Extension of the Prohibition Against Certain Flights in the Damascus Flight Information Region (FIR) (OSTT), 89294-89300 [2023-28502]
Download as PDF
89294
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 247 / Wednesday, December 27, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
for Thomasville Regional Airport,
Thomasville, GA, by updating the
airport name (formerly Thomasville
Municipal Airport). Also, the radius is
increased to 7 miles (previously 6.5
miles), and an extension to the northeast
is added. Controlled airspace is
necessary for the area’s safety and
management of instrument flight rules
(IFR) operations.
§ 71.1
Regulatory Notices and Analyses
*
The FAA has determined that this
regulation only involves an established
body of technical regulations for which
frequent and routine amendments are
necessary to keep them operationally
current. It, therefore, (1) is not a
‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under
Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a
‘‘significant rule’’ under DOT
Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44
FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and (3)
does not warrant preparation of a
regulatory evaluation as the anticipated
impact is minimal. Since this is a
routine matter that only affects air traffic
procedures and air navigation, it is
certified that this rule, when
promulgated, does not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities under the
criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
ASO GA E5 Thomasville, GA [Amended]
Thomasville Regional Airport, GA
(Lat. 30°54′05″ N, long. 83°52′53″ W)
That airspace extending upward from 700
feet above the surface within a 7-mile radius
of Thomasville Regional Airport and within
3.5 miles on each side of the 040° bearing of
the airport, extending from the 7-mile radius
to 9.7 miles northeast of the airport.
Environmental Review
Federal Aviation Administration
The FAA has determined that this
action qualifies for categorical exclusion
under the National Environmental
Policy Act in accordance with FAA
Order 1050.1F, ‘‘Environmental
Impacts: Policies and Procedures,’’
paragraph 5–6.5a.
This airspace action is not expected to
cause any potentially significant
environmental impacts, and no
extraordinary circumstances warrant the
preparation of an environmental
assessment.
14 CFR Part 91
Lists of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71
The Amendment
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES1
In consideration of the foregoing, the
Federal Aviation Administration
amends 14 CFR part 71 as follows:
PART 71—DESIGNATION OF CLASS A,
B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR
TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND
REPORTING POINTS
1. The authority citation for part 71
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g); 40103,
40113, 40120; E.O. 10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR,
1959–1963 Comp., p. 389.
15:06 Dec 26, 2023
Jkt 262001
Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace Areas
Extending Upward From 700 Feet or More
Above the Surface of the Earth.
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Issued in College Park, Georgia, on
December 20, 2023.
Andreese C. Davis,
Manager, Airspace & Procedures Team South,
Eastern Service Center, Air Traffic
Organization.
[FR Doc. 2023–28406 Filed 12–26–23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
[Docket No.: FAA–2017–0768; Amdt. No.
91–348D]
RIN 2120–AL91
Extension of the Prohibition Against
Certain Flights in the Damascus Flight
Information Region (FIR) (OSTT)
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
This action extends the
prohibition against certain flight
operations in the Damascus Flight
Information Region (FIR) (OSTT) 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 U.S.-registered aircraft for
a foreign air carrier; and operators of
U.S.-registered civil aircraft, except
when the operator of such aircraft is a
foreign air carrier, for an additional five
years, from December 30, 2023, until
December 30, 2028. The FAA finds this
action necessary to address significant
safety-of-flight risks to U.S. civil
aviation associated with the enduring
complex conflict in Syria. The FAA also
SUMMARY:
Airspace, Incorporation by reference,
Navigation (air).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
[Amended]
2. The incorporation by reference in
14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order JO 7400.11H,
Airspace Designations and Reporting
Points, dated August 11, 2023, and
effective September 15, 2023, is
amended as follows:
■
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
republishes the approval process and
exemption information for this Special
Federal Aviation Regulation (SFAR),
consistent with other recently published
flight prohibition SFARs.
DATES: This final rule is effective on
December 27, 2023.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bill
Petrak, Flight Standards Service,
through the Washington Operations
Center, Federal Aviation
Administration, 800 Independence
Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591;
telephone (202) 267–3203; email 9-FAAOverseasFlightProhibitions@faa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Executive Summary
This action extends the expiration
date of SFAR No. 114, § 91.1609 of title
14, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR),
from December 30, 2023, to December
30, 2028. SFAR No. 114, § 91.1609,
prohibits certain flight operations in the
Damascus FIR (OSTT) 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
U.S.-registered aircraft for a foreign air
carrier; and operators of U.S.-registered
civil aircraft, except when the operator
of such aircraft is a foreign air carrier.
