Prohibition Against Certain Flights in the Simferopol (UKFV) Flight Information Region (FIR), 22862-22869 [2014-09545]
Download as PDF
22862
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 80 / Friday, April 25, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601–
612)
§ 123.11 Does SBA require collateral for
any of its disaster loans?
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA),
5 U.S.C. 601 requires administrative
agencies to consider the effect of their
actions on small entities, including
small businesses.
According to the RFA, when an
agency issues a rule, the agency must
prepare an analysis to determine
whether the impact of the rule will have
a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
However, the RFA requires such
analysis only where notice and
comment rulemaking is required. Rules
are exempt from the APA notice and
comment requirements when the agency
for good cause finds that notice and
public procedure thereon is
impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary
to the public interest. SBA has
determined that there is good cause to
adopt this interim final rule without
prior public participation; therefore, the
rule is also exempt from the RFA
requirements. SBA invites comments on
this determination.
1. The authority citation for part 123
continues to read as follows:
(a) When collateral is not required:
(1) Economic injury disaster loans.
Generally, SBA will not require that you
pledge collateral to secure an economic
injury disaster loan of $25,000 or less.
(2) Physical disaster home and
physical disaster business loans. SBA
will not require that you pledge
collateral to secure a physical disaster
home or physical disaster business loan
of $14,000 or less. In addition, under a
Major Disaster, SBA generally will not
require that you pledge collateral to
secure a physical disaster home or
physical disaster business loan of
$25,000 or less.
(3) IDAP loans. Collateral
requirements for IDAP loans are set
forth in Subpart H of this part.
(4) Military Reservist EIDL. For the
purposes of the Military Reservist EIDL
only, as described in section 123.513,
SBA will not generally require that you
pledge collateral to secure a loan of
$50,000 or less.
(b) For loans larger than the amounts
outlined in paragraph (a) of this section,
you will be required to provide
available collateral such as a lien on the
damaged or replacement property, a
security interest in personal/business
property, or both.
(c) * * * In deciding whether
collateral is required, SBA will add up
all physical disaster loans to see if they
exceed the applicable unsecured
threshold outlined in paragraph (a)(2) of
this section and all economic injury
disaster loans to see if they exceed
$25,000.
*
*
*
*
*
Authority: 15 U.S.C. 632, 634(b) (6),
636(b), 636(d), 657n; Pub. L. 102–395, 106
Stat. 1828, 1864; Pub. L. 103–75, 107 Stat.
739; and Pub. L. 106–50, 113 Stat. 245.
Dated: April 16, 2014.
Maria Contreras-Sweet,
Administrator.
List of Subjects in 13 CFR Part 123
Disaster assistance, Loan programsbusiness, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Small businesses,
Terrorism.
For reasons set forth in the preamble,
SBA amends 13 CFR part 123 as
follows:
PART 123—DISASTER LOAN
PROGRAM
■
2. Amend § 123.6 by revising the first
sentence to read as follows:
■
WREIER-AVILES on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
§ 123.6 What does SBA look for when
considering a disaster loan applicant?
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:58 Apr 24, 2014
Jkt 232001
Good Cause for Immediate Adoption
Federal Aviation Administration
Title 5, United States Code (U.S.C.)
§ 553(b)(3)(B) authorizes agencies to
dispense with notice and comment
procedures for rules when the agency
for ‘‘good cause’’ finds that those
procedures are ‘‘impracticable,
unnecessary, or contrary to the public
interest.’’ In this instance, the FAA finds
that notice and public comment to this
immediately adopted final rule, as well
as any delay in the effective date of this
rule, are contrary to the public interest
due to the immediate need to address
the potential hazard to civil aviation
that now exists in a portion of the
Simferopol (UKFV) FIR, as described in
the Background section of this notice.
14 CFR Part 91
Authority for This Rulemaking
[Docket No.: FAA–2014–0225; Amdt. No.
91–331]
The FAA is responsible for the safety
of flight in the United States (U.S.) and
for the safety of U.S. civil operators,
U.S.-registered aircraft, and U.S.certificated airmen throughout the
world. The FAA’s authority to issue
rules on aviation safety is found in 49
U.S.C. Subtitle I, section 106(f),
describes the authority of the FAA
Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation
Programs, describes in more detail the
scope of the agency’s authority. Section
[FR Doc. 2014–09183 Filed 4–24–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8025–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
There must be reasonable assurance
that you can repay your loan based on
SBA’s analysis of your credit or your
personal or business cash flow, and you
must also have satisfactory
character.* * *
■ 3. Amend § 123.11 as follows:
■ a. Remove the introductory text and
paragraph (c);
■ b. Redesignate paragraphs (a) and (b)
as (c) and (d)
■ c. Add new paragraphs (a) and (b);
and
■ d. Revise the second sentence of
newly redesignated paragraph (c) to
read as follows.
This action prohibits certain
flight operations in a portion of the
Simferopol (UKFV) Flight Information
Region (FIR) by all U.S. air carriers; U.S.
commercial operators; persons
exercising the privileges of a U.S.
airman certificate, except when such
persons are operating a U.S.-registered
aircraft for a foreign air carrier; and
operators of U.S.-registered civil aircraft,
except when such operators are foreign
air carriers. The FAA finds this action
to be necessary to prevent a potential
hazard to persons and aircraft engaged
in such flight operations.
DATES: This final rule is effective on
April 25, 2014, and remains in effect
through April 27, 2015.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
technical questions concerning this
action, contact Will Gonzalez, Air
Transportation Division, Flight
Standards Service Federal Aviation
Administration, 800 Independence
Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591;
telephone 202–267–8166; email
will.gonzalez@faa.gov.
For legal questions concerning this
action, contact Robert Frenzel, Office of
the Chief Counsel, AGC–200, Federal
Aviation Administration, 800
Independence Avenue SW.,
Washington, DC 20591; telephone (202)
267–7638; email robert.frenzel@faa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
SUMMARY:
RIN 2120–AK50
Prohibition Against Certain Flights in
the Simferopol (UKFV) Flight
Information Region (FIR)
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Immediately adopted final rule.
AGENCY:
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\25APR1.SGM
25APR1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 80 / Friday, April 25, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
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
U.S. Government under international
agreements.
This rulemaking is promulgated
under the authority described in
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section
44701, General requirements. Under
that section, the FAA is charged broadly
with promoting safe flight of civil
aircraft in air commerce by prescribing,
among other things, regulations and
minimum standards for practices,
methods, and procedures the
Administrator finds necessary for safety
in air commerce and national security.
This regulation is within the scope of
that authority because it prohibits the
persons subject to paragraph (a) of this
Special Federal Aviation Regulation
(SFAR) from conducting flight
operations in a portion of the
Simferopol (UKFV) FIR due to the
potential hazard to the safety of such
persons’ flight operations described in
the Background section of this
document.
WREIER-AVILES on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
I. Overview of Immediately Adopted
Final Rule
This action prohibits flight operations
in a portion of the Simferopol (UKFV)
FIR by all U.S. air carriers; U.S.
commercial operators; persons
exercising the privileges of a U.S.
airman certificate, except when such
persons are operating a U.S.-registered
aircraft for a foreign air carrier; and
operators of U.S.-registered civil aircraft,
except when such operators are foreign
air carriers. The FAA finds this action
necessary to prevent a potential hazard
to persons and aircraft engaged in such
flight operations.
II. Background
The FAA has safety and national
security concerns regarding flight
operations in a portion of the
Simferopol (UKFV) FIR. On March 28,
2014, the Russian Federation issued a
Notice-to-Airmen (NOTAM) purporting
to establish unilaterally a new FIR,
effective April 3, 2014, in a significant
portion of the Simferopol (UKFV) FIR.
The affected airspace includes sovereign
Ukrainian airspace over the Crimean
Peninsula and the associated Ukrainian
territorial sea, as well as international
airspace managed by Ukraine over the
Black Sea and the Sea of Azov under a
regional air navigation agreement
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:58 Apr 24, 2014
Jkt 232001
approved by the Council of the
International Civil Aviation
Organization (ICAO). This action by the
Russian Federation contradicts
international law, including provisions
of the Convention on International Civil
Aviation, done at Chicago, December 7,
1944 (also known as the ‘‘Chicago
Convention’’) and the standards
established in Annex 11 to the Chicago
Convention. Ukraine has rejected the
Russian Federation’s purported
establishment of a new FIR within the
existing Simferopol (UKFV) FIR and
continues to provide air traffic control
services in both Ukrainian territorial
airspace and international airspace
assigned to Ukraine.
