Extension of the Prohibition Against Certain Flights in the Tripoli (HLLL) Flight Information Region (FIR), 14433-14437 [2017-05515]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 53 / Tuesday, March 21, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
Service Bulletin 737–53–1315, dated July 29,
2011, were performed before March 28, 2017
(the effective date of AD 2017–03–04) using
Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin
737–53–1315, dated July 29, 2011, except as
required by paragraph (h)(4) of this AD.
Boeing Special Attention Bulletin 737–53–
1315, dated July 29, 2011, was incorporated
by reference in AD 2012–16–07.
(m) Alternative Methods of Compliance
(AMOCs)
(1) The Manager, Los Angeles Aircraft
Certification Office (ACO), FAA, has the
authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if
requested using the procedures found in 14
CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19,
send your request to your principal inspector
or local Flight Standards District Office, as
appropriate. If sending information directly
to the manager of the ACO, send it to the
attention of the person identified in
paragraph (n) of this AD. Information may be
emailed to: 9-ANM-LAACO-AMOCRequests@faa.gov.
(2) Before using any approved AMOC,
notify your appropriate principal inspector,
or lacking a principal inspector, the manager
of the local flight standards district office/
certificate holding district office.
(3) An AMOC that provides an acceptable
level of safety may be used for any repair,
modification, or alteration required by this
AD if it is approved by the Boeing
Commercial Airplanes Organization
Designation Authorization (ODA) that has
been authorized by the Manager, Los Angeles
ACO, to make those findings. To be
approved, the repair method, modification
deviation, or alteration deviation must meet
the certification basis of the airplane, and the
approval must specifically refer to this AD.
(4) AMOCs approved previously for AD
2012–16–07 are approved as AMOCs for the
corresponding provisions of paragraph (g) of
this AD.
pmangrum on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES
(n) Related Information
For more information about this AD,
contact Jennifer Tsakoumakis, Aerospace
Engineer, Airframe Branch, ANM–120L,
FAA, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification
Office (ACO), 3960 Paramount Boulevard,
Lakewood, CA 90712–4137; phone: 562–627–
5264; fax: 562–627–5210; email:
jennifer.tsakoumakis@faa.gov.
(o) Material Incorporated by Reference
(1) The Director of the Federal Register
approved the incorporation by reference
(IBR) of the service information listed in this
paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR
part 51.
(2) You must use this service information
as applicable to do the actions required by
this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
(3) The following service information was
approved for IBR on March 28, 2017 (82 FR
11140, February 21, 2017).
(i) Boeing Special Attention Service
Bulletin 737–53–1315, Revision 1, dated June
30, 2015.
(ii) Reserved.
(4) For service information identified in
this AD, contact Boeing Commercial
Airplanes, Attention: Contractual & Data
Services (C&DS), 2600 Westminster Blvd.,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:46 Mar 20, 2017
Jkt 241001
MC 110–SK57, Seal Beach, CA 90740–5600;
telephone 562–797–1717; Internet https://
www.myboeingfleet.com.
(5) You may view this service information
at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate,
1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For
information on the availability of this
material at the FAA, call 425–227–1221.
(6) You may view this service information
that is incorporated by reference at the
National Archives and Records
Administration (NARA). For information on
the availability of this material at NARA, call
202–741–6030, or go to: https://
www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibrlocations.html.
14433
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Executive Summary
[FR Doc. 2017–05162 Filed 3–20–17; 8:45 am]
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 due to continued hazards to
persons and aircraft engaged in such
flight operations. The prohibition,
which is scheduled to remain in effect
until March 20, 2017, will now remain
in effect until March 20, 2019.
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
II. Legal Authority and Good Cause
Issued in Renton, Washington, on March 7,
2017.
Michael Kaszycki,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane
Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
A. Legal Authority
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 91
[Docket No.: FAA–2011–0246; Amdt. No.
91–321C]
RIN 2120–AK99
Extension of the Prohibition Against
Certain Flights in the Tripoli (HLLL)
Flight Information Region (FIR)
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
This action extends the
prohibition of flight operations in 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 due to continued hazards to
persons and aircraft engaged in such
flight operations. This Special Federal
Aviation Regulation (SFAR) will now
remain in effect until March 20, 2019.
DATES: This final rule is effective on
March 16, 2017.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Michael Filippell, Air Transportation
Division, AFS–220, Flight Standards
Service, Federal Aviation
Administration, 800 Independence
Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591;
telephone 202–267–8166; email
michael.e.filippell@faa.gov.
