Prohibition Against Certain Flights Within the Tripoli (HLLL) Flight Information Region (FIR); Extension of Expiration Date, 15503-15507 [2015-06697]
Download as PDF
15503
Rules and Regulations
Federal Register
Vol. 80, No. 56
Tuesday, March 24, 2015
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER
contains regulatory documents having general
applicability and legal effect, most of which
are keyed to and codified in the Code of
Federal Regulations, which is published under
50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.
The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by
the Superintendent of Documents. Prices of
new books are listed in the first FEDERAL
REGISTER issue of each week.
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 91
[Docket No.: FAA–2011–0246; Amdt. No.
91–321B]
RIN 2120–AK70
Prohibition Against Certain Flights
Within the Tripoli (HLLL) Flight
Information Region (FIR); Extension of
Expiration Date
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Final rule and extension of
expiration date.
AGENCY:
This action extends the
prohibition of flight operations within
the Tripoli (HLLL) Flight Information
Region (FIR) by all: U.S. air carriers;
U.S. commercial operators; persons
exercising the privileges of an airman
certificate issued by the FAA, 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 operators of such
aircraft that are foreign air carriers. The
extension of the expiration date is
necessary to address a potential hazard
to persons and aircraft engaged in such
flight operations. Additionally, the FAA
is amending the prohibition to make
clear that operations by sub-contractors
under a U.S. Government department,
agency, or instrumentality’s contract,
grant, or cooperative agreement may be
included in an approval request and to
remove an obsolete reference to
paragraph 8 of United Nations Security
Council Resolution (UNSCR) 1973. The
FAA is also revising the approval
conditions that will apply to operations
authorized by other U.S. Government
departments, agencies, and
instrumentalities that are approved by
the FAA, and the information about
TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:15 Mar 23, 2015
Jkt 235001
requests for exemption, to reflect the
termination of statutory authorization
for the FAA premium war risk
insurance program.
DATES: The final rule is effective March
20, 2015. This action extends the period
during which Special Federal Aviation
Regulation (SFAR) No. 112, scheduled
to expire on March 20, 2015, will
remain in effect. The expiration date is
extended until March 20, 2017.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
technical questions concerning this
action, contact Will Gonzalez, Air
Transportation Division, AFS–220,
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 Mary Mason, Office of
the Chief Counsel, AGC–200, Federal
Aviation Administration, 800
Independence Avenue SW.,
Washington, DC 20591; telephone (202)
267–8018; email mary.mason@faa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Good Cause for Immediate Adoption
Section 553(b)(3)(B) of title 5, U.S.
Code, 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
continued potential hazard to civil
aviation that exists in the Tripoli (HLL)
FIR, as described in the Background
section of this rule.
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 civil aircraft, and U.S.certificated airmen throughout the
world. The FAA’s authority to issue
rules on aviation safety is found in title
49, U.S. Code. Subtitle I, section 106(f),
describes the authority of the FAA
Administrator. Subtitle VII of title 49,
Aviation Programs, describes in more
detail the scope of the agency’s
authority. Section 40101(d)(1) provides
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
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 that the
Administrator finds necessary for safety
in air commerce and national security.
This regulation is within the scope of
that authority, because it extends the
prohibition against the persons subject
to paragraph (a) of SFAR No. 112, 14
CFR 91.1603, conducting flight
operations in the Tripoli (HLLL) FIR
due to the continued potential hazard to
the safety of such persons’ flight
operations, as described in the
Background section of this document.
I. Executive Summary
This action extends the prohibition of
flight operations in the Tripoli (HLLL)
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 address potential hazards
to persons and aircraft engaged in such
flight operations. The prohibition,
which is scheduled to expire on March
20, 2015, is hereby extended to March
20, 2017.
II. Background
As a result of safety and national
security concerns regarding flight
operations in the Tripoli (HLLL) FIR,
the FAA issued § 91.1603 of title 14,
Code of Federal Regulations, SFAR No.
112, in March 2011 (76 FR 16238,
March 23, 2011). SFAR No. 112
prohibits all U.S. air carriers; U.S.
commercial operators; persons
exercising the privileges of an airman
E:\FR\FM\24MRR1.SGM
24MRR1
TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
15504
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 56 / Tuesday, March 24, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
certificate issued by the FAA, 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 operators of such
aircraft that are foreign air carriers, from
conducting flight operations in the
Tripoli (HLLL) FIR, except as provided
in paragraphs (c) and (d) of the SFAR.