In response to the Russian
Federation’s actions, Ukraine
established a prohibited area over the
Crimean Peninsula for flight operations
below flight level 290 by means of a
NOTAM and closed various air traffic
services (ATS) route segments. The
Russian Federation further responded
by the issuance of a NOTAM that
rejected and directly conflicts with
Ukrainian NOTAMs concerning the
establishment of the prohibited area and
the route segment closures. On April 2,
2014, ICAO’s Regional Director for
Europe and the North Atlantic Regions
issued a state letter to countries and
their civil aviation authorities
highlighting the possible existence of
serious risks to the safety of
international civil flights. ICAO stated
that, due to the unsafe situation where
more than one ATS provider may be
controlling flights within the same
airspace from April 3, 2014, 0600
Universal Time Coordinated (UTC)
onwards, consideration should be given
to implementing measures to avoid the
airspace and to circumnavigate the
Simferopol (UKFV) FIR with alternative
routings.
In the FAA’s view, the potential for
civil aircraft to receive confusing and
conflicting air traffic control
instructions from both Ukrainian and
Russian ATS providers while operating
in the portion of the Simferopol (UKFV)
FIR covered by this SFAR is unsafe and
presents a potential hazard to civil flight
operations in the disputed airspace. In
addition, political and military tension
between Ukraine and the Russian
Federation remains high, and
compliance with air traffic control
instructions issued by the authorities of
one country could result in a civil
aircraft being misidentified as a threat
and intercepted or otherwise engaged by
air defense forces of the other country.
This SFAR will remain in effect for
one year. During this period, the FAA
will continue to actively evaluate the
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
22863
area and the airports in the region to
determine to what extent U.S. civil
operators may be able to safely operate
in the region. Adjustments to the SFAR
may be appropriate if the risk to
aviation safety and security changes.
The FAA may amend or rescind the
SFAR as necessary prior to the
expiration date.
Because the circumstances described
herein warrant immediate action by the
FAA, I find that notice and public
comment under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(B) are
impracticable and contrary to the public
interest. However, we will accept any
comments regarding the impact of this
action for consideration in future
rulemaking action to amend or rescind
this SFAR. Further, I find that good
cause exists under 5 U.S.C. 553(d) for
making this rule effective immediately
upon issuance. I also find that this
action is fully consistent with the
obligations under 49 U.S.C. 40105 to
ensure that I exercise my duties
consistently with the obligations of the
United States under international
agreements.
Approval Based on Authorization
Request of an Agency of the United
States Government
If a department, agency, or
instrumentality of the U.S. Government
determines that it has a critical need to
engage any person covered under SFAR
No. 113, § 91.1607, including a U.S. air
carrier or a U.S. commercial operator, to
conduct a charter to transport civilian or
military passengers or cargo through the
portion of the Simferopol (UKFV) FIR
covered by this SFAR, that department,
agency, or instrumentality may request
the FAA to approve persons covered
under SFAR No.113, § 91.1607, to
conduct such operations. An approval
request must be made in a letter signed
by an appropriate senior official of the
requesting department, agency, or
instrumentality of the U.S. Government;
the letter must be sent to the Associate
Administrator for Aviation Safety
(AVS–1), Federal Aviation
Administration, 800 Independence
Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591.
Electronic submissions are acceptable,
and the requesting entity may request an
electronic copy of the FAA’s response.
If a requestor wishes to make an
electronic submission to the FAA, the
requestor should contact the Air
Transportation Division, Flight
Standards Service at (202) 267–8166 for
the appropriate email address, as the
division anticipates an email system
change in the near future that would
likely make any email address
published here outdated. A single letter
may request approval from the FAA for
E:\FR\FM\25APR1.SGM
25APR1
WREIER-AVILES on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
22864
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 80 / Friday, April 25, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
multiple persons covered under SFAR
No. 113, § 91.1607, and/or for multiple
flight operations. To the extent known,
the letter must identify the person(s)
expected to be covered under the SFAR
on whose behalf the U.S. Government
department, agency, or instrumentality
is seeking FAA approval, and it must
describe—
• The proposed operation(s),
including the nature of the mission
being supported;
• The service to be provided by the
person(s) covered by the SFAR;
• To the extent known, the specific
locations within the portion of the
Simferopol (UKFV) FIR covered by this
SFAR where the proposed operation(s)
will be conducted; and
• The method by which the
department, agency, or instrumentality
will provide, or how the operator will
otherwise obtain, current threat
information and an explanation of how
the operator will integrate this
information into all phases of its
proposed operations (e.g., pre-mission
planning and briefing, in-flight, and
post-flight).
The request for approval must also
include a list of operators, including
subcontractors, with whom the U.S.
Government department, agency, or
instrumentality requesting FAA
approval has a current contract(s),
grant(s), or cooperative agreement(s) for
specific flight operations in the
Simferopol (UKFV) FIR. Additional
such operators may be identified to the
FAA at any time after the FAA approval
is issued. Updated lists should be sent
to the email address specified by the Air
Transportation Division, (202) 267–
8166.
If an approval request includes
classified information, requestors may
contact Aviation Safety Inspector Will
Gonzalez for instructions on submitting
it to the FAA. His contact information
is listed in the For Further Information
Contact section of this final rule.
FAA approval of the operation under
SFAR No. 113, § 91.1607, does not
relieve persons subject to this SFAR of
their responsibility to comply with all
applicable FAA rules and regulations.
Operators of civil aircraft will have to
comply with the conditions of their
certificate and Operations Specifications
(OpSpecs). In addition, operators will
have to comply with all rules and
regulations of other U.S. Government
departments or agencies that may apply
to the proposed operation, including,
but not limited to, the Transportation
Security Regulations issued by the
Transportation Security Administration,
Department of Homeland Security.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:58 Apr 24, 2014
Jkt 232001
Approval Conditions
When the FAA approves the request,
the FAA’s Aviation Safety Organization
(AVS) will send a letter to the
requesting department, agency, or
instrumentality confirming that the
FAA’s approval is subject to all of the
following conditions:
(1) The approval will stipulate those
procedures and conditions that limit, to
the greatest degree possible, the risk to
the operator, while still allowing the
operator to achieve its operational
objectives.
(2) Any approval will specify that the
operation is not eligible for coverage
under a premium war risk insurance
policy issued by the FAA under chapter
443 of title 49, U.S. Code.1
(3) If the proposed operation would
have been covered by a premium war
risk insurance policy issued by the
FAA, but for SFAR No. 113, § 91.1607,
the FAA will issue an endorsement to
that premium policy that specifically
excludes coverage for any operations
into, out of, within, or through the
portion of the Simferopol (UKFV) FIR
covered by this SFAR, including
operations under a flight plan that
contemplates landing in or taking off
from Crimea. The endorsement to the
premium policy will take effect before
the approval’s effective date. The
operator must further establish that it
has obtained substitute commercial war
risk coverage for operations in the
portion of the Simferopol (UKFV) FIR
covered by this SFAR or that the
operation would be covered by an
effective non-premium war risk
insurance policy issued by the FAA
under chapter 443 of title 49, U.S. Code.
The exclusion specified in the
endorsement remains in effect
notwithstanding the issuance of any
approval under, or exemption from, this
SFAR (the chapter 443 premium policy
refers to such approval as a ‘‘waiver’’
and such exemption as an ‘‘exclusion’’).
Additionally, before any approval takes
effect, the operator must submit to the
FAA a written release of the U.S.
Government (including but not limited
to the United States of America, as
Insurer) from all damages, claims and
liabilities, including without limitation
legal fees and expenses, and the
operator’s agreement to indemnify the
U.S. Government (including but not
limited to the United States of America,
1 If and when, in connection with an operator’s
contract with a department, agency, or
instrumentality of the U.S. Government, an
operation is covered by a non-premium war risk
insurance policy issued by FAA under 49 U.S.C.
44305, coverage under that operator’s FAA
premium war risk insurance policy is suspended as
a condition of that premium policy.
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
as Insurer) with respect to any and all
third-party damages, claims and
liabilities, including without limitation
legal fees and expenses, relating to any
event arising from or related to the
approved operations in the portion of
the Simferopol (UKFV) FIR covered by
this SFAR. This waiver of claims does
not preclude an operator from raising a
claim under an applicable non-premium
war risk insurance policy issued by the
FAA.