The FAA finds this action necessary to
address significant safety-of-flight risks
to U.S. civil aviation in the Damascus
FIR (OSTT) associated with the
enduring complex conflict in Syria. The
FAA also republishes the approval
process and exemption information for
this flight prohibition SFAR, consistent
with other recently published flight
prohibition SFARs.
II. Authority and Good Cause
A. Authority
The FAA is responsible for the safety
of flight in the U.S. and for the safety
of U.S. civil operators, U.S.-registered
civil aircraft, and U.S.-certificated
airmen throughout the world. Sections
106(f) and (g) of title 49, U.S. Code
(U.S.C.), subtitle I, establish the FAA
Administrator’s authority to issue rules
on aviation safety. 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 this authority
consistently with the obligations of the
U.S. Government under international
agreements.
E:\FR\FM\27DER1.SGM
27DER1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 247 / Wednesday, December 27, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES1
The FAA is promulgating this rule
under the authority described in 49
U.S.C. 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
the FAA’s authority because it
continues to prohibit the persons
described in paragraph (a) of SFAR No.
114, § 91.1609, from conducting flight
operations in the Damascus FIR (OSTT)
due to the significant safety-of-flight
risks to U.S. civil flight operations in
that airspace, as described in the
preamble to this final rule.
B. Good Cause for Immediate Adoption
Section 553(b)(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.’’ Also, section
553(d) permits agencies, upon a finding
of good cause, to issue rules with an
effective date less than 30 days from the
date of publication. In this instance, the
FAA finds good cause to forgo notice
and comment and the delayed effective
date because they would be
impracticable and contrary to the public
interest.
Providing notice and the opportunity
for the public to comment here would
be impracticable. The FAA’s flight
prohibitions, and any amendments
thereto, need to include appropriate
boundaries that reflect the agency’s
current understanding of the risk
environment for U.S. civil aviation. This
allows the FAA to protect the safety of
U.S. operators’ aircraft and the lives of
their passengers and crews without
over-restricting or under-restricting U.S.
operators’ routing options. However, the
risk environment for U.S. civil aviation
in airspace managed by other countries
with respect to safety of flight is fluid
in circumstances involving fighting,
violent extremist and militant activity,
or periods of heightened tensions,
particularly where weapons capable of
targeting or otherwise negatively
affecting U.S. civil aviation are or may
be present. This fluidity, and the
potential for rapid changes in the risks
to U.S. civil aviation, significantly limits
how far in advance of a new or amended
flight prohibition the FAA can usefully
assess the risk environment. The delay
that would be occasioned by providing
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:06 Dec 26, 2023
Jkt 262001
an opportunity to comment on this
action would significantly increase the
risk that the resulting final action would
not accurately reflect the current risks to
U.S. civil aviation associated with the
situation and thus would not establish
boundaries for the flight prohibition
commensurate with those risks.
While the FAA sought and responded
to public comments, the boundaries of
the area in which unacceptable risks to
the safety of U.S. civil aviation existed
might change due to: evolving military
or political circumstances; violent
extremist and militant group activity;
the introduction, removal, or
repositioning of more advanced antiaircraft weapon systems; or other
factors. As a result, if the situation
improved while the FAA sought and
responded to public comments, the rule
the FAA finalized might be overrestrictive, unnecessarily limiting U.S.
operators’ routing options and
potentially causing them to incur
unnecessary additional fuel and
operations-related costs, as well as
potentially causing passengers to incur
unnecessarily some costs attributed to
their time. Conversely, if the situation
deteriorated while the FAA sought and
responded to public comments, the rule
the FAA finalized might be underrestrictive, allowing U.S. civil aviation
to continue operating in areas where
unacceptable risks to their safety had
developed. Such an outcome would
endanger the safety of these aircraft, as
well as their passengers and crews,
exposing them to unacceptable risks of
death, injury, and property damage that
could occur if a U.S. operator’s aircraft
were shot down (or otherwise damaged)
while operating in the Damascus FIR
(OSTT).