When SFAR No. 112 was issued, an
armed conflict was ongoing in Libya
and presented a potential hazard to civil
aviation. The FAA was concerned that
runways at Libya’s international
airports, including the main
international airports serving Benghazi
(HLLB) and Tripoli (HLLT), might be
damaged or degraded. There was also
concern that air navigation services in
the Tripoli FIR might be unavailable or
degraded. In addition, the proliferation
of air defense weapons, including ManPortable Air-Defense Systems
(MANPADS), and the presence of
military operations, including Libyan
aerial bombardments and unplanned
military flights entering and departing
the Tripoli (HLLL) FIR, posed a
potential hazard to U.S. operators, U.S.registered aircraft, and FAA-certificated
airmen that might operate within the
Tripoli (HLLL) FIR. Additionally, the
United Nations Security Council
adopted Resolution 1973 on March 18,
2011, which mandated a ban on all
flights in the airspace of Libya, with
certain exceptions.
By March 2014, although the Gadhafi
regime had been overthrown and the
UN-mandated ban on flights in Libyan
airspace had been lifted, the FAA
continued to have significant security
concerns for Libya and for the safety of
U.S. civil aviation operations in that
country. On March 20, 2014, the FAA
extended the expiration date of SFAR
No. 112, § 91.1603, to March 20, 2015.
The FAA considered that, on December
12, 2013, the Department of State had
issued a Travel Warning strongly
advising against all non-essential travel
to Libya. Various groups had called for
attacks against U.S. citizens and U.S.
interests in Libya. Many military-grade
weapons remained in the hands of
private individuals and groups, among
them anti-aircraft weapons that could be
used against civil aviation, including
MANPADS. The Travel Warning also
warned that closures or threats of
closures of the international airports
occurred regularly for maintenance,
labor, or security-related reasons. For
those reasons, on March 21, 2014, the
FAA published a final rule (79 FR
15679; corrected at 79 FR 19288, April
8, 2014) extending the expiration date of
SFAR No. 112, § 91.1603, to March 20,
2015.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:15 Mar 23, 2015
Jkt 235001
The FAA continues to have
significant concerns regarding the safety
of U.S. civil aviation operations in the
Tripoli (HLLL) FIR at all altitudes due
to the hazardous situation created by the
ongoing fighting involving various
militant groups and Libyan military
forces in various areas of Libya,
including some near Tripoli and
Benghazi. Islamist militant groups hold
and control significant portions of
Western Libya, including Tripoli
International Airport (HLLT). Militant
groups, such as Libyan Dawn, possess a
variety of anti-aircraft weapons, which
give them the capability to target aircraft
upon landing and departure and at
higher altitudes.
Civil aviation infrastructure is at risk
from indirect fire from mortars and
rockets targeting Libyan airports during
the ongoing fighting. Civil aviation in
the Tripoli FIR is also at risk from aerial
combat operations and other military
activity conducted by Libyan forces.
Furthermore, the security situation in
the Tripoli (HLLL) FIR continues to be
unpredictable and unstable. Therefore,
since there is a significant continuing
risk to the safety of U.S. civil aviation
in the Tripoli (HLLL) FIR, the FAA
hereby extends the expiration date of
SFAR No. 112, § 91.1603, for an
additional two years.
The FAA will continue to actively
evaluate the area to determine to what
extent U.S. civil operators may be able
to safely operate therein. Adjustments to
this SFAR may be appropriate if the risk
to aviation safety and security changes.
The FAA may amend or rescind this
SFAR as necessary prior to its
expiration date.
Additionally, the FAA is amending
paragraph (c), Permitted operations, of
SFAR No. 112, § 91.1603, to make clear
that operations by sub-contractors under
a U.S. Government department, agency,
or instrumentality’s contract, grant, or
cooperative agreement may be included
in an approval request and to remove an
obsolete reference to paragraph 8 of
UNSCR 1973. UNSCR 2016 (2011)
terminated paragraphs 6 to 12 of UNSCR
1973, effective 23:59 p.m. Libyan local
time on October 31, 2011. The FAA is
also revising the approval conditions
that will apply to operations authorized
by other U.S. Government departments,
agencies, and instrumentalities and
approved by the FAA, and the
information about requests for
exemption, to reflect the termination of
statutory authorization for the FAA
premium war risk insurance program.
Section 102 of Division L of the
Consolidated and Further Continuing
Appropriations Act, 2015, Public Law
113–235, December 16, 2014, inter alia,
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
amended 49 U.S.C. 44302(f) and
44310(a) to specify the termination
dates in those sections as December 11,
2014. The effect was to terminate
coverage under FAA’s premium war risk
insurance program as of December 11,
2014.
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. 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.
Revised Approval Conditions
As noted above, Congress terminated
coverage under FAA’s premium war risk
insurance program as of December 11,
2014. Consequently, the FAA is revising
the approval conditions that will apply
to any approvals that the FAA may grant
for flight operations authorized by
another U.S. Government department,
agency or instrumentality in the Tripoli
(HLLL) FIR to remove material related to
this program. When the FAA approves
such operations, 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 the
following conditions:
(1) Any 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) Before any approval takes effect,
the operator must submit to the FAA:
(a) a written release of the U.S.