(4) Other conditions determined by
the FAA, including those that may be
imposed in OpSpecs.
If the proposed operation or
operations are approved, the FAA will
issue OpSpecs to the certificate holder
authorizing these operations. The FAA
will notify the departments, agencies, or
instrumentalities that request FAA
approval of civil flight operations to be
conducted by one or more persons
described in paragraph (a) of this SFAR
of any additional conditions beyond
those contained in the approval letter, if
the operations are approved. The
requesting department, agency, or
instrumentality must have a contract
(includes subcontracts), grant, or
cooperative agreement with the
person(s) described in paragraph (a) of
this SFAR on whose behalf the
department, agency, or instrumentality
requests FAA approval.
Request for Exemptions
Any operations not conducted under
the approval process discussed above
must be conducted under an exemption
from this SFAR. A request by any
person covered under SFAR No. 113,
§ 91.1607, for an exemption must
comply with 14 CFR part 11, and will
require exceptional circumstances
beyond those contemplated by the
approval process set forth in this SFAR.
In addition to the information required
by 14 CFR § 11.81, as a minimum, the
petitioner must describe in its
submission to the FAA—
• The proposed operation(s),
including the nature of the operation;
• The service to be provided by the
person(s) covered by the SFAR;
• The specific locations within the
portion of the Simferopol (UKFV) FIR
covered by this SFAR where the
proposed operation(s) will be
conducted, and;
• The method by which the operator
will obtain current threat information
and an explanation of how the operator
will integrate this information into all
phases of its proposed operations (e.g.,
pre-mission planning and briefing, inflight, and post-flight).
Additionally, the endorsement of any
premium war risk insurance policy
E:\FR\FM\25APR1.SGM
25APR1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 80 / Friday, April 25, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
WREIER-AVILES on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
issued under chapter 443 of title 49,
U.S. Code, and a waiver and
indemnification agreement, all as
referred to above, will also be required
as a condition of any exemption issued
under SFAR No. 113, § 91.1607. The
FAA recognizes that there may be
operations conducted for the
governments of other countries with the
support of the U.S. Government that
may be affected by this SFAR. While
these operations will not be permitted
through the approval process, the FAA
will process exemption requests for
such operations on an expedited basis
and prior to any private exemption
requests.
IV. Regulatory Evaluation, Regulatory
Flexibility Determination, International
Trade Impact Assessment, and
Unfunded Mandates Assessment
Changes to Federal regulations must
undergo several economic analyses.
First, Executive Order 12866 and
Executive Order 13563 direct that each
Federal agency shall propose or adopt a
regulation only upon a reasoned
determination that the benefits of the
intended regulation justify its costs.
Second, the Regulatory Flexibility Act
of 1980 (Pub. L. 96–354), as codified in
5 U.S.C. 603, requires agencies to
analyze the economic impact of
regulatory changes on small entities.
Third, the Trade Agreements Act of
1979 (Pub. L. 96–39), as codified in 19
U.S.C. 2532, prohibits agencies from
setting standards that create
unnecessary obstacles to the foreign
commerce of the United States. In
developing U.S. standards, the Trade
Agreements Act requires agencies to
consider international standards and,
where appropriate, that they be the basis
of U.S. standards. Fourth, the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L.
104–4), as codified in 2 U.S.C. 1532,
requires agencies to prepare a written
assessment of the costs, benefits, and
other effects of proposed or final rules
that include a Federal mandate likely to
result in the expenditure by State, local,
or tribal governments, in the aggregate,
or by the private sector, of $100 million
or more annually (adjusted for inflation
with base year of 1995). This portion of
the preamble summarizes the FAA’s
analysis of the economic impacts of this
final rule.
Department of Transportation Order
(DOT) 2100.5 prescribes policies and
procedures for simplification, analysis,
and review of regulations. If the
expected cost impact is so minimal that
a proposed or final rule does not
warrant a full evaluation, this order
permits that a statement to that effect
and the basis for it to be included in the
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:58 Apr 24, 2014
Jkt 232001
preamble if a full regulatory evaluation
of the cost and benefits is not prepared.
Such a determination has been made for
this final rule. The reasoning for this
determination follows:
This rule prohibits flights in an area
of airspace over the Crimean Peninsula,
the associated Ukrainian territorial sea,
and adjacent international airspace
assigned to Ukraine where both the
Ukrainian and Russian air traffic
services claim jurisdiction. This
situation could result in confusing or
conflicting instructions to operators of
civil aircraft, creating a potentially
unsafe operating environment. The
alternative flight routes result in some
additional fuel and operations costs to
the operators, as well as some costs
attributed to passenger time. By
prohibiting unsafe flights, the benefits of
this rule will exceed the minimal flight
deviation costs.
In conducting these analyses, FAA
has determined this final rule is a
‘‘significant regulatory action,’’ as
defined in section 3(f) of Executive
Order 12866, because it raises novel
policy issues contemplated under that
executive order. The rule is also
‘‘significant’’ as defined in DOT’s
Regulatory Policies and Procedures. The
final rule, if adopted, will not have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities,
will not create unnecessary obstacles to
international trade and will not impose
an unfunded mandate on state, local, or
tribal governments, or on the private
sector.
A. 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
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.
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
22865
However, if an agency determines that
a rule is not expected to have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities,
section 605(b) of the RFA provides that
the head of the agency may so certify
and a regulatory flexibility analysis is
not required. The certification must
include a statement providing the
factual basis for this determination, and
the reasoning should be clear.
U.S. certificate holders affected by
this final rule are predominately large
passenger and all-cargo carriers. There
are some small entity operators flying
under U.S. government contract and
some operators providing flights that
support oil operations that the FAA
anticipates will also be affected. Many
of these operations are conducted by
small entities, but due to the immediacy
of the potential harm to U.S. certificate
holders, their passengers, crew, and
cargo, there is not a sufficient amount of
time to ascertain exact numbers. There
are likely to be enough such operators
to be considered a substantial number of
small entities. While we have not
performed a full cost benefit analysis of
this rule, we estimate that
approximately 10 to 12 U.S. carrier
operations per day will be impacted by
this rule, and that the average cost of
avoiding the disputed air space is
approximately $2,000 per flight,
equating to a cost estimate to U.S.
carriers of $8.8–11 million, annually.
This estimate does not include
additional operations costs and time
costs. However, the $2,000 per flight
estimate includes impacts on U.S. air
carriers, including charter operations.
The $2,000 per flight estimate is
calculated using an air carrier-provided
average additional fuel burn estimate for
the deviation of 4,000 pounds of fuel, at
the total system average fuel price for
U.S. air carriers, $3.05 per gallon (‘‘Fuel
Cost and Consumption,’’ US DOT
Bureau of Transportation Statistics,
Monthly report Jan. 2014), and a
conversion factor of 6.84 pounds of fuel
per gallon (Air BP Handbook of
Products, Air BP Ltd 2000). Therefore,
as provided in section 605(b), the head
of the FAA certifies that this rulemaking
will not result in a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small
entities.
B. International Trade Impact
Assessment
The Trade Agreements Act of 1979
(Pub. L. 96–39), as amended by the
Uruguay Round Agreements Act (Pub.
L. 103–465), prohibits Federal agencies
from establishing standards or engaging
in related activities that create
unnecessary obstacles to the foreign
E:\FR\FM\25APR1.SGM
25APR1
22866
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 80 / Friday, April 25, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
commerce of the United States.
Pursuant to these Acts, the
establishment of standards is not
considered an unnecessary obstacle to
the foreign commerce of the United
States, so long as the standard has a
legitimate domestic objective, such the
protection of safety, and does not
operate in a manner that excludes
imports that meet this objective. The
statute also requires consideration of
international standards and, where
appropriate, that they be the basis for
U.S. standards. The FAA has assessed
the potential effect of this final rule and
determined that its purpose is to protect
the safety of U.S. civil aviation from a
potential hazard outside the U.S.
Therefore, the rule is in compliance
with the Trade Agreements Act.
C. Unfunded Mandates Assessment
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4)
requires each Federal agency to prepare
a written statement assessing the effects
of any Federal mandate in a proposed or
final agency rule that may result in an
expenditure of $100 million or more (in
1995 dollars) in any one year by State,
local, and tribal governments, in the
aggregate, or by the private sector; such
a mandate is deemed to be a ‘‘significant
regulatory action.’’ The FAA currently
uses an inflation-adjusted value of
$151.0 million in lieu of $100 million.
