, as well as a
report summarizing each substantive public contact with FAA personnel
concerning the proposed rulemaking. Before acting on the proposal, we
will consider all comments we receive on or before the closing date for
comments. We will consider comments filed after the comment period has
closed if it is possible to do so without incurring expense or delay.
We may make changes to the proposal in light of the comments we
receive.
Proprietary or Confidential Business Information
Do not file in the docket information that you consider to be
proprietary or confidential business information. Send or deliver this
information directly to the person identified in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document. You must mark the
information that you consider proprietary or confidential. If you send
the information on a disk or CD-ROM, mark the outside of the disk or
CD-ROM and also identify electronically within the disk or CD-ROM the
specific information that is proprietary or confidential.
Under 14 CFR 11.35(b), when we are aware of proprietary information
filed with a comment, we do not place it in the docket. We hold it in a
separate file to which the public does not have access, and we place a
note in the docket that we have received it. If we receive a request to
examine or copy this information, we treat it as any other request
under the Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552). We process such a
request under the DOT procedures found in 49 CFR part 7.
Availability of Rulemaking Documents
You can get an electronic copy of rulemaking documents using the
Internet by--
1. Searching the Federal eRulemaking Portal (https://www.regulations.gov);
2. Visiting the FAA's Regulations and Policies web page at https://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies; or
3. Accessing the Government Printing Office's web page at https://www.gpoaccess.gov/fr/.
You can also get a copy by sending a request to the Federal
Aviation Administration, Office of Rulemaking, ARM-1, 800 Independence
Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591, or by calling (202) 267-9680. Make
sure to identify the docket or SFAR number of this rulemaking.
You may access all documents the FAA considered in developing the
proposed rule, including economic analyses and technical reports, from
the internet through the Federal eRulemaking Portal referenced in
paragraph (1).
Issued in Washington, DC, on July 15, 2010.
Pamela Hamilton-Powell,
Director, Office of Rulemaking.
[FR Doc. 2010-17762 Filed 7-19-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