Government from all damages, claims,
and liabilities, including without
limitation legal fees and expenses; and
(b) the operator’s agreement to
indemnify the U.S. Government 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 Tripoli (HLLL) FIR;
and
(3) Other conditions that the FAA
may specify, including those that may
be imposed in OpSpecs.
The release and agreement to
indemnify do not preclude an operator
from raising a claim under an applicable
non-premium war risk insurance policy
E:\FR\FM\24MRR1.SGM
24MRR1
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 56 / Tuesday, March 24, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
issued by the FAA under chapter 443 of
title 49, United States Code.
If the proposed operation or
operations are approved, the FAA will
issue OpSpecs to the certificate holder
authorizing these operations and will
notify the department, agency, or
instrumentality that requested FAA
approval of civil flight operations to be
conducted by one or more persons
described in paragraph (a) of SFAR No.
112, § 91.1603, of any additional
conditions beyond those contained in
the approval letter. The requesting
department, agency, or instrumentality
must have a contract, grant, or
cooperative agreement (or its prime
contractor must have a subcontract)
with the person(s) described in
paragraph (a) of SFAR No. 112,
§ 91.1603, on whose behalf the
department, agency, or instrumentality
requests FAA approval.
TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Requests for Exemption
Any operations not conducted under
the approval process set forth above
must be conducted under an exemption
from SFAR No. 112, § 91.1603. A
request by any person covered under
this SFAR for an exemption must
comply with 14 CFR part 11 and will
require exceptional circumstances
beyond those contemplated by the
approval process set forth above. In
addition to the information required by
14 CFR 11.81, at a minimum, the
requestor 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
Tripoli FIR 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.,
the pre-mission planning and briefing,
in-flight, and post-flight phases).
Additionally, the release and
agreement to indemnify, as referred to
above, will be required as a condition of
any exemption issued under this SFAR.
The FAA recognizes that operations that
may be affected by SFAR No. 112,
§ 91.1603, may be planned for the
governments of other countries with the
support of the U.S. Government. 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.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:15 Mar 23, 2015
Jkt 235001
III. Regulatory Notices and Analyses
Changes to Federal regulations must
undergo several economic analyses.
First, Executive Orders 12866 and 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 et seq.,
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 amended, 19 U.S.C. Chapter 13,
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 a 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 (DOT)
Order 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 extends, by an additional
two years, the prohibition by SFAR No.
112 of flight operations within the
Tripoli (HLLL) Flight Information
Region (FIR) by all: U.S. air carriers,
U.S. commercial operators; persons
exercising the privileges of an airman
certificate issued by the FAA, 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 operators of such
aircraft that are foreign air carriers.
Because of the civil war that was
ongoing in Libya when SFAR No. 112
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
15505
was issued, the FAA believed that few,
if any, operators were operating in the
Tripoli (HLLL) FIR. Consequently, the
FAA found the costs of SFAR No. 112
to be minimal. Given the continuing
threats to civil aviation in the Tripoli
(HLLL) FIR described in the Background
section of this final rule, including but
not limited to ongoing fighting
involving various groups, the FAA has
determined that the costs of continuing
to prohibit U.S. civil flights in the
Tripoli FIR are still minimal. These
minimal costs are exceeded by the
benefits of avoiding the significant
hazards to civil aviation detailed above
in the Background section of this
preamble.
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.
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
E:\FR\FM\24MRR1.SGM
24MRR1
15506
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 56 / Tuesday, March 24, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
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.
As discussed above, the FAA
estimates the costs of this rule will be
minimal. 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, prohibits
Federal agencies from establishing
standards or engaging in related
activities that create unnecessary
obstacles to the foreign commerce of the
United States. Pursuant to this Act, 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 as
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
potential hazards outside the U.S.
Therefore, the rule is in compliance
with the Trade Agreements Act.
TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:15 Mar 23, 2015
Jkt 235001
new requirement for information
collection associated with this
immediately adopted final rule.
E. International Compatibility and
Cooperation
In keeping with U.S. obligations
under the Convention on International
Civil Aviation, it is FAA policy to
conform to International Civil Aviation
Organization (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 this regulation.
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 312f of this order and
involves no extraordinary
circumstances.
The FAA has reviewed the
implementation of the SFAR and
determined it is categorically excluded
from further environmental review
according to FAA Order 1050.1E,
‘‘Environmental Impacts: Policies and
Procedures,’’ paragraph 312f. The FAA
has examined possible extraordinary
circumstances and determined that no
such circumstances exist. After careful
and thorough consideration of the
action, the FAA finds that this Federal
action does not require preparation of
an Environmental Assessment or
Environmental Impact Statement in
accordance with the requirements of
NEPA, Council on Environmental
Quality (CEQ) regulations, and FAA
Order 1050.1E.