This final rule does not contain such a
mandate; therefore, the requirements of
Title II of the Act do not apply.
WREIER-AVILES on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
D. Paperwork Reduction Act
The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(44 U.S.C. 3507(d)) requires that the
FAA consider the impact of paperwork
and other information collection
burdens imposed on the public. The
FAA has determined that there is no
new requirement for information
collection associated with this
immediately adopted final rule.
E. International Compatibility and
Cooperation
(1) In keeping with U.S. obligations
under the Chicago Convention, it is
FAA policy to conform to ICAO
Standards and Recommended Practices
to the maximum extent practicable. The
FAA has determined that there are no
ICAO Standards and Recommended
Practices that correspond to these
proposed regulations.
(2) Executive Order 13609, Promoting
International Regulatory Cooperation,
promotes international regulatory
cooperation to meet shared challenges
involving health, safety, labor, security,
environmental, and other issues and to
reduce, eliminate, or prevent
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:58 Apr 24, 2014
Jkt 232001
unnecessary differences in regulatory
requirements. The Russian Federation’s
unilateral attempt to establish a new FIR
in Ukrainian territorial airspace and
international airspace managed by
Ukraine threatens to undermine the
framework for international regulatory
cooperation in civil aviation established
under the Chicago Convention. This
action by the FAA contributes to the
international community’s efforts to
uphold that framework.
F. Environmental Analysis
FAA Order 1050.1E identifies FAA
actions that are categorically excluded
from preparation of an environmental
assessment or environmental impact
statement under the National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) in the
absence of extraordinary circumstances.
The FAA has determined this
rulemaking action qualifies for the
categorical exclusion identified in
paragraph 312(f) and involves no
extraordinary circumstances.
The FAA has reviewed the
implementation of the proposed SFAR
and determined it is categorically
excluded from further environmental
review according to FAA Order 1050.1E,
‘‘Environmental Impacts: Policies and
Procedures,’’ paragraph 312(f). The FAA
has examined possible extraordinary
circumstances and determined that no
such circumstances exist. After careful
and thorough consideration of the
proposed action, the FAA finds that the
proposed Federal action does not
require preparation of an EA or EIS in
accordance with the requirements of
NEPA, Council on Environmental
Quality (CEQ) regulations, and FAA
Order 1050.1E.
V. Executive Order Determinations
A. Executive Order 13132, Federalism
The FAA has analyzed this
immediately adopted final rule under
the principles and criteria of Executive
Order 13132, Federalism. The agency
determined that this action will not
have a substantial direct effect on the
States, or the relationship between the
Federal Government and the States, or
on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government, and, therefore,
does not have Federalism implications.
(May 18, 2001). The agency has
determined that it is not a ‘‘significant
energy action’’ under the executive
order and it is not likely to have a
significant adverse effect on the supply,
distribution, or use of energy.
VI. How To Obtain Additional
Information
A. Rulemaking Documents
An electronic copy of a rulemaking
document may be obtained by using the
Internet—
1. Search the Federal Document
Management System (FDMS) Portal
(https://www.regulations.gov);
2. Visit the FAA’s Regulations and
Policies Web page at https://
www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/ or
3. Access the Government Printing
Office’s Web page at: https://
www.gpo.gov/fdsys/.
Copies may also be obtained by
sending a request (identified by notice,
amendment, or docket number of this
rulemaking) to the Federal Aviation
Administration, Office of Rulemaking,
ARM–1, 800 Independence Avenue
SW., Washington, DC 20591, or by
calling (202) 267–9680.
B. Small Business Regulatory
Enforcement Fairness Act
The Small Business Regulatory
Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996
(SBREFA) requires FAA to comply with
small entity requests for information or
advice about compliance with statutes
and regulations within its jurisdiction.
A small entity with questions regarding
this document may contact its local
FAA official, or the person listed under
the For Further Information Contact
section at the beginning of the preamble.
To find out more about SBREFA on the
Internet, visit https://www.faa.gov/
regulations_policies/rulemaking/sbre_
act/.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 91
Air traffic control, Aircraft, Airmen,
Airports, Aviation safety, Freight,
Ukraine.
The Amendment
In consideration of the foregoing, the
Federal Aviation Administration
amends chapter I of Title 14, Code of
Federal Regulations as follows:
PART 91—GENERAL OPERATING AND
FLIGHT RULES
B. Executive Order 13211, Regulations
That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use
■
The FAA analyzed this immediately
adopted final rule under Executive
Order 13211, Actions Concerning
Regulations That Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g), 1155,
40103, 40113, 40120, 44101, 44111, 44701,
44704, 44709, 44711, 44712, 44715, 44716,
44717, 44722, 46306, 46315, 46316, 46504,
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
1. The authority citation for part 91
continues to read as follows:
E:\FR\FM\25APR1.SGM
25APR1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 80 / Friday, April 25, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
46506–46507, 47122, 47508, 47528–47531,
47534, articles 12 and 29 of the Convention
on International Civil Aviation (61 Stat.
1180), (126 Stat. 11).
2. Add new § 91.1607 to subpart M to
read as follows:
■
§ 91.1607 Special Federal Aviation
Regulation No. 113—Prohibition Against
Certain Flights in the Simferopol (UKFV)
Flight Information Region (FIR).
WREIER-AVILES on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
(a) Applicability. This Special Federal
Aviation Regulation (SFAR) applies to
the following persons:
(1) All U.S. air carriers and U.S.
commercial operators;
(2) All persons exercising the
privileges of an airman certificate issued
by the FAA, except such persons
operating U.S.-registered aircraft for a
foreign air carrier; and
(3) All operators of U.S.-registered
civil aircraft, except where the operator
of such aircraft is a foreign air carrier.
(b) Flight prohibition. Except as
provided in paragraphs (c) and (d) of
this section, no person described in
paragraph (a) of this section may
conduct flight operations in the portion
of the Simferopol (UKFV) FIR within
the following lateral limits: 454500N
0345800E–460900N 0360000E–460000N
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:58 Apr 24, 2014
Jkt 232001
0370000E–452700N 0364100E–452242N
0364100E–451824N 0363524E–451442N
0363542E–451218N 0363200E–450418N
0363418E–445600N 0363700E–443100N
0364000E–424400N 0361600E–424700N
0340000E–424800N 0304500E–434100N
0303200E–441500N 0302400E–444600N
0300900E–455400N 0322500E–454900N
0324700E–455400N 0330600E–455600N
0332700E–455900N 0332900E—then
along the Crimea border to 454500N
0345800E. See Figure 1 below for a
depiction of the affected airspace.
(c) Permitted operations. This section
does not prohibit persons described in
paragraph (a) of this section from
conducting flight operations in the
portion of the Simferopol (UKFV) FIR
described in paragraph (b) of this
section, provided that such flight
operations are conducted under a
contract, grant or cooperative agreement
with a department, agency, or
instrumentality of the U.S. government
with the approval of the FAA, or under
an exemption issued by the FAA. The
FAA will process requests for approval
or exemption in a timely manner, with
an order of preference being: first, for
those operations in support of U.S.
government-sponsored activities;
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
22867
second, for those operations in support
of government-sponsored activities of a
foreign country with the support of a
U.S. government department, agency, or
instrumentality; and third, for all other
operations.
(d) Emergency situations. In an
emergency that requires immediate
decision and action for the safety of the
flight, the pilot in command of an
aircraft may deviate from this section to
the extent required by that emergency.
Except for U.S. air carriers and
commercial operators that are subject to
the requirements of 14 CFR parts 119,
121, 125, or 135, each person who
deviates from this section must, within
10 days of the deviation, excluding
Saturdays, Sundays, and Federal
holidays, submit to the nearest FAA
Flight Standards District Office (FSDO)
a complete report of the operations of
the aircraft involved in the deviation,
including a description of the deviation
and the reasons for it.
(e) Expiration. This SFAR will remain
in effect until April 27, 2015. The FAA
may amend, rescind, or extend this
SFAR as necessary.
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
E:\FR\FM\25APR1.SGM
25APR1
22868
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 80 / Friday, April 25, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:58 Apr 24, 2014
Jkt 232001
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\25APR1.SGM
25APR1
ER25AP14.030
WREIER-AVILES on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
Figure 1: Depiction of Airspace Covered by SFAR 113
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 80 / Friday, April 25, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
Issued under authority provided by 49
U.S.C. 106(f), 40101(d)(1), 40105(b)(1)(A),
44701(a)(5), in Washington, DC, on April 23,
2014.