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
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, sections 106(f)
and (g) describe 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
FAA’s authority under the statutes cited
previously, because it continues to
prohibit the persons subject to
paragraph (a) of 14 CFR 91.1603, (SFAR
No. 112), from conducting flight
operations in the Tripoli (HLLL) FIR
due to the continued hazards to the
safety of such persons’ flight operations,
E:\FR\FM\21MRR1.SGM
21MRR1
14434
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 53 / Tuesday, March 21, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
as described in the Background section
of this document.
pmangrum on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES
B. 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.’’ Section 553(d)
also authorizes agencies to forgo the
delay in effective date for good cause
found and published with the rule. In
this instance, the FAA finds an
immediate need to address the
continued hazard to U.S. civil aviation
due to threats from political instability
and associated militant/terrorist activity
that exists in the Tripoli (HLL) FIR. This
hazard is further described in the
Background section of this rule.
Because the circumstances described
herein warrant a continuation of the
flight restrictions imposed by SFAR No.
112, 14 CFR 91.1603, the FAA finds that
notice and public comment under 5
U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(B), and a delay in the
effective date described in 5 U.S.C.
553(d), are impracticable and contrary
to the public interest. The FAA also
finds that this action is fully consistent
with the obligations under 49 U.S.C.
40105 to ensure that the FAA exercises
its duties consistently with the
obligations of the United States under
international agreements.
III. Background
The significant threat, identified
when the FAA published its most recent
extension of the expiration date of SFAR
No. 112, 14 CFR 91.1603,1 to U.S. civil
aviation operating in the Tripoli (HLLL)
FIR continues, due to threats from
political instability and associated
militant/terrorist activity. Libya
continues to experience a fluid conflict
environment involving heavily-armed
elements that are equipped with a
variety of anti-aircraft-capable weapons
and that have demonstrated the
capability and intent to target aviation
interests.
As a result of safety and national
security concerns regarding flight
operations in the Tripoli (HLLL) FIR,
the FAA issued SFAR No. 112, 14 CFR
91.1603, in March 2011,2 prohibiting 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
1 80
2 76
FR 15503, March 24, 2015.
FR 16238, March 23, 2011.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:46 Mar 20, 2017
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 regulation.
When SFAR No. 112, 14 CFR 91.1603,
was issued, an armed conflict was
ongoing in Libya and presented a hazard
to U.S. 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 (HLLL) 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 hazard
to U.S. operators, U.S.-registered civil
aircraft, and FAA-certificated airmen
that might operate in 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 former
Libyan leader Muammar Gadhafi’s
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, 14 CFR 91.1603, to March 20,
2015.3 The FAA considered that, on
December 12, 2013, the Department of
State had issued a Travel Warning
strongly advising against all nonessential travel to Libya. Various groups
had called for attacks against U.S.
citizens and U.S. interests in Libya. As
a consequence of the unpredictable
security environment, a hazard to U.S.registered civil aircraft, U.S. operators,
and FAA-certificated airmen still
existed. Additionally, many militarygrade 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.
3 79 FR 15679, March 20, 2014, corrected at 79
FR 19288, April 8, 2014.
Jkt 241001
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
By March 2015, the FAA continued 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 held
and controlled significant portions of
Western Libya, including Tripoli
International Airport (HLLT). Militant
groups, such as Libyan Dawn, possessed
a variety of anti-aircraft weapons, which
gave them the capability to target
aircraft upon landing and departure and
at higher altitudes. Civil aviation
infrastructure continued to be at risk
from indirect fire from mortars and
rockets targeting Libyan airports during
the ongoing fighting. Civil aviation in
the Tripoli (HLLL) FIR was also at risk
from aerial combat operations and other
military activity conducted by Libyan
forces. Further, the security situation in
the Tripoli (HLLL) FIR continued to be
unpredictable and unstable. For these
reasons, the FAA extended the
expiration date of SFAR No. 112, 14
CFR 91.1603, from March 20, 2015, to
March 20, 2017.4
The FAA continues to assess the
situation in the Tripoli (HLLL) FIR as
being hazardous for U.S. civil aviation.
The newly-established interim
government does not control vast
amounts of Libyan territory, security
conditions remain unstable throughout
the country, and fighting could flare
with little or no warning as various
elements vie for political influence and
territorial control. Anti-aircraft-capable
weapons remain a continuing threat, as
demonstrated by the July 2016 shoot
down of a military helicopter near
Benghazi.