IV. 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
has determined that this action would
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,
would not have Federalism
implications.
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
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 would not be a
‘‘significant energy action’’ under the
executive order and would not be likely
to have a significant adverse effect on
the supply, distribution, or use of
energy.
C. Executive Order 13609, Promoting
International Regulatory Cooperation
Executive Order 13609, Promoting
International Regulatory Cooperation,
(77 FR 26413, May 4, 2012) 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 FAA has analyzed
this action under the policies and
agency responsibilities of Executive
Order 13609, and has determined that
this action would have no effect on
international regulatory cooperation.
V. Additional Information
A. Availability of Rulemaking
Documents
An electronic copy of rulemaking
documents may be obtained from the
Internet by—
• Searching the Federal eRulemaking
Portal (https://www.regulations.gov);
• Visiting the FAA’s Regulations and
Policies Web page at https://
www.faa.gov/regulations_policies or
• Accessing the Government Printing
Office’s Web page at https://
www.fdsys.gov.
Copies may also be obtained by
sending a request to the Federal
Aviation Administration, Office of
Rulemaking, ARM–1, 800 Independence
Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591, or
by calling (202) 267–9680. Please
identify the docket or amendment
number of this rulemaking in your
request.
All documents the FAA considered in
developing this rule, including
economic analyses and technical
reports, may be accessed from the
Internet through the Federal
eRulemaking Portal referenced above.
B. Small Business Regulatory
Enforcement Fairness Act
The Small Business Regulatory
Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996
E:\FR\FM\24MRR1.SGM
24MRR1
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 56 / Tuesday, March 24, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
(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
heading 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, Libya.
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
1. The authority citation for part 91
continues to read as follows:
■
2. In § 91.1603, revise paragraphs (c)
and (e) to read as follows:
■
§ 91.1603 Special Federal Aviation
Regulation No. 112—Prohibition Against
Certain Flights Within the Tripoli (HLLL)
Flight Information Region (FIR).
TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
*
*
*
*
(c) Permitted operations. This section
does not prohibit persons described in
paragraph (a) of this section from
conducting flight operations within the
Tripoli (HLLL) FIR under the following
conditions:
(1) Flight operations are conducted
under a contract, grant, or cooperative
agreement with a department, agency, or
instrumentality of the U.S. government
(or under a subcontract between the
prime contractor of the department,
agency, or instrumentality, and the
person described in paragraph (a) of this
section), 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 the 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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:15 Mar 23, 2015
Jkt 235001
Issued in Washington, DC, under the
authority of 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 40101(d)(1),
40105(b)(1)(A), and 44701(a)(5), on March 19,
2015.
Michael P. Huerta,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2015–06697 Filed 3–20–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING
COMMISSION
17 CFR Part 1
RIN 3038–AE22
Residual Interest Deadline for Futures
Commission Merchants
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g), 1155,
40101, 40103, 40105, 40113, 40120, 44101,
44111, 44701, 44704, 44709, 44711, 44712,
44715, 44716, 44717, 44722, 46306, 46315,
46316, 46504, 46506–46507, 47122, 47508,
47528–47531, 47534, articles 12 and 29 of the
Convention on International Civil Aviation
(61 Stat. 1180), (126 Stat. 11).
*
department, agency, or instrumentality;
and third, for all other operations.
(2) [Reserved]
*
*
*
*
*
(e) Expiration. This Special Federal
Aviation Regulation will remain in
effect until March 20, 2017. The FAA
may amend, rescind, or extend this
Special Federal Aviation Regulation as
necessary.
Commodity Futures Trading
Commission.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
The Commodity Futures
Trading Commission (‘‘Commission’’ or
‘‘CFTC’’) is amending its regulations to
remove the December 31, 2018
automatic termination date for the
phased-in compliance schedule for
futures commission merchants
(‘‘FCMs’’) and provides assurance that
the residual interest deadline, as
defined in the regulations (‘‘Residual
Interest Deadline’’), will only be revised
through a separate Commission
rulemaking.
DATES: The final rule is effective May
26, 2015.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Division of Swap Dealer and
Intermediary Oversight: Thomas Smith,
Acting Director, 202–418–5495, tsmith@
cftc.gov; Jennifer Bauer, Special
Counsel, 202–418–5472, jbauer@
cftc.gov; Joshua Beale, AttorneyAdvisor, 202–418–5446, jbeale@
cftc.gov, Three Lafayette Centre, 1155
21st Street NW., Washington, DC 20581.
Division of Clearing and Risk: Kirsten
V.K. Robbins, Associate Chief Counsel,
202–418–5313, krobbins@cftc.gov,
Three Lafayette Centre, 1155 21st Street
NW., Washington, DC 20581.