Michael G. Whitaker,
Deputy Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2014–09545 Filed 4–23–14; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–C
Manager, Docket Operations, telephone
(202) 366–9826.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Acronyms
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
A. Regulatory History and Information
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 165
[Docket Number USCG–2014–0236]
RIN 1625–AA00
Safety Zone for Fireworks Display,
Patapsco River, Northwest Harbor
(East Channel); Baltimore, MD
Coast Guard, DHS.
Temporary final rule.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
The Coast Guard is
establishing a temporary safety zone
encompassing certain waters of the
Patapsco River. This action is necessary
to provide for the safety of life on
navigable waters during a fireworks
display launched from a barge located
adjacent to the East Channel of
Northwest Harbor at Baltimore, MD on
May 8, 2014. This safety zone is
intended to protect the maritime public
in a portion of the Patapsco River.
DATES: This rule is effective from April
25, 2014 through May 9, 2014 and
enforceable from 7:30 p.m. on May 8,
2014 through 9:30 p.m. on May 9, 2014.
ADDRESSES: Documents mentioned in
this preamble are part of docket [USCG–
2014–0236]. To view documents
mentioned in this preamble as being
available in the docket, go to https://
www.regulations.gov, type the docket
number in the ‘‘SEARCH’’ box and click
‘‘SEARCH.’’ Click on Open Docket
Folder on the line associated with this
rulemaking. You may also visit the
Docket Management Facility in Room
W12–140 on the ground floor of the
Department of Transportation West
Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m.
and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If
you have questions on this rule, call or
email Mr. Ronald Houck, U.S. Coast
Guard Sector Baltimore, MD; telephone
410–576–2674, email Ronald.L.Houck@
uscg.mil. If you have questions on
viewing or submitting material to the
docket, call Cheryl Collins, Program
WREIER-AVILES on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:58 Apr 24, 2014
Jkt 232001
The Coast Guard is issuing this final
rule without prior notice and
opportunity to comment pursuant to
authority under section 4(a) of the
Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5
U.S.C. 553(b)). This provision
authorizes an agency to issue a rule
without prior notice and opportunity to
comment when the agency for good
cause finds that those procedures are
‘‘impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary
to the public interest.’’ Under 5 U.S.C.
553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that
good cause exists for not publishing a
notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)
with respect to this rule due to the short
time period between event planners
notifying the Coast Guard of details
concerning the event, on March 25,
2014, and publication of this safety
zone. As such, it is impracticable to
provide a full comment period due to
lack of time. Furthermore, delaying the
effective date of this safety zone would
be contrary to the public interest given
the high risk of injury and damage from
the potential hazards associated with a
fireworks display, such as the accidental
discharge of fireworks, dangerous
projectiles, and falling hot embers or
other debris.
Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast
Guard finds that good cause exists for
making this rule effective less than 30
days after publication in the Federal
Register. Due to the need for immediate
action, the restriction of vessel traffic is
necessary to protect life, property and
the environment; therefore, a 30-day
notice is impracticable. Delaying the
effective date would be contrary to the
safety zone’s intended objectives of
protecting persons and vessels, and
enhancing public and maritime safety.
The permanent safety zones listed in the
Table to 33 CFR 165.506 do not apply
to this event.
B. Basis and Purpose
Under Armour, Inc., and InVNT, LLC
of New York, NY, will sponsor a
fireworks display launched from a barge
located adjacent to the East Channel of
Northwest Harbor in Baltimore, MD,
scheduled on May 8, 2014 at 8:30 p.m.
If necessary due to inclement weather,
the fireworks display will be
rescheduled to May 9, 2014.
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
22869
Fireworks displays are frequently
held from locations on or near the
navigable waters of the United States.
The potential hazards associated with
fireworks displays are a safety concern
during such events. The purpose of this
rule is to promote public and maritime
safety during a fireworks display, and to
protect mariners transiting the area from
the potential hazards associated with a
fireworks display, such as the accidental
discharge of fireworks, dangerous
projectiles, and falling hot embers or
other debris. This rule is needed to
ensure safety on the waterway before,
during and after the scheduled event.
C. Discussion of the Final Rule
Through this regulation, the Coast
Guard will establish a safety zone. The
temporary safety zone will be enforced
from 7:30 p.m. through 9:30 p.m. on
May 8, 2014, and if necessary due to
inclement weather, from 7:30 p.m.
through 9:30 p.m. on May 9, 2014. The
safety zone will encompass all waters of
the Patapsco River, within a 200 yards
radius of a fireworks discharge barge in
approximate position latitude 39°15′55″
N, longitude 076°34′33″ W, located
adjacent to the East Channel of
Northwest Harbor at Baltimore,
Maryland, MD. This location is entirely
within the Area of Responsibility of the
Captain of the Port Baltimore, as set
forth at 33 CFR 3.25–15.
The effect of this temporary safety
zone will be to restrict navigation in the
regulated area immediately before,
during, and immediately after the
fireworks display. Vessels will be
allowed to transit the waters of the
Patapsco River outside the safety zone.
This rule requires that entry into or
remaining in this safety zone is
prohibited unless authorized by the
Coast Guard Captain of the Port
Baltimore. All vessels underway within
this safety zone at the time it is
implemented are to depart the zone. To
seek permission to transit the area of the
safety zone, the Captain of the Port
Baltimore can be contacted at telephone
number 410–576–2693 or on Marine
Band Radio VHF–FM channel 16 (156.8
MHz). Coast Guard vessels enforcing the
safety zone can be contacted on Marine
Band Radio VHF–FM channel 16 (156.8
MHz). Federal, state, and local agencies
may assist the Coast Guard in the
enforcement of the safety zone. The
Coast Guard will issue notices to the
maritime community to further
publicize the safety zone and notify the
public of changes in the status of the
zone. Such notices will continue until
the event is complete.
E:\FR\FM\25APR1.SGM
25APR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 80 (Friday, April 25, 2014)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 22862-22869]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-09545]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 91
[Docket No.: FAA-2014-0225; Amdt. No. 91-331]
RIN 2120-AK50
Prohibition Against Certain Flights in the Simferopol (UKFV)
Flight Information Region (FIR)
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Immediately adopted final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This action prohibits certain flight operations in a portion
of the Simferopol (UKFV) Flight Information Region (FIR) by all U.S.
air carriers; U.S. commercial operators; persons exercising the
privileges of a U.S. airman certificate, except when such persons are
operating a U.S.-registered aircraft for a foreign air carrier; and
operators of U.S.-registered civil aircraft, except when such operators
are foreign air carriers. The FAA finds this action to be necessary to
prevent a potential hazard to persons and aircraft engaged in such
flight operations.
DATES: This final rule is effective on April 25, 2014, and remains in
effect through April 27, 2015.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For technical questions concerning
this action, contact Will Gonzalez, Air Transportation Division, Flight
Standards Service Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence
Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591; telephone 202-267-8166; email
will.gonzalez@faa.gov.
For legal questions concerning this action, contact Robert Frenzel,
Office of the Chief Counsel, AGC-200, Federal Aviation Administration,
800 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591; telephone (202) 267-
7638; email robert.frenzel@faa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Good Cause for Immediate Adoption
Title 5, United States Code (U.S.C.) Sec. 553(b)(3)(B) authorizes
agencies to dispense with notice and comment procedures for rules when
the agency for ``good cause'' finds that those procedures are
``impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest.'' In
this instance, the FAA finds that notice and public comment to this
immediately adopted final rule, as well as any delay in the effective
date of this rule, are contrary to the public interest due to the
immediate need to address the potential hazard to civil aviation that
now exists in a portion of the Simferopol (UKFV) FIR, as described in
the Background section of this notice.
Authority for This Rulemaking
The FAA is responsible for the safety of flight in the United
States (U.S.) and for the safety of U.S. civil operators, U.S.-
registered aircraft, and U.S.-certificated airmen throughout the world.
The FAA's authority to issue rules on aviation safety is found in 49
U.S.C. Subtitle I, section 106(f), describes the authority of the FAA
Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, describes in more
detail the scope of the agency's authority. Section
[[Page 22863]]
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 U.S. Government
under international agreements.
This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701, General requirements.