Therefore, since there is a significant
continuing risk to the safety of U.S. civil
aviation in the Tripoli (HLLL) FIR, the
FAA extends the expiration date of
SFAR No. 112, 14 CFR 91.1603, from
March 20, 2017, to March 20, 2019, to
maintain the prohibition on flight
operations in the Tripoli (HLLL) 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
when such operators are foreign air
carriers.
The FAA will continue to actively
monitor the situation and, based on
evaluations, determine the extent to
4 80
FR 15503, March 24, 2015.
E:\FR\FM\21MRR1.SGM
21MRR1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 53 / Tuesday, March 21, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
pmangrum on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES
which U.S. civil operators may be able
to safely operate in the Tripoli (HLLL)
FIR in the future. Amendments to SFAR
No. 112, 14 CFR 91.1603, may be
appropriate if the risk to aviation safety
and security changes. The FAA may
amend or rescind SFAR No. 112, 14 CFR
91.1603, as necessary, prior to its
expiration date.
IV. 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,
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.
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, as 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 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 Evaluation
Department of Transportation (DOT)
Order 2100.5 prescribes policies and
procedures for simplification, analysis,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:46 Mar 20, 2017
Jkt 241001
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 a statement to that effect and
the basis for it to be included in the
preamble if a full regulatory evaluation
of the costs 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, SFAR No. 112, 14 CFR
91.1603. Due to the conditions in Libya
at the time that SFAR No. 112, 14 CFR
91.1603, was issued, the FAA believed
the rule would impose only minimal
cost because few, if any, operators
subject to the rule were operating in the
Tripoli (HLLL) FIR. The FAA has again
determined that the costs of continuing
to prohibit U.S. civil flights in the
Tripoli (HLLL) FIR are minimal. The
FAA finds that the costs to the few
operators who might wish to operate in
the Tripoli FIR are exceeded by the
benefits of avoiding the loss of life,
injuries, and property damage that
could be caused by the significant
hazards to U.S. civil aviation detailed in
the Background section of this rule.
B. 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
the head of the agency may so certify
and a regulatory flexibility analysis is
not required. The certification must
include a statement providing the
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
14435
factual basis for this determination, and
the reasoning should be clear.
The FAA estimates the costs of
extending this rule will continue to be
minimal, as discussed previously.
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.
C. International Trade Impact
Assessment
The Trade Agreements Act of 1979
(Pub. L. 96–39) 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 effect of
this final rule and determined that its
purpose is to protect the safety of U.S.
civil aviation from hazards outside the
U.S. Therefore, the rule is in compliance
with the Trade Agreements Act.
D. 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 $155
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.
E. Paperwork Reduction Act
The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(Pub. L. 104–13) 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 final rule.
E:\FR\FM\21MRR1.SGM
21MRR1
14436
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 53 / Tuesday, March 21, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
F. 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.
G. Environmental Analysis
FAA Order 1050.1F 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 5–6.6f 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 1050.1F,
‘‘Environmental Impacts: Policies and
Procedures,’’ paragraph 5–6.6f. 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 1050.1F.
pmangrum on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES
V. Executive Order Determinations
A. Executive Order 13132, Federalism
The FAA analyzed this 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 final rule
under Executive Order 13211, Actions
Concerning Regulations That
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:46 Mar 20, 2017
Jkt 241001
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.
VI. 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 Publishing
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) 267–9677. Please
identify the docket or amendment
number of this rulemaking in your
request.
Except for classified material, 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
(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
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
FAA official, or the persons 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:
■
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).
■
2. Revise § 91.1603 to read as follows:
§ 91.1603 Special Federal Aviation
Regulation No. 112—Prohibition Against
Certain Flights in the Tripoli (HLLL) Flight
Information Region (FIR).
(a) Applicability. This section 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 when such persons
are operating a U.S.-registered aircraft
for a foreign air carrier; and
(3) All operators of U.S.-registered
civil aircraft, except operators of such
aircraft that are foreign air carriers.
(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 Tripoli
(HLLL) FIR.
(c) Permitted operations. This section
does not prohibit persons described in
paragraph (a) of this section from
conducting flight operations in 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,
E:\FR\FM\21MRR1.SGM
21MRR1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 53 / Tuesday, March 21, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
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]
(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 part 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 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 Special Federal
Aviation Regulation will remain in
effect until March 20, 2019. 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 15,
2017.