Office of the Chief Economist:
Stephen Kane, Research Economist,
202–418–5911, skane@cftc.gov, Three
Lafayette Centre, 1155 21st Street NW.,
Washington, DC 20581.
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
15507
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
On October 30, 2013, the Commission
amended Regulation 1.22 to enhance the
safety of funds deposited by customers
with FCMs as margin for futures
transactions.1 The amendments require
an FCM to maintain its own capital
(hereinafter referred to as the FCM’s
‘‘Residual Interest’’) in customer
segregated accounts in an amount equal
to or greater than its customers’
aggregate undermargined amounts.2 The
Commission established a phased-in
compliance schedule for Regulation
1.22 with an initial Residual Interest
Deadline of 6:00 p.m. Eastern Time on
the date of the settlement referenced in
Regulation 1.22(c)(2)(i) or (c)(4) (the
‘‘Settlement Date’’), beginning
November 14, 2014.3 Amended
Regulation 1.22 also directs staff to host
a public roundtable and publish a report
for public comment by May 16, 2016
addressing, to the extent information is
practically available, the practicability
(for both FCMs and customers) of
moving the Residual Interest Deadline
from 6:00 p.m. Eastern Time on the
Settlement Date, to the time of
settlement or to some other time of day.4
Furthermore, amended Regulation 1.22
provides that, absent Commission
action, the phased-in compliance period
for the Residual Interest Deadline
automatically terminates on December
31, 2018.5 In the case of such automatic
termination, the Residual Interest
Deadline would change to the time of
settlement on the Settlement Date.
II. The Proposal
On November 3, 2014, the
Commission proposed to revise
Regulation 1.22 to remove the December
31, 2018 automatic termination of the
phase-in compliance period.6 In the
NPRM, the Commission stated the
intention to retain the Residual Interest
1 Enhancing Protections Afforded Customers and
Customer Funds Held by Futures Commission
Merchants and Derivatives Clearing Organizations,
Final Rule, 78 FR 68506 (Nov. 14, 2013) (amending
17 CFR parts 1, 3, 22, 30 and 140).
2 See 17 CFR 1.22(c)(3)(i). As defined in
Regulation 1.22(c)(1), a customer’s account is
‘‘undermargined,’’ when the value of the customer
funds for a customer’s account is less than the total
amount of collateral required by derivatives
clearing organizations for that account’s contracts.
See 78 FR 68513, n.30.
3 See 17 CFR 1.22(c)(5)(ii); See 78 FR at 68578.
4 See 17 CFR 1.22(c)(5)(iii)(A).
5 See 17 CFR 1.22(c)(5)(iii)(C).
6 Residual Interest Deadline for Futures
Commission Merchants, Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking, 79 FR 68148 (Nov. 14, 2014)
(amending 17 CFR part 1).
E:\FR\FM\24MRR1.SGM
24MRR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 56 (Tuesday, March 24, 2015)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 15503-15507]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-06697]
========================================================================
Rules and Regulations
Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory documents
having general applicability and legal effect, most of which are keyed
to and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is published
under 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.
The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the Superintendent of Documents.
Prices of new books are listed in the first FEDERAL REGISTER issue of each
week.
========================================================================
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 56 / Tuesday, March 24, 2015 / Rules
and Regulations
[[Page 15503]]
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 91
[Docket No.: FAA-2011-0246; Amdt. No. 91-321B]
RIN 2120-AK70
Prohibition Against Certain Flights Within the Tripoli (HLLL)
Flight Information Region (FIR); Extension of Expiration Date
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Final rule and extension of expiration date.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This action extends the prohibition of flight operations
within the Tripoli (HLLL) Flight Information Region (FIR) by all: U.S.
air carriers; U.S. commercial operators; persons exercising the
privileges of an airman certificate issued by the FAA, 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
operators of such aircraft that are foreign air carriers. The extension
of the expiration date is necessary to address a potential hazard to
persons and aircraft engaged in such flight operations. Additionally,
the FAA is amending the prohibition to make clear that operations by
sub-contractors under a U.S. Government department, agency, or
instrumentality's contract, grant, or cooperative agreement may be
included in an approval request and to remove an obsolete reference to
paragraph 8 of United Nations Security Council Resolution (UNSCR) 1973.
The FAA is also revising the approval conditions that will apply to
operations authorized by other U.S. Government departments, agencies,
and instrumentalities that are approved by the FAA, and the information
about requests for exemption, to reflect the termination of statutory
authorization for the FAA premium war risk insurance program.
DATES: The final rule is effective March 20, 2015. This action extends
the period during which Special Federal Aviation Regulation (SFAR) No.