Under that section, the FAA is charged broadly with promoting safe
flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing, among other
things, regulations and minimum standards for practices, methods, and
procedures the Administrator finds necessary for safety in air commerce
and national security. This regulation is within the scope of that
authority because it prohibits the persons subject to paragraph (a) of
this Special Federal Aviation Regulation (SFAR) from conducting flight
operations in a portion of the Simferopol (UKFV) FIR due to the
potential hazard to the safety of such persons' flight operations
described in the Background section of this document.
I. Overview of Immediately Adopted Final Rule
This action prohibits flight operations in a portion of the
Simferopol (UKFV) FIR by all U.S. air carriers; U.S. commercial
operators; persons exercising the privileges of a U.S. airman
certificate, except when such persons are operating a U.S.-registered
aircraft for a foreign air carrier; and operators of U.S.-registered
civil aircraft, except when such operators are foreign air carriers.
The FAA finds this action necessary to prevent a potential hazard to
persons and aircraft engaged in such flight operations.
II. Background
The FAA has safety and national security concerns regarding flight
operations in a portion of the Simferopol (UKFV) FIR. On March 28,
2014, the Russian Federation issued a Notice-to-Airmen (NOTAM)
purporting to establish unilaterally a new FIR, effective April 3,
2014, in a significant portion of the Simferopol (UKFV) FIR. The
affected airspace includes sovereign Ukrainian airspace over the
Crimean Peninsula and the associated Ukrainian territorial sea, as well
as international airspace managed by Ukraine over the Black Sea and the
Sea of Azov under a regional air navigation agreement approved by the
Council of the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO). This
action by the Russian Federation contradicts international law,
including provisions of the Convention on International Civil Aviation,
done at Chicago, December 7, 1944 (also known as the ``Chicago
Convention'') and the standards established in Annex 11 to the Chicago
Convention. Ukraine has rejected the Russian Federation's purported
establishment of a new FIR within the existing Simferopol (UKFV) FIR
and continues to provide air traffic control services in both Ukrainian
territorial airspace and international airspace assigned to Ukraine.
In response to the Russian Federation's actions, Ukraine
established a prohibited area over the Crimean Peninsula for flight
operations below flight level 290 by means of a NOTAM and closed
various air traffic services (ATS) route segments. The Russian
Federation further responded by the issuance of a NOTAM that rejected
and directly conflicts with Ukrainian NOTAMs concerning the
establishment of the prohibited area and the route segment closures. On
April 2, 2014, ICAO's Regional Director for Europe and the North
Atlantic Regions issued a state letter to countries and their civil
aviation authorities highlighting the possible existence of serious
risks to the safety of international civil flights. ICAO stated that,
due to the unsafe situation where more than one ATS provider may be
controlling flights within the same airspace from April 3, 2014, 0600
Universal Time Coordinated (UTC) onwards, consideration should be given
to implementing measures to avoid the airspace and to circumnavigate
the Simferopol (UKFV) FIR with alternative routings.
In the FAA's view, the potential for civil aircraft to receive
confusing and conflicting air traffic control instructions from both
Ukrainian and Russian ATS providers while operating in the portion of
the Simferopol (UKFV) FIR covered by this SFAR is unsafe and presents a
potential hazard to civil flight operations in the disputed airspace.
In addition, political and military tension between Ukraine and the
Russian Federation remains high, and compliance with air traffic
control instructions issued by the authorities of one country could
result in a civil aircraft being misidentified as a threat and
intercepted or otherwise engaged by air defense forces of the other
country.
This SFAR will remain in effect for one year. During this period,
the FAA will continue to actively evaluate the area and the airports in
the region to determine to what extent U.S. civil operators may be able
to safely operate in the region. Adjustments to the SFAR may be
appropriate if the risk to aviation safety and security changes. The
FAA may amend or rescind the SFAR as necessary prior to the expiration
date.
Because the circumstances described herein warrant immediate action
by the FAA, I find that notice and public comment under 5 U.S.C.
553(b)(3)(B) are impracticable and contrary to the public interest.
However, we will accept any comments regarding the impact of this
action for consideration in future rulemaking action to amend or
rescind this SFAR. Further, I find that good cause exists under 5
U.S.C. 553(d) for making this rule effective immediately upon issuance.
I also find that this action is fully consistent with the obligations
under 49 U.S.C. 40105 to ensure that I exercise my duties consistently
with the obligations of the United States under international
agreements.
Approval Based on Authorization Request of an Agency of the United
States Government
If a department, agency, or instrumentality of the U.S. Government
determines that it has a critical need to engage any person covered
under SFAR No. 113, Sec. 91.1607, including a U.S. air carrier or a
U.S. commercial operator, to conduct a charter to transport civilian or
military passengers or cargo through the portion of the Simferopol
(UKFV) FIR covered by this SFAR, that department, agency, or
instrumentality may request the FAA to approve persons covered under
SFAR No.113, Sec. 91.1607, to conduct such operations. An approval
request must be made in a letter signed by an appropriate senior
official of the requesting department, agency, or instrumentality of
the U.S. Government; the letter must be sent to the Associate
Administrator for Aviation Safety (AVS-1), Federal Aviation
Administration, 800 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591.
Electronic submissions are acceptable, and the requesting entity may
request an electronic copy of the FAA's response. If a requestor wishes
to make an electronic submission to the FAA, the requestor should
contact the Air Transportation Division, Flight Standards Service at
(202) 267-8166 for the appropriate email address, as the division
anticipates an email system change in the near future that would likely
make any email address published here outdated. A single letter may
request approval from the FAA for
[[Page 22864]]
multiple persons covered under SFAR No. 113, Sec. 91.1607, and/or for
multiple flight operations. To the extent known, the letter must
identify the person(s) expected to be covered under the SFAR on whose
behalf the U.S. Government department, agency, or instrumentality is
seeking FAA approval, and it must describe--
The proposed operation(s), including the nature of the
mission being supported;
The service to be provided by the person(s) covered by the
SFAR;
To the extent known, the specific locations within the
portion of the Simferopol (UKFV) FIR covered by this SFAR where the
proposed operation(s) will be conducted; and
The method by which the department, agency, or
instrumentality will provide, or how the operator will otherwise
obtain, current threat information and an explanation of how the
operator will integrate this information into all phases of its
proposed operations (e.g., pre-mission planning and briefing, in-
flight, and post-flight).
The request for approval must also include a list of operators,
including subcontractors, with whom the U.S. Government department,
agency, or instrumentality requesting FAA approval has a current
contract(s), grant(s), or cooperative agreement(s) for specific flight
operations in the Simferopol (UKFV) FIR. Additional such operators may
be identified to the FAA at any time after the FAA approval is issued.
Updated lists should be sent to the email address specified by the Air
Transportation Division, (202) 267-8166.
If an approval request includes classified information, requestors
may contact Aviation Safety Inspector Will Gonzalez for instructions on
submitting it to the FAA. His contact information is listed in the For
Further Information Contact section of this final rule.
FAA approval of the operation under SFAR No. 113, Sec. 91.1607,
does not relieve persons subject to this SFAR of their responsibility
to comply with all applicable FAA rules and regulations. Operators of
civil aircraft will have to comply with the conditions of their
certificate and Operations Specifications (OpSpecs). In addition,
operators will have to comply with all rules and regulations of other
U.S. Government departments or agencies that may apply to the proposed
operation, including, but not limited to, the Transportation Security
Regulations issued by the Transportation Security Administration,
Department of Homeland Security.
Approval Conditions
When the FAA approves the request, the FAA's Aviation Safety
Organization (AVS) will send a letter to the requesting department,
agency, or instrumentality confirming that the FAA's approval is
subject to all of the following conditions:
(1) The approval will stipulate those procedures and conditions
that limit, to the greatest degree possible, the risk to the operator,
while still allowing the operator to achieve its operational
objectives.