Victoria B. Wassmer,
Acting Deputy Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2017–05515 Filed 3–16–17; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Office of the Secretary
14 CFR Part 234
[Docket No. DOT–RITA–2011–0001]
pmangrum on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES
RIN 2105–AE65
Reporting of Data for Mishandled
Baggage and Wheelchairs and
Scooters Transported in Aircraft Cargo
Compartments; Extension of
Compliance Date
Office of the Secretary (OST),
Department of Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
The Department of
Transportation is amending its
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:46 Mar 20, 2017
Jkt 241001
regulations by extending the compliance
date of its final rule on reporting of data
for mishandled baggage and wheelchairs
in aircraft cargo compartments from
January 1, 2018 to January 1, 2019.
Under that final rule, the mishandledbaggage data that air carriers are
required to report changed, from the
number of Mishandled Baggage Reports
and the number of domestic passenger
enplanements to the number of
mishandled bags and the number of
enplaned bags. The rule also requires
separate statistics for mishandled
wheelchairs and scooters used by
passengers with disabilities and
transported in aircraft cargo
compartments. This extension is in
response to a request by Airlines for
America (A4A) and Delta.
DATES: This final rule is effective March
21, 2017.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Blane A. Workie, Office of Aviation
Enforcement and Proceedings, U.S.
Department of Transportation, 1200
New Jersey Ave. SE., Washington, DC
20590, 202–366–9342, 202–366–7152
(fax), blane.workie@dot.gov (email).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Electronic Access and Filing
A copy of all materials related to the
original rulemaking proceeding (2105–
AE41) may be viewed online at https://
www.regulations.gov using the docket
numbers listed above. A copy of this
notice will also be placed on the docket.
Electronic retrieval help and guidelines
are available on the Web site. It is
available 24 hours each day, 365 days
each year. An electronic copy of this
document may also be downloaded
from the Office of the Federal Register’s
Web site at https://www.ofr.gov and the
Government Publishing Office’s Web
site at https://www.gpo.gov.
Background
On November 2, 2016, the Department
of Transportation published a final rule
in the Federal Register (81 FR 76300)
(RIN 2105–AE41), titled ‘‘Reporting of
Data for Mishandled Baggage and
Wheelchairs and Scooters Transported
in Aircraft Cargo Compartments.’’ This
rule changes the methodology for the
mishandled-baggage data that U.S. air
carriers are required to report to the
Department and requires U.S. air
carriers to report separate statistics in
their mishandled baggage reporting for
mishandled wheelchairs and scooters
used by disabled passengers and
transported in aircraft cargo
compartments.
On January 20, 2017, the White House
Chief of Staff issued a memorandum
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
14437
entitled, ‘‘Regulatory Freeze Pending
Review’’ (‘‘Memo’’). The Memo directed
heads of executive departments and
agencies to take certain steps to ensure
that the President’s appointees and
designees have the opportunity to
review new and pending regulations. It
instructed agencies to temporarily
postpone the effective dates of
regulations that had been published in
the Federal Register, but were not yet
effective, until 60 days after the date of
the memorandum.
On January 27, 2017, the Department
received a request from Airlines for
America (A4A) to extend the
compliance date of the final rule on
reporting data for mishandled baggage
and wheelchairs. In that request, the
A4A cites the Memo as a reason to
extend the compliance date. On
February 10, 2017, Delta Air Lines also
submitted a request to the Department
expressing support for extending the
compliance date which also referenced
the Memo. On March 2, 2017, A4A sent
a follow-up to its original request
specifying that if the rulemaking
remains that they are requesting that the
implementation period of the final rule
on mishandled baggage and wheelchairs
be delayed one year until January 2019
in the spirit of the Memo. A4A states
that industry is facing challenges with
parts of this regulation and needs more
time to implement it.
After carefully considering the
requests, we have decided to grant an
extension of the compliance date for the
final rule on reporting of mishandled
baggage and wheelchairs until January
1, 2019. As such, we also intend to
extend the compliance date for the
baggage handling statistics provision (14
CFR 234.6) in the final rule titled
‘‘Enhancing Airline Passenger
Protections III,’’ which was published
contemporaneously with the final rule
on reporting of data for mishandled
baggage and wheelchairs, to January 1,
2019.
Issued this 2nd day of March 2017 in
Washington, DC, under authority delegated
in 49 CFR 1.27(n).