Alternatively, if the FAA made
changes to the area in which U.S. civil
aviation operations would be prohibited
between a notice of proposed
rulemaking and a final rule due to
changed conditions, the version of the
rule the public commented on would no
longer reflect the FAA’s current
assessment of the risk environment for
U.S. civil aviation.
In addition, seeking comment would
be contrary to the public interest
because some of the rational basis for
the rulemaking is based upon classified
information and controlled unclassified
information not authorized for public
release. In order to meaningfully
provide comment on a proposal, the
public would need access to the basis
for the agency’s decision-making, which
the FAA cannot provide. Disclosing
classified or controlled unclassified
information in order to seek meaningful
comment on the proposal would harm
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
89295
the public interest. Accordingly, the
FAA meaningfully seeking comment on
the proposal is contrary to the public
interest.
Therefore, providing notice and the
opportunity for comment would be
impracticable as it would hinder the
FAA’s ability to maintain appropriate
flight prohibitions based on up-to-date
risk assessments of the risks to the
safety of U.S. civil aviation operations
in airspace managed by other countries,
and contrary to the public interest, as
the FAA cannot protect classified and
controlled unclassified information and
meaningfully seek public comment.
For the same reasons discussed above,
the potential safety impacts and the
need for prompt action on up-to-date
information that is not public would
make delaying the effective date
impracticable and contrary to the public
interest.
Accordingly, the FAA finds good
cause exists to forgo notice and
comment and any delay in the effective
date for this rule.
III. Background
On December 30, 2020, the FAA
amended SFAR No. 114, § 91.1609, to
extend the expiration date of the flight
prohibition for U.S. operators and
airmen in the Damascus FIR (OSTT)
from December 30, 2020, to December
30, 2023.1 In issuing the 2020 final rule,
the FAA determined the situation in the
Damascus FIR (OSTT) remained
hazardous for U.S. civil aviation due to
a variety of aviation safety risks
associated with the ongoing conflict in
Syria.2
In 2020, the FAA determined the
presence of third parties conducting
independent military operations in
Syria against pro-Assad regime forces,
opposition groups, and violent extremist
elements presented an unacceptable
level of risk to U.S. civil aviation
operations. Third-party airstrikes in
Syria often resulted in Syrian military
air defense responses. Syrian authorities
did not adequately de-conflict these air
defense activities, which included
indiscriminate surface-to-air missile
(SAM) fire, with civil aviation
operations in the Damascus FIR (OSTT),
including, but not limited to, civil flight
operations in close proximity to
international airports in Syria. In late
February 2020, Syrian air defense
activities forced a commercial Cham
Wings Airbus 320 passenger flight on
final approach to Damascus
1 Extension of the Prohibition Against Certain
Flights in the Damascus Flight Information Region
(FIR) (OSTT) final rule, 85 FR 75840, (Nov. 27,
2020).
2 Id. at 75841.
E:\FR\FM\27DER1.SGM
27DER1
89296
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 247 / Wednesday, December 27, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES1
International Airport (ICAO code: OSDI)
to divert to an alternate airfield in Syria.
The lack of de-confliction of Syrian
air defense activity with civil air traffic
was just one of the risks to U.S. civil
aviation operations in the Damascus FIR
(OSTT) emanating from third-party
involvement in Syria. Russia, Iran, and
the Lebanese terrorist organization,
Hizballah, all of which are Syrian
regime allies, continued to conduct
military operations in Syria and had
deployed significant air defense and
electronic warfare capabilities,
including Global Positioning System
(GPS) jammers, which presented a risk
to U.S. civil aviation operations in the
Damascus FIR (OSTT). In March 2020,
Russian, Turkish, and Syrian forces
clashed in Idlib Province. During these
clashes, fighter aircraft and possible
SAMs shot down several manned and
unmanned aircraft.
In addition to the hazards associated
with third-party involvement in the
Syrian conflict, violent extremist threats
to civil aviation safety existed in Syria.
Terrorist groups, including the Islamic
State of Iraq and ash-Sham (ISIS) and alQaida-aligned entities, possessed or had
access to a wide array of anti-aircraft
weapons that posed a risk to civil
aviation operations in the Damascus FIR
(OSTT). Anti-regime forces, violent
extremists, and militants had
successfully shot down multiple
military aircraft using man-portable air
defense systems (MANPADS) during the
Syrian conflict. Additionally, various
elements had successfully targeted
military aircraft using advanced antitank guided missiles (ATGMs). ATGMs
primarily pose a risk to civil aircraft
operating near, or parked at, an airport.