112, scheduled to expire on March 20, 2015, will remain in effect. The
expiration date is extended until March 20, 2017.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For technical questions concerning
this action, contact Will Gonzalez, Air Transportation Division, AFS-
220, 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 Mary Mason,
Office of the Chief Counsel, AGC-200, Federal Aviation Administration,
800 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591; telephone (202) 267-
8018; email mary.mason@faa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Good Cause for Immediate Adoption
Section 553(b)(3)(B) of title 5, U.S. Code, 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 continued potential hazard to civil aviation that exists in
the Tripoli (HLL) FIR, as described in the Background section of this
rule.
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 civil aircraft, and U.S.-certificated airmen throughout the
world. The FAA's authority to issue rules on aviation safety is found
in title 49, U.S. Code. Subtitle I, section 106(f), describes the
authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII of title 49, Aviation
Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's authority.
Section 40101(d)(1) provides that the Administrator shall consider in
the public interest, among other matters, assigning, maintaining, and
enhancing safety and security as the highest priorities in air
commerce. Section 40105(b)(1)(A) requires the Administrator to exercise
his authority consistently with the obligations of the 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 that the Administrator finds necessary for safety in air
commerce and national security. This regulation is within the scope of
that authority, because it extends the prohibition against the persons
subject to paragraph (a) of SFAR No. 112, 14 CFR 91.1603, conducting
flight operations in the Tripoli (HLLL) FIR due to the continued
potential hazard to the safety of such persons' flight operations, as
described in the Background section of this document.
I. Executive Summary
This action extends the prohibition of flight operations in the
Tripoli (HLLL) 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 address potential hazards to
persons and aircraft engaged in such flight operations. The
prohibition, which is scheduled to expire on March 20, 2015, is hereby
extended to March 20, 2017.
II. Background
As a result of safety and national security concerns regarding
flight operations in the Tripoli (HLLL) FIR, the FAA issued Sec.
91.1603 of title 14, Code of Federal Regulations, SFAR No. 112, in
March 2011 (76 FR 16238, March 23, 2011). SFAR No. 112 prohibits all
U.S. air carriers; U.S. commercial operators; persons exercising the
privileges of an airman
[[Page 15504]]
certificate issued by the FAA, 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 operators of such aircraft that
are foreign air carriers, from conducting flight operations in the
Tripoli (HLLL) FIR, except as provided in paragraphs (c) and (d) of the
SFAR.
When SFAR No. 112 was issued, an armed conflict was ongoing in
Libya and presented a potential hazard to civil aviation. The FAA was
concerned that runways at Libya's international airports, including the
main international airports serving Benghazi (HLLB) and Tripoli (HLLT),
might be damaged or degraded. There was also concern that air
navigation services in the Tripoli FIR might be unavailable or
degraded. In addition, the proliferation of air defense weapons,
including Man-Portable Air-Defense Systems (MANPADS), and the presence
of military operations, including Libyan aerial bombardments and
unplanned military flights entering and departing the Tripoli (HLLL)
FIR, posed a potential hazard to U.S. operators, U.S.-registered
aircraft, and FAA-certificated airmen that might operate within the
Tripoli (HLLL) FIR. Additionally, the United Nations Security Council
adopted Resolution 1973 on March 18, 2011, which mandated a ban on all
flights in the airspace of Libya, with certain exceptions.
By March 2014, although the Gadhafi regime had been overthrown and
the UN-mandated ban on flights in Libyan airspace had been lifted, the
FAA continued to have significant security concerns for Libya and for
the safety of U.S. civil aviation operations in that country. On March
20, 2014, the FAA extended the expiration date of SFAR No. 112, Sec.
91.1603, to March 20, 2015. The FAA considered that, on December 12,
2013, the Department of State had issued a Travel Warning strongly
advising against all non-essential travel to Libya. Various groups had
called for attacks against U.S. citizens and U.S. interests in Libya.
Many military-grade weapons remained in the hands of private
individuals and groups, among them anti-aircraft weapons that could be
used against civil aviation, including MANPADS. The Travel Warning also
warned that closures or threats of closures of the international
airports occurred regularly for maintenance, labor, or security-related
reasons. For those reasons, on March 21, 2014, the FAA published a
final rule (79 FR 15679; corrected at 79 FR 19288, April 8, 2014)
extending the expiration date of SFAR No. 112, Sec. 91.1603, to March
20, 2015.
The FAA continues to have significant concerns regarding the safety
of U.S. civil aviation operations in the Tripoli (HLLL) FIR at all
altitudes due to the hazardous situation created by the ongoing
fighting involving various militant groups and Libyan military forces
in various areas of Libya, including some near Tripoli and Benghazi.
