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 (http://www.regulations.gov); 2. Visit the FAA’s Regulations and Policies Web page at http:// www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/ or 3. Access the Government Printing Office’s Web page at: http:// 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 http://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</GPH> 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 http:// 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 
(http://www.regulations.gov);
    2. Visit the FAA's Regulations and Policies Web page at http://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/ or
    3. Access the Government Printing Office's Web page at: http://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 http://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