Finally, various groups had employed
unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) to
surveil and attack Syrian and Syrianallied fielded forces and airfields.
IV. Discussion of the Final Rule
The FAA has determined the
enduring complex conflict in Syria
continues to present an unacceptable
level of risk for U.S. civil aviation safety
in the entirety of the Damascus FIR
(OSTT) at all altitudes. Various third
parties, including but not limited to
Russia, Iran, Turkey, and Israel,
continue to conduct uncoordinated
military operations in Syria, resulting in
various risks to U.S. civil aviation
operations in the Damascus FIR (OSTT).
Such military operations include
tactical crewed aircraft and UAS
intelligence collection and strike
operations, electronic warfare
operations, indirect fire attacks,
missiles, and potential anti-aircraft
weapons use that may not be de-
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:06 Dec 26, 2023
Jkt 262001
conflicted adequately with civil aviation
operations in the Damascus FIR (OSTT).
Recent third-party military operations
have resulted in damage and operational
disruptions at Damascus International
Airport (ICAO code: OSDI) and Aleppo
International Airport (ICAO code:
OSAP). In mid October 2023, third party
attacks resulted in cratering of the
runways at both Damascus International
Airport (OSDI) and at Aleppo
International Airport (OSAP) resulting
in operational disruptions and at least
one civil aircraft changing its routing
out of Syrian airspace. Previous attacks
on Syrian airports had occurred in early
January 2023, third-party attacks in
Damascus caused damage and
operational disruptions at Damascus
International Airport (OSDI). Thirdparty airstrikes also had targeted
Damascus International Airport (OSDI)
in June and September 2022. In March
2023 and in early May 2023, third-party
airstrikes on Aleppo International
Airport (OSAP) occurred. The early May
2023 airstrikes against military targets at
the airport resulted in a temporary
shutdown of airport operations. Past
Syrian air defense responses to thirdparty missile attacks and airstrikes in
Syria have included indiscriminate
surface-to-air missile (SAM) fire not
adequately de-conflicted with civil
aviation operations in the Damascus FIR
(OSTT). Additionally, Russia, Iran, and
the Lebanese terrorist organization
Hizballah, have deployed significant air
defense and electronic warfare
capabilities in Syria, including GPS
jammers, which also may not be deconflicted adequately with civil aviation
operations, further contributing to the
inadvertent risks to the safety of U.S.
civil aviation operations in the
Damascus FIR (OSTT). The FAA
remains concerned about the potential
for inadvertent damage to or destruction
of civil aircraft operating in the
Damascus FIR (OSTT) and while on the
ground at or near targeted locations in
Syria.
In addition to the continued hazards
associated with third-party involvement
in the Syrian conflict, violent extremist
threats to civil aviation safety continue
to exist in the Damascus FIR (OSTT).
Anti-regime forces, violent extremists,
and militants have successfully shot
down multiple crewed military aircraft
using man-portable air defense systems
(MANPADS) during the Syrian conflict,
as well as multiple UAS. In addition, in
early 2023, Iranian-aligned militia
groups (IAMGs) increased their targeting
of U.S. forces in Syria with rockets and
weaponized UAS, as demonstrated by a
January 2023 UAS attack on U.S.
interests at Al-Tanf and a March 2023
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
UAS attack on U.S. forces located in
northeastern Syria. UAS attack
operations present increased safety-offlight risks to civil aircraft operating at
low altitudes in the Damascus FIR
(OSTT) and at targeted locations in
Syria.
Open-source reporting also indicates
that Iran has discussed deploying
advanced air defense capabilities to
Syria, and potentially proliferating these
capabilities to IAMGs, to counter thirdparty airstrikes in Syria. If confirmed,
the proliferation of advanced air defense
capabilities to IAMGs would likely
increase risk concerns for U.S. civil
aviation in the Damascus FIR (OSTT)
due to the potential for uncoordinated
SAM launches by operators who would
likely lack adequate training and a
complete airspace picture.