Islamist militant groups hold and control significant portions of
Western Libya, including Tripoli International Airport (HLLT). Militant
groups, such as Libyan Dawn, possess a variety of anti-aircraft
weapons, which give them the capability to target aircraft upon landing
and departure and at higher altitudes.
Civil aviation infrastructure is at risk from indirect fire from
mortars and rockets targeting Libyan airports during the ongoing
fighting. Civil aviation in the Tripoli FIR is also at risk from aerial
combat operations and other military activity conducted by Libyan
forces.
Furthermore, the security situation in the Tripoli (HLLL) FIR
continues to be unpredictable and unstable. Therefore, since there is a
significant continuing risk to the safety of U.S. civil aviation in the
Tripoli (HLLL) FIR, the FAA hereby extends the expiration date of SFAR
No. 112, Sec. 91.1603, for an additional two years.
The FAA will continue to actively evaluate the area to determine to
what extent U.S. civil operators may be able to safely operate therein.
Adjustments to this SFAR may be appropriate if the risk to aviation
safety and security changes. The FAA may amend or rescind this SFAR as
necessary prior to its expiration date.
Additionally, the FAA is amending paragraph (c), Permitted
operations, of SFAR No. 112, Sec. 91.1603, to make clear that
operations by sub-contractors under a U.S. Government department,
agency, or instrumentality's contract, grant, or cooperative agreement
may be included in an approval request and to remove an obsolete
reference to paragraph 8 of UNSCR 1973. UNSCR 2016 (2011) terminated
paragraphs 6 to 12 of UNSCR 1973, effective 23:59 p.m. Libyan local
time on October 31, 2011. The FAA is also revising the approval
conditions that will apply to operations authorized by other U.S.
Government departments, agencies, and instrumentalities and approved by
the FAA, and the information about requests for exemption, to reflect
the termination of statutory authorization for the FAA premium war risk
insurance program. Section 102 of Division L of the Consolidated and
Further Continuing Appropriations Act, 2015, Public Law 113-235,
December 16, 2014, inter alia, amended 49 U.S.C. 44302(f) and 44310(a)
to specify the termination dates in those sections as December 11,
2014. The effect was to terminate coverage under FAA's premium war risk
insurance program as of December 11, 2014.
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.
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.
Revised Approval Conditions
As noted above, Congress terminated coverage under FAA's premium
war risk insurance program as of December 11, 2014. Consequently, the
FAA is revising the approval conditions that will apply to any
approvals that the FAA may grant for flight operations authorized by
another U.S. Government department, agency or instrumentality in the
Tripoli (HLLL) FIR to remove material related to this program. When the
FAA approves such operations, 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 the
following conditions:
(1) Any 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) Before any approval takes effect, the operator must submit to
the FAA:
(a) a written release of the U.S. Government from all damages,
claims, and liabilities, including without limitation legal fees and
expenses; and
(b) the operator's agreement to indemnify the U.S. Government 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 Tripoli
(HLLL) FIR; and
(3) Other conditions that the FAA may specify, including those that
may be imposed in OpSpecs.
The release and agreement to indemnify do not preclude an operator
from raising a claim under an applicable non-premium war risk insurance
policy
[[Page 15505]]
issued by the FAA under chapter 443 of title 49, United States Code.
If the proposed operation or operations are approved, the FAA will
issue OpSpecs to the certificate holder authorizing these operations
and will notify the department, agency, or instrumentality that
requested FAA approval of civil flight operations to be conducted by
one or more persons described in paragraph (a) of SFAR No. 112, Sec.
91.1603, of any additional conditions beyond those contained in the
approval letter. The requesting department, agency, or instrumentality
must have a contract, grant, or cooperative agreement (or its prime
contractor must have a subcontract) with the person(s) described in
paragraph (a) of SFAR No. 112, Sec. 91.1603, on whose behalf the
department, agency, or instrumentality requests FAA approval.
Requests for Exemption
Any operations not conducted under the approval process set forth
above must be conducted under an exemption from SFAR No. 112, Sec.
91.1603. A request by any person covered under this SFAR for an
exemption must comply with 14 CFR part 11 and will require exceptional
circumstances beyond those contemplated by the approval process set
forth above. In addition to the information required by 14 CFR 11.81,
at a minimum, the requestor 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 Tripoli FIR 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., the pre-mission planning and briefing, in-flight, and post-
flight phases).
Additionally, the release and agreement to indemnify, as referred
to above, will be required as a condition of any exemption issued under
this SFAR. The FAA recognizes that operations that may be affected by
SFAR No. 112, Sec. 91.1603, may be planned for the governments of
other countries with the support of the U.S. Government. 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.
III. Regulatory Notices and Analyses
Changes to Federal regulations must undergo several economic
analyses. First, Executive Orders 12866 and 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 et seq., 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 amended, 19 U.S.C.