(2) Any approval will specify that the operation is not eligible
for coverage under a premium war risk insurance policy issued by the
FAA under chapter 443 of title 49, U.S. Code.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ If and when, in connection with an operator's contract with
a department, agency, or instrumentality of the U.S. Government, an
operation is covered by a non-premium war risk insurance policy
issued by FAA under 49 U.S.C. 44305, coverage under that operator's
FAA premium war risk insurance policy is suspended as a condition of
that premium policy.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(3) If the proposed operation would have been covered by a premium
war risk insurance policy issued by the FAA, but for SFAR No. 113,
Sec. 91.1607, the FAA will issue an endorsement to that premium policy
that specifically excludes coverage for any operations into, out of,
within, or through the portion of the Simferopol (UKFV) FIR covered by
this SFAR, including operations under a flight plan that contemplates
landing in or taking off from Crimea. The endorsement to the premium
policy will take effect before the approval's effective date. The
operator must further establish that it has obtained substitute
commercial war risk coverage for operations in the portion of the
Simferopol (UKFV) FIR covered by this SFAR or that the operation would
be covered by an effective non-premium war risk insurance policy issued
by the FAA under chapter 443 of title 49, U.S. Code. The exclusion
specified in the endorsement remains in effect notwithstanding the
issuance of any approval under, or exemption from, this SFAR (the
chapter 443 premium policy refers to such approval as a ``waiver'' and
such exemption as an ``exclusion''). Additionally, before any approval
takes effect, the operator must submit to the FAA a written release of
the U.S. Government (including but not limited to the United States of
America, as Insurer) from all damages, claims and liabilities,
including without limitation legal fees and expenses, and the
operator's agreement to indemnify the U.S. Government (including but
not limited to the United States of America, as Insurer) with respect
to any and all third-party damages, claims and liabilities, including
without limitation legal fees and expenses, relating to any event
arising from or related to the approved operations in the portion of
the Simferopol (UKFV) FIR covered by this SFAR. This waiver of claims
does not preclude an operator from raising a claim under an applicable
non-premium war risk insurance policy issued by the FAA.
(4) Other conditions determined by the FAA, including those that
may be imposed in OpSpecs.
If the proposed operation or operations are approved, the FAA will
issue OpSpecs to the certificate holder authorizing these operations.
The FAA will notify the departments, agencies, or instrumentalities
that request FAA approval of civil flight operations to be conducted by
one or more persons described in paragraph (a) of this SFAR of any
additional conditions beyond those contained in the approval letter, if
the operations are approved. The requesting department, agency, or
instrumentality must have a contract (includes subcontracts), grant, or
cooperative agreement with the person(s) described in paragraph (a) of
this SFAR on whose behalf the department, agency, or instrumentality
requests FAA approval.
Request for Exemptions
Any operations not conducted under the approval process discussed
above must be conducted under an exemption from this SFAR. A request by
any person covered under SFAR No. 113, Sec. 91.1607, for an exemption
must comply with 14 CFR part 11, and will require exceptional
circumstances beyond those contemplated by the approval process set
forth in this SFAR. In addition to the information required by 14 CFR
Sec. 11.81, as a minimum, the petitioner must describe in its
submission to the FAA--
The proposed operation(s), including the nature of the
operation;
The service to be provided by the person(s) covered by the
SFAR;
The specific locations within the portion of the
Simferopol (UKFV) FIR covered by this SFAR where the proposed
operation(s) will be conducted, and;
The method by which the operator will obtain current
threat information and an explanation of how the operator will
integrate this information into all phases of its proposed operations
(e.g., pre-mission planning and briefing, in-flight, and post-flight).
Additionally, the endorsement of any premium war risk insurance
policy
[[Page 22865]]
issued under chapter 443 of title 49, U.S. Code, and a waiver and
indemnification agreement, all as referred to above, will also be
required as a condition of any exemption issued under SFAR No. 113,
Sec. 91.1607. The FAA recognizes that there may be operations
conducted for the governments of other countries with the support of
the U.S. Government that may be affected by this SFAR. While these
operations will not be permitted through the approval process, the FAA
will process exemption requests for such operations on an expedited
basis and prior to any private exemption requests.
IV. Regulatory Evaluation, Regulatory Flexibility Determination,
International Trade Impact Assessment, and Unfunded Mandates Assessment
Changes to Federal regulations must undergo several economic
analyses. First, Executive Order 12866 and Executive Order 13563 direct
that each Federal agency shall propose or adopt a regulation only upon
a reasoned determination that the benefits of the intended regulation
justify its costs. Second, the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (Pub.
L. 96-354), as codified in 5 U.S.C. 603, requires agencies to analyze
the economic impact of regulatory changes on small entities. Third, the
Trade Agreements Act of 1979 (Pub. L. 96-39), as codified in 19 U.S.C.
2532, prohibits agencies from setting standards that create unnecessary
obstacles to the foreign commerce of the United States. In developing
U.S. standards, the Trade Agreements Act requires agencies to consider
international standards and, where appropriate, that they be the basis
of U.S. standards. Fourth, the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
(Pub. L. 104-4), as codified in 2 U.S.C. 1532, requires agencies to
prepare a written assessment of the costs, benefits, and other effects
of proposed or final rules that include a Federal mandate likely to
result in the expenditure by State, local, or tribal governments, in
the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100 million or more
annually (adjusted for inflation with base year of 1995). This portion
of the preamble summarizes the FAA's analysis of the economic impacts
of this final rule.
Department of Transportation Order (DOT) 2100.5 prescribes policies
and procedures for simplification, analysis, and review of regulations.
If the expected cost impact is so minimal that a proposed or final rule
does not warrant a full evaluation, this order permits that a statement
to that effect and the basis for it to be included in the preamble if a
full regulatory evaluation of the cost and benefits is not prepared.
Such a determination has been made for this final rule. The reasoning
for this determination follows:
This rule prohibits flights in an area of airspace over the Crimean
Peninsula, the associated Ukrainian territorial sea, and adjacent
international airspace assigned to Ukraine where both the Ukrainian and
Russian air traffic services claim jurisdiction. This situation could
result in confusing or conflicting instructions to operators of civil
aircraft, creating a potentially unsafe operating environment. The
alternative flight routes result in some additional fuel and operations
costs to the operators, as well as some costs attributed to passenger
time. By prohibiting unsafe flights, the benefits of this rule will
exceed the minimal flight deviation costs.
In conducting these analyses, FAA has determined this final rule is
a ``significant regulatory action,'' as defined in section 3(f) of
Executive Order 12866, because it raises novel policy issues
contemplated under that executive order. The rule is also
``significant'' as defined in DOT's Regulatory Policies and Procedures.
The final rule, if adopted, will not have a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities, will not create unnecessary
obstacles to international trade and will not impose an unfunded
mandate on state, local, or tribal governments, or on the private
sector.
A. 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 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.
However, if an agency determines that a rule is not expected to
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities, section 605(b) of the RFA provides that the head of the
agency may so certify and a regulatory flexibility analysis is not
required. The certification must include a statement providing the
factual basis for this determination, and the reasoning should be
clear.
U.S. certificate holders affected by this final rule are
predominately large passenger and all-cargo carriers. There are some
small entity operators flying under U.S. government contract and some
operators providing flights that support oil operations that the FAA
anticipates will also be affected. Many of these operations are
conducted by small entities, but due to the immediacy of the potential
harm to U.S. certificate holders, their passengers, crew, and cargo,
there is not a sufficient amount of time to ascertain exact numbers.
There are likely to be enough such operators to be considered a
substantial number of small entities. While we have not performed a
full cost benefit analysis of this rule, we estimate that approximately
10 to 12 U.S. carrier operations per day will be impacted by this rule,
and that the average cost of avoiding the disputed air space is
approximately $2,000 per flight, equating to a cost estimate to U.S.
carriers of $8.8-11 million, annually. This estimate does not include
additional operations costs and time costs. However, the $2,000 per
flight estimate includes impacts on U.S. air carriers, including
charter operations. The $2,000 per flight estimate is calculated using
an air carrier-provided average additional fuel burn estimate for the
deviation of 4,000 pounds of fuel, at the total system average fuel
price for U.S. air carriers, $3.05 per gallon (``Fuel Cost and
Consumption,'' US DOT Bureau of Transportation Statistics, Monthly
report Jan. 2014), and a conversion factor of 6.84 pounds of fuel per
gallon (Air BP Handbook of Products, Air BP Ltd 2000). Therefore, as
provided in section 605(b), the head of the FAA certifies that this
rulemaking will not result in a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
B. International Trade Impact Assessment
The Trade Agreements Act of 1979 (Pub. L. 96-39), as amended by the
Uruguay Round Agreements Act (Pub. L. 103-465), prohibits Federal
agencies from establishing standards or engaging in related activities
that create unnecessary obstacles to the foreign
[[Page 22866]]
commerce of the United States. Pursuant to these Acts, the
establishment of standards is not considered an unnecessary obstacle to
the foreign commerce of the United States, so long as the standard has
a legitimate domestic objective, such the protection of safety, and
does not operate in a manner that excludes imports that meet this
objective. The statute also requires consideration of international
standards and, where appropriate, that they be the basis for U.S.
standards. The FAA has assessed the potential effect of this final rule
and determined that its purpose is to protect the safety of U.S. civil
aviation from a potential hazard outside the U.S. Therefore, the rule
is in compliance with the Trade Agreements Act.