As a result of the significant,
continuing, unacceptable risks to the
safety of U.S. civil aviation operations
in the Damascus FIR (OSTT), the FAA
extends the expiration date of SFAR No.
114, § 91.1609, from December 30, 2023,
until December 30, 2028.
Further amendments to SFAR No.
114, § 91.1609, might be appropriate if
the risk to U.S. civil aviation safety and
security changes. In this regard, the
FAA will continue to monitor the
situation and evaluate the extent to
which persons described in paragraph
(a) of this rule might be able to operate
safely in the Damascus FIR (OSTT).
The FAA also republishes the details
concerning the approval and exemption
processes in Sections V and VI of this
preamble, consistent with other recently
published flight prohibition SFARs, to
enable interested persons to refer to this
final rule for comprehensive
information about requesting relief from
the FAA from the provisions of SFAR
No. 114, § 91.1609.
V. Approval Process Based on a
Request From a Department, Agency, or
Instrumentality of the United States
Government
A. Approval Process Based on an
Authorization Request From a
Department, Agency, or Instrumentality
of the United States Government
In some instances, U.S. government
departments, agencies, or
instrumentalities may need to engage
U.S. civil aviation to support their
activities in the Damascus FIR (OSTT).
If a department, agency, or
instrumentality of the U.S. Government
determines that it has a critical need to
engage any person described in SFAR
No. 114, § 91.1609, including a U.S. air
carrier or commercial operator, to
transport civilian or military passengers
E:\FR\FM\27DER1.SGM
27DER1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 247 / Wednesday, December 27, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES1
or cargo or conduct other operations in
the Damascus FIR (OSTT), that
department, agency, or instrumentality
may request the FAA to approve
persons described in paragraph (a) of
SFAR No. 114, § 91.1609, to conduct
such operations.
The requesting department, agency, or
instrumentality of the U.S. Government
must submit the request for approval to
the FAA’s Associate Administrator for
Aviation Safety in a letter signed by an
appropriate senior official of the
requesting department, agency, or
instrumentality.3 The FAA will not
accept or consider requests for approval
from anyone other than the requesting
department, agency, or instrumentality.
In addition, the senior official signing
the letter requesting FAA approval on
behalf of the requesting department,
agency, or instrumentality must be
sufficiently positioned within the
organization to demonstrate that the
senior leadership of the requesting
department, agency, or instrumentality
supports the request for approval and is
committed to taking all necessary steps
to minimize aviation safety and security
risks to the proposed flights. The senior
official must also be in a position to: (1)
attest to the accuracy of all
representations made to the FAA in the
request for approval, and (2) ensure that
any support from the requesting U.S.
Government department, agency, or
instrumentality described in the request
for approval is in fact brought to bear
and is maintained over time. Unless
justified by exigent circumstances,
requests for approval must be submitted
to the FAA no less than 30 calendar
days before the date on which the
requesting department, agency, or
instrumentality wishes the proposed
operation(s) to commence.
The requestor must send the request
to the Associate Administrator for
Aviation Safety, Federal Aviation
Administration, 800 Independence
Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591.
Electronic submissions are acceptable,
and the requesting entity may request
that the FAA notify it electronically as
to whether the FAA grants the approval
request. If a requestor wishes to make an
electronic submission to the FAA, the
requestor should contact the
Washington Operations Center by
3 This approval procedure applies to U.S.
Government departments, agencies, or
instrumentalities; it does not apply to the public.
The FAA describes this procedure in the interest of
providing transparency with respect to the FAA’s
process for interacting with U.S. Government
departments, agencies, or instrumentalities that
seek to engage U.S. civil aviation to operate within
the area in which this SFAR would prohibit their
operations in the absence of specific FAA
authorization.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:06 Dec 26, 2023
Jkt 262001
telephone at (202) 267–3203 or by email
at 9-FAA-OverseasFlightProhibitions@
faa.gov for submission instructions. The
requestor must not submit its letter
requesting FAA approval or related
supporting documentation to the
Washington Operations Center. Rather,
the Washington Operation Center will
refer the requestor to an appropriate
staff member of the Air Transportation
Division, Flight Standards Service, for
further assistance.
A single letter may request approval
from the FAA for multiple persons
described in SFAR No. 114, § 91.1609,
or for multiple flight operations. To the
extent known, the letter must identify
the person(s) the requester expects the
SFAR to cover on whose behalf the U.S.