Chapter 13, 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 a 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 (DOT) Order 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 extends, by an additional two years, the prohibition by
SFAR No. 112 of flight operations within the Tripoli (HLLL) Flight
Information Region (FIR) by all: U.S. air carriers, U.S. commercial
operators; persons exercising the privileges of an airman certificate
issued by the FAA, 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 operators of such aircraft that are
foreign air carriers. Because of the civil war that was ongoing in
Libya when SFAR No. 112 was issued, the FAA believed that few, if any,
operators were operating in the Tripoli (HLLL) FIR. Consequently, the
FAA found the costs of SFAR No. 112 to be minimal. Given the continuing
threats to civil aviation in the Tripoli (HLLL) FIR described in the
Background section of this final rule, including but not limited to
ongoing fighting involving various groups, the FAA has determined that
the costs of continuing to prohibit U.S. civil flights in the Tripoli
FIR are still minimal. These minimal costs are exceeded by the benefits
of avoiding the significant hazards to civil aviation detailed above in
the Background section of this preamble.
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
[[Page 15506]]
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.
As discussed above, the FAA estimates the costs of this rule will
be minimal. 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,
prohibits Federal agencies from establishing standards or engaging in
related activities that create unnecessary obstacles to the foreign
commerce of the United States. Pursuant to this Act, 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 as 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
potential hazards 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
In keeping with U.S. obligations under the Convention on
International Civil Aviation, it is FAA policy to conform to
International Civil Aviation Organization (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 this regulation.
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 312f of this order and involves no
extraordinary circumstances.
The FAA has reviewed the implementation of the SFAR and determined
it is categorically excluded from further environmental review
according to FAA Order 1050.1E, ``Environmental Impacts: Policies and
Procedures,'' paragraph 312f. The FAA has examined possible
extraordinary circumstances and determined that no such circumstances
exist. After careful and thorough consideration of the action, the FAA
finds that this Federal action does not require preparation of an
Environmental Assessment or Environmental Impact Statement in
accordance with the requirements of NEPA, Council on Environmental
Quality (CEQ) regulations, and FAA Order 1050.1E.
IV. 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 has determined that this action would 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, would 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 would not be a ``significant
energy action'' under the executive order and would not be likely to
have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use
of energy.
C. Executive Order 13609, Promoting International Regulatory
Cooperation
Executive Order 13609, Promoting International Regulatory
Cooperation, (77 FR 26413, May 4, 2012) 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 FAA has analyzed this action under the policies and
agency responsibilities of Executive Order 13609, and has determined
that this action would have no effect on international regulatory
cooperation.
V. Additional Information
A. Availability of Rulemaking Documents
An electronic copy of rulemaking documents may be obtained from the
Internet by--
Searching the Federal eRulemaking Portal (https://www.regulations.gov);
Visiting the FAA's Regulations and Policies Web page at
https://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies or
Accessing the Government Printing Office's Web page at
https://www.fdsys.gov.
Copies may also be obtained by sending a request to the Federal
Aviation Administration, Office of Rulemaking, ARM-1, 800 Independence
Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591, or by calling (202) 267-9680. Please
identify the docket or amendment number of this rulemaking in your
request.
All documents the FAA considered in developing this rule, including
economic analyses and technical reports, may be accessed from the
Internet through the Federal eRulemaking Portal referenced above.
B. Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act
The Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996
[[Page 15507]]
(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 heading 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, Libya.
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, 40101, 40103, 40105,
40113, 40120, 44101, 44111, 44701, 44704, 44709, 44711, 44712,
44715, 44716, 44717, 44722, 46306, 46315, 46316, 46504, 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. In Sec. 91.1603, revise paragraphs (c) and (e) to read as follows:
Sec. 91.1603 Special Federal Aviation Regulation No. 112--Prohibition
Against Certain Flights Within the Tripoli (HLLL) Flight Information
Region (FIR).
* * * * *
(c) Permitted operations. This section does not prohibit persons
described in paragraph (a) of this section from conducting flight
operations within the Tripoli (HLLL) FIR under the following
conditions:
(1) Flight operations are conducted under a contract, grant, or
cooperative agreement with a department, agency, or instrumentality of
the U.S. government (or under a subcontract between the prime
contractor of the department, agency, or instrumentality, and the
person described in paragraph (a) of this section), 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 the
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.
(2) [Reserved]
* * * * *
(e) Expiration. This Special Federal Aviation Regulation will
remain in effect until March 20, 2017. The FAA may amend, rescind, or
extend this Special Federal Aviation Regulation as necessary.
Issued in Washington, DC, under the authority of 49 U.S.C.
106(f), 40101(d)(1), 40105(b)(1)(A), and 44701(a)(5), on March 19,
2015.
Michael P. Huerta,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2015-06697 Filed 3-20-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P