Judith S. Kaleta,
Deputy General Counsel.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 234
Air carriers, Mishandled baggage,
Ontime statistics, Reporting, Uniform
system of accounts.
Accordingly, the Department of
Transportation amends 14 CFR part 234
as follows:
E:\FR\FM\21MRR1.SGM
21MRR1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 53 (Tuesday, March 21, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 14433-14437]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-05515]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 91
[Docket No.: FAA-2011-0246; Amdt. No. 91-321C]
RIN 2120-AK99
Extension of the Prohibition Against Certain Flights in the
Tripoli (HLLL) Flight Information Region (FIR)
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This action extends the prohibition of flight operations in
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 due to continued hazards to persons and aircraft
engaged in such flight operations. This Special Federal Aviation
Regulation (SFAR) will now remain in effect until March 20, 2019.
DATES: This final rule is effective on March 16, 2017.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael Filippell, Air Transportation
Division, AFS-220, Flight Standards Service, Federal Aviation
Administration, 800 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591;
telephone 202-267-8166; email michael.e.filippell@faa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
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 due to continued hazards to persons and aircraft
engaged in such flight operations. The prohibition, which is scheduled
to remain in effect until March 20, 2017, will now remain in effect
until March 20, 2019.
II. Legal Authority and Good Cause
A. Legal Authority
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, sections 106(f) and (g) describe
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 FAA's authority under the
statutes cited previously, because it continues to prohibit the persons
subject to paragraph (a) of 14 CFR 91.1603, (SFAR No. 112), from
conducting flight operations in the Tripoli (HLLL) FIR due to the
continued hazards to the safety of such persons' flight operations,
[[Page 14434]]
as described in the Background section of this document.
B. 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.'' Section 553(d) also
authorizes agencies to forgo the delay in effective date for good cause
found and published with the rule. In this instance, the FAA finds an
immediate need to address the continued hazard to U.S. civil aviation
due to threats from political instability and associated militant/
terrorist activity that exists in the Tripoli (HLL) FIR. This hazard is
further described in the Background section of this rule.
Because the circumstances described herein warrant a continuation
of the flight restrictions imposed by SFAR No. 112, 14 CFR 91.1603, the
FAA finds that notice and public comment under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(B),
and a delay in the effective date described in 5 U.S.C. 553(d), are
impracticable and contrary to the public interest. The FAA also finds
that this action is fully consistent with the obligations under 49
U.S.C. 40105 to ensure that the FAA exercises its duties consistently
with the obligations of the United States under international
agreements.
III. Background
The significant threat, identified when the FAA published its most
recent extension of the expiration date of SFAR No. 112, 14 CFR
91.1603,\1\ to U.S. civil aviation operating in the Tripoli (HLLL) FIR
continues, due to threats from political instability and associated
militant/terrorist activity. Libya continues to experience a fluid
conflict environment involving heavily-armed elements that are equipped
with a variety of anti-aircraft-capable weapons and that have
demonstrated the capability and intent to target aviation interests.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 80 FR 15503, March 24, 2015.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As a result of safety and national security concerns regarding
flight operations in the Tripoli (HLLL) FIR, the FAA issued SFAR No.
112, 14 CFR 91.1603, in March 2011,\2\ prohibiting 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, from conducting flight
operations in the Tripoli (HLLL) FIR, except as provided in paragraphs
(c) and (d) of the regulation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ 76 FR 16238, March 23, 2011.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
When SFAR No. 112, 14 CFR 91.1603, was issued, an armed conflict
was ongoing in Libya and presented a hazard to U.S. 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 (HLLL) 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 hazard to U.S. operators, U.S.-registered civil
aircraft, and FAA-certificated airmen that might operate in 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 former Libyan leader Muammar Gadhafi's
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, 14 CFR 91.1603, to March 20, 2015.\3\
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. As a consequence of the
unpredictable security environment, a hazard to U.S.-registered civil
aircraft, U.S. operators, and FAA-certificated airmen still existed.