Government department, agency, or
instrumentality seeks FAA approval,
and it must describe—
The proposed operation(s), including
the nature of the mission being
supported;
The service that the person(s) covered
by the SFAR will provide;
To the extent known, the specific
locations in the Damascus FIR (OSTT)
where the proposed operation(s) will
occur, including, but not limited to, the
flight path and altitude of the aircraft
while it is operating in the Damascus
FIR (OSTT) and the airports, airfields, or
landing zones at which the aircraft will
take off and land; and
The method by which the department,
agency, or instrumentality will provide,
or how the operator will otherwise
obtain, current threat information and
an explanation of how the operator will
integrate this information into all phases
of the proposed operations (i.e., the premission planning and briefing, in-flight,
and post-flight phases).
The request for approval must also
include a list of operators with whom
the U.S. Government department,
agency, or instrumentality requesting
FAA approval has a current contract(s),
grant(s), or cooperative agreement(s) (or
its prime contractor has a
subcontract(s)) for specific flight
operations in the Damascus FIR (OSTT).
The requestor may identify additional
operators to the FAA at any time after
the FAA issues its approval. Neither the
operators listed in the original request,
nor any operators the requestor
subsequently seeks to add to the
approval, may commence operations
under the approval until the FAA issues
them an Operations Specification
(OpSpec) or Letter of Authorization
(LOA), as appropriate, for operations in
the Damascus FIR (OSTT). The approval
conditions discussed below apply to all
operators, whether included in the
original list or subsequently added to
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
89297
the approval. Requestors should contact
the Washington Operations Center by
telephone at (202) 267–3203 or by email
at 9-FAA-OverseasFlightProhibitions@
faa.gov for instructions on how to
submit the names of additional
operators it wishes to add to an existing
approval to the FAA. The requestor
must not submit the names of additional
operators it wishes to add to an existing
approval to the Washington Operations
Center. Rather, the Washington
Operation Center will refer the requestor
to an appropriate staff member of the
Air Transportation Division, Flight
Standards Service, for further
assistance.
If an approval request includes
classified information or controlled
unclassified information not authorized
for public release, requestors may
contact the Washington Operations
Center for instructions on submitting it
to the FAA. The Washington Operations
Center’s contact information appears in
the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section of this final rule.
FAA approval of an operation under
SFAR No. 114, § 91.1609, does not
relieve persons subject to this SFAR of
the responsibility to comply with all
other applicable FAA rules and
regulations. Operators of civil aircraft
must comply with the conditions of
their certificates, OpSpecs, and LOAs,
as applicable. Operators must also
comply with all rules and regulations of
other U.S. Government departments or
agencies that may apply to the proposed
operation(s), including, but not limited
to, regulations issued by the
Transportation Security Administration.
B. Approval Conditions
If the FAA approves the request, the
FAA’s Aviation Safety organization will
send an approval letter to the requesting
department, agency, or instrumentality
informing it that the FAA’s approval is
subject to all of the following
conditions:
(1) The approval will stipulate those
procedures and conditions that limit, to
the greatest degree possible, the risk to
the operator, while still allowing the
operator to achieve its operational
objectives.
(2) 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,
relating to any event arising out of or
related to the approved operations in
the Damascus FIR (OSTT); and
(b) The operator’s written agreement
to indemnify the U.S. Government with
respect to any and all third-party
E:\FR\FM\27DER1.SGM
27DER1
89298
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 247 / Wednesday, December 27, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES1
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 Damascus FIR (OSTT).
(3) Other conditions the FAA may
specify, including those the FAA might
impose in OpSpecs or LOAs, as
applicable.
The release and agreement to
indemnify do not preclude an operator
from raising a claim under an applicable
non-premium war risk insurance policy
the FAA issues under chapter 443 of
title 49, U.S. Code.