C. Unfunded Mandates Assessment
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-
4) requires each Federal agency to prepare a written statement
assessing the effects of any Federal mandate in a proposed or final
agency rule that may result in an expenditure of $100 million or more
(in 1995 dollars) in any one year by State, local, and tribal
governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector; such a mandate
is deemed to be a ``significant regulatory action.'' The FAA currently
uses an inflation-adjusted value of $151.0 million in lieu of $100
million. This final rule does not contain such a mandate; therefore,
the requirements of Title II of the Act do not apply.
D. Paperwork Reduction Act
The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3507(d)) requires
that the FAA consider the impact of paperwork and other information
collection burdens imposed on the public. The FAA has determined that
there is no new requirement for information collection associated with
this immediately adopted final rule.
E. International Compatibility and Cooperation
(1) In keeping with U.S. obligations under the Chicago Convention,
it is FAA policy to conform to ICAO Standards and Recommended Practices
to the maximum extent practicable. The FAA has determined that there
are no ICAO Standards and Recommended Practices that correspond to
these proposed regulations.
(2) Executive Order 13609, Promoting International Regulatory
Cooperation, promotes international regulatory cooperation to meet
shared challenges involving health, safety, labor, security,
environmental, and other issues and to reduce, eliminate, or prevent
unnecessary differences in regulatory requirements. The Russian
Federation's unilateral attempt to establish a new FIR in Ukrainian
territorial airspace and international airspace managed by Ukraine
threatens to undermine the framework for international regulatory
cooperation in civil aviation established under the Chicago Convention.
This action by the FAA contributes to the international community's
efforts to uphold that framework.
F. Environmental Analysis
FAA Order 1050.1E identifies FAA actions that are categorically
excluded from preparation of an environmental assessment or
environmental impact statement under the National Environmental Policy
Act (NEPA) in the absence of extraordinary circumstances. The FAA has
determined this rulemaking action qualifies for the categorical
exclusion identified in paragraph 312(f) and involves no extraordinary
circumstances.
The FAA has reviewed the implementation of the proposed SFAR and
determined it is categorically excluded from further environmental
review according to FAA Order 1050.1E, ``Environmental Impacts:
Policies and Procedures,'' paragraph 312(f). The FAA has examined
possible extraordinary circumstances and determined that no such
circumstances exist. After careful and thorough consideration of the
proposed action, the FAA finds that the proposed Federal action does
not require preparation of an EA or EIS in accordance with the
requirements of NEPA, Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ)
regulations, and FAA Order 1050.1E.
V. Executive Order Determinations
A. Executive Order 13132, Federalism
The FAA has analyzed this immediately adopted final rule under the
principles and criteria of Executive Order 13132, Federalism. The
agency determined that this action will not have a substantial direct
effect on the States, or the relationship between the Federal
Government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government, and,
therefore, does not have Federalism implications.
B. Executive Order 13211, Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use
The FAA analyzed this immediately adopted final rule under
Executive Order 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use (May 18,
2001). The agency has determined that it is not a ``significant energy
action'' under the executive order and it is not likely to have a
significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of
energy.
VI. How To Obtain Additional Information
A. Rulemaking Documents
An electronic copy of a rulemaking document may be obtained by
using the Internet--
1. Search the Federal Document Management System (FDMS) Portal
(https://www.regulations.gov);
2. Visit the FAA's Regulations and Policies Web page at https://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/ or
3. Access the Government Printing Office's Web page at: https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/.
Copies may also be obtained by sending a request (identified by
notice, amendment, or docket number of this rulemaking) to the Federal
Aviation Administration, Office of Rulemaking, ARM-1, 800 Independence
Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591, or by calling (202) 267-9680.
B. Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act
The Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996
(SBREFA) requires FAA to comply with small entity requests for
information or advice about compliance with statutes and regulations
within its jurisdiction. A small entity with questions regarding this
document may contact its local FAA official, or the person listed under
the For Further Information Contact section at the beginning of the
preamble. To find out more about SBREFA on the Internet, visit https://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/rulemaking/sbre_act/.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 91
Air traffic control, Aircraft, Airmen, Airports, Aviation safety,
Freight, Ukraine.
The Amendment
In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation
Administration amends chapter I of Title 14, Code of Federal
Regulations as follows:
PART 91--GENERAL OPERATING AND FLIGHT RULES
0
1. The authority citation for part 91 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g), 1155, 40103, 40113, 40120,
44101, 44111, 44701, 44704, 44709, 44711, 44712, 44715, 44716,
44717, 44722, 46306, 46315, 46316, 46504,
[[Page 22867]]
46506-46507, 47122, 47508, 47528-47531, 47534, articles 12 and 29 of
the Convention on International Civil Aviation (61 Stat. 1180), (126
Stat. 11).
0
2. Add new Sec. 91.1607 to subpart M to read as follows:
Sec. 91.1607 Special Federal Aviation Regulation No. 113--Prohibition
Against Certain Flights in the Simferopol (UKFV) Flight Information
Region (FIR).
(a) Applicability. This Special Federal Aviation Regulation (SFAR)
applies to the following persons:
(1) All U.S. air carriers and U.S. commercial operators;
(2) All persons exercising the privileges of an airman certificate
issued by the FAA, except such persons operating U.S.-registered
aircraft for a foreign air carrier; and
(3) All operators of U.S.-registered civil aircraft, except where
the operator of such aircraft is a foreign air carrier.
(b) Flight prohibition. Except as provided in paragraphs (c) and
(d) of this section, no person described in paragraph (a) of this
section may conduct flight operations in the portion of the Simferopol
(UKFV) FIR within the following lateral limits: 454500N 0345800E-
460900N 0360000E-460000N 0370000E-452700N 0364100E-452242N 0364100E-
451824N 0363524E-451442N 0363542E-451218N 0363200E-450418N 0363418E-
445600N 0363700E-443100N 0364000E-424400N 0361600E-424700N 0340000E-
424800N 0304500E-434100N 0303200E-441500N 0302400E-444600N 0300900E-
455400N 0322500E-454900N 0324700E-455400N 0330600E-455600N 0332700E-
455900N 0332900E--then along the Crimea border to 454500N 0345800E. See
Figure 1 below for a depiction of the affected airspace.
(c) Permitted operations. This section does not prohibit persons
described in paragraph (a) of this section from conducting flight
operations in the portion of the Simferopol (UKFV) FIR described in
paragraph (b) of this section, provided that such flight operations are
conducted under a contract, grant or cooperative agreement with a
department, agency, or instrumentality of the U.S. government with the
approval of the FAA, or under an exemption issued by the FAA. The FAA
will process requests for approval or exemption in a timely manner,
with an order of preference being: first, for those operations in
support of U.S. government-sponsored activities; second, for those
operations in support of government-sponsored activities of a foreign
country with the support of a U.S. government department, agency, or
instrumentality; and third, for all other operations.
(d) Emergency situations. In an emergency that requires immediate
decision and action for the safety of the flight, the pilot in command
of an aircraft may deviate from this section to the extent required by
that emergency. Except for U.S. air carriers and commercial operators
that are subject to the requirements of 14 CFR parts 119, 121, 125, or
135, each person who deviates from this section must, within 10 days of
the deviation, excluding Saturdays, Sundays, and Federal holidays,
submit to the nearest FAA Flight Standards District Office (FSDO) a
complete report of the operations of the aircraft involved in the
deviation, including a description of the deviation and the reasons for
it.
(e) Expiration. This SFAR will remain in effect until April 27,
2015. The FAA may amend, rescind, or extend this SFAR as necessary.
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
[[Page 22868]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR25AP14.030
[[Page 22869]]
Issued under authority provided by 49 U.S.C. 106(f),
40101(d)(1), 40105(b)(1)(A), 44701(a)(5), in Washington, DC, on
April 23, 2014.
Michael G. Whitaker,
Deputy Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2014-09545 Filed 4-23-14; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-C