Additionally, 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ 79 FR 15679, March 20, 2014, corrected at 79 FR 19288, April
8, 2014.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
By March 2015, the FAA continued 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 held and controlled significant
portions of Western Libya, including Tripoli International Airport
(HLLT). Militant groups, such as Libyan Dawn, possessed a variety of
anti-aircraft weapons, which gave them the capability to target
aircraft upon landing and departure and at higher altitudes. Civil
aviation infrastructure continued to be at risk from indirect fire from
mortars and rockets targeting Libyan airports during the ongoing
fighting. Civil aviation in the Tripoli (HLLL) FIR was also at risk
from aerial combat operations and other military activity conducted by
Libyan forces. Further, the security situation in the Tripoli (HLLL)
FIR continued to be unpredictable and unstable. For these reasons, the
FAA extended the expiration date of SFAR No. 112, 14 CFR 91.1603, from
March 20, 2015, to March 20, 2017.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ 80 FR 15503, March 24, 2015.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The FAA continues to assess the situation in the Tripoli (HLLL) FIR
as being hazardous for U.S. civil aviation. The newly-established
interim government does not control vast amounts of Libyan territory,
security conditions remain unstable throughout the country, and
fighting could flare with little or no warning as various elements vie
for political influence and territorial control. Anti-aircraft-capable
weapons remain a continuing threat, as demonstrated by the July 2016
shoot down of a military helicopter near Benghazi.
Therefore, since there is a significant continuing risk to the
safety of U.S. civil aviation in the Tripoli (HLLL) FIR, the FAA
extends the expiration date of SFAR No. 112, 14 CFR 91.1603, from March
20, 2017, to March 20, 2019, to maintain the prohibition on flight
operations in the Tripoli (HLLL) 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 when such operators are foreign
air carriers.
The FAA will continue to actively monitor the situation and, based
on evaluations, determine the extent to
[[Page 14435]]
which U.S. civil operators may be able to safely operate in the Tripoli
(HLLL) FIR in the future. Amendments to SFAR No. 112, 14 CFR 91.1603,
may be appropriate if the risk to aviation safety and security changes.
The FAA may amend or rescind SFAR No. 112, 14 CFR 91.1603, as
necessary, prior to its expiration date.
IV. 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, 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.
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, as 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 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 Evaluation
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 a statement to
that effect and the basis for it to be included in the preamble if a
full regulatory evaluation of the costs 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, SFAR No. 112, 14 CFR
91.1603. Due to the conditions in Libya at the time that SFAR No. 112,
14 CFR 91.1603, was issued, the FAA believed the rule would impose only
minimal cost because few, if any, operators subject to the rule were
operating in the Tripoli (HLLL) FIR. The FAA has again determined that
the costs of continuing to prohibit U.S. civil flights in the Tripoli
(HLLL) FIR are minimal. The FAA finds that the costs to the few
operators who might wish to operate in the Tripoli FIR are exceeded by
the benefits of avoiding the loss of life, injuries, and property
damage that could be caused by the significant hazards to U.S. civil
aviation detailed in the Background section of this rule.
B. 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.
The FAA estimates the costs of extending this rule will continue to
be minimal, as discussed previously. 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.
C. International Trade Impact Assessment
The Trade Agreements Act of 1979 (Pub. L. 96-39) 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 effect of this final rule and determined
that its purpose is to protect the safety of U.S. civil aviation from
hazards outside the U.S. Therefore, the rule is in compliance with the
Trade Agreements Act.
D. 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 $155 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.
E. Paperwork Reduction Act
The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-13) 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 final rule.
[[Page 14436]]
F. 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.
G. Environmental Analysis
FAA Order 1050.1F 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 5-6.6f 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 1050.1F, ``Environmental Impacts: Policies and
Procedures,'' paragraph 5-6.6f. 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 1050.1F.
V. Executive Order Determinations
A. Executive Order 13132, Federalism
The FAA analyzed this 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 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.
VI. 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 Publishing 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) 267-9677. Please
identify the docket or amendment number of this rulemaking in your
request.
Except for classified material, 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
(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 persons 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. Revise Sec. 91.1603 to read as follows:
Sec. 91.1603 Special Federal Aviation Regulation No. 112--Prohibition
Against Certain Flights in the Tripoli (HLLL) Flight Information Region
(FIR).
(a) Applicability. This section 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 when such persons are operating a U.S.-
registered aircraft for a foreign air carrier; and
(3) All operators of U.S.-registered civil aircraft, except
operators of such aircraft that are foreign air carriers.
(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 Tripoli (HLLL) FIR.
(c) Permitted operations. This section does not prohibit persons
described in paragraph (a) of this section from conducting flight
operations in 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,
[[Page 14437]]
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]
(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 part 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 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 Special Federal Aviation Regulation will
remain in effect until March 20, 2019. 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 15,
2017.
Victoria B. Wassmer,
Acting Deputy Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2017-05515 Filed 3-16-17; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