If the FAA approves the proposed
operation(s), the FAA will issue an
OpSpec or LOA, as applicable, to the
operator(s) identified in the original
request, and any operators the requestor
subsequently adds to the approval,
authorizing them to conduct the
approved operation(s). In addition, as
stated in paragraph (3) of this section
V.B., the FAA notes that it may include
additional conditions beyond those
contained in the approval letter in any
OpSpec or LOA associated with a
particular operator operating under this
approval, as necessary in the interests of
aviation safety. U.S. Government
departments, agencies, and
instrumentalities requesting FAA
approval on behalf of entities with
which they have a contract or
subcontract, grant, or cooperative
agreement should request a copy of the
relevant OpSpec or LOA directly from
the entity with which they have any of
the foregoing types of arrangements, if
desired.
VI. Information Regarding Petitions for
Exemption
Any operations not conducted under
an approval the FAA issues through the
approval process set forth previously
may only occur in accordance with an
exemption from SFAR No. 114,
§ 91.1609. A petition for exemption
must comply with 14 CFR part 11. The
FAA will consider whether exceptional
circumstances exist beyond those the
approval process described in the
previous section contemplates. To
determine whether a petition for
exemption from the prohibition this
SFAR establishes fulfills the standard of
14 CFR 11.81, the FAA consistently
finds necessary the following
information:
The proposed operation(s), including
the nature of the operation(s);
The service the person(s) covered by
the SFAR will provide;
The specific locations in the
Damascus FIR (OSTT) where the
proposed operation(s) will occur,
including, but not limited to, the flight
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:06 Dec 26, 2023
Jkt 262001
path and altitude of the aircraft while it
is operating in the Damascus FIR
(OSTT) and the airports, airfields, or
landing zones at which the aircraft will
take off and land;
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 (i.e.,
the pre-mission planning and briefing,
in-flight, and post-flight phases); and
The plans and procedures the
operator will use to minimize the risks,
identified in this preamble, to the
proposed operations, to establish that
granting the exemption would not
adversely affect safety or would provide
a level of safety at least equal to that
provided by this SFAR. The FAA has
found comprehensive, organized plans
and procedures of this nature to be
helpful in facilitating the agency’s safety
evaluation of petitions for exemption
from flight prohibition SFARs.
The FAA includes, as a condition of
each such exemption it issues, a release
and agreement to indemnify, as
described previously.
The FAA recognizes that, with the
support of the U.S. Government, the
governments of other countries could
plan operations that may be affected by
SFAR No. 114, § 91.1609. While the
FAA will not permit these operations
through the approval process, the FAA
will consider exemption requests for
such operations on an expedited basis
and in accordance with the order of
preference set forth in paragraph (c) of
SFAR No. 114, § 91.1609.
If a petition for exemption includes
information that is sensitive for security
reasons or proprietary information,
requestors may contact the Washington
Operations Center for instructions on
submitting it to the FAA. The
Washington Operations Center’s contact
information appears in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section of this
final rule. Requestors must not submit
their petitions for exemption or related
supporting documentation to the
Washington Operations Center. Rather,
the Washington Operation Center will
refer the requestor to the appropriate
staff member of the Air Transportation
Division, Flight Standards Service, or
the Office of Rulemaking for further
assistance.
VII. Severability
Congress authorized the FAA by
statute to promote safe flight of civil
aircraft in air commerce by prescribing,
among other things, regulations and
minimum standards for practices,
methods, and procedures the
Administrator finds necessary for safety
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
in air commerce and national security.
49 U.S.C. 44701. Consistent with that
mandate, the FAA is prohibiting certain
persons from conducting flight
operations in the Damascus FIR (OSTT)
due to the continuing hazards to the
safety of U.S. civil flight operations. The
purpose of this rule is to operate
holistically in addressing a range of
hazards and needs in the Damascus FIR
(OSTT). However, the FAA recognizes
that certain provisions focus on unique
factors. Therefore, the FAA finds that
the various provisions of this final rule
are severable and able to operate
functionally if severed from each other.
In the event a court were to invalidate
one or more of this final rule’s unique
provisions, the remaining provisions
should stand, thus allowing the FAA to
continue to fulfill its Congressionally
authorized role of promoting safe flight
of civil aircraft in air commerce.
VIII. Regulatory Notices and Analyses
Federal agencies consider impacts of
regulatory actions under a variety of
executive orders and other
requirements. First, Executive Order
12866 and Executive Order 13563, as
amended by Executive Order 14094
(‘‘Modernizing Regulatory Review’’),
direct that each Federal agency shall
propose or adopt a regulation only upon
a reasoned determination that the
benefits of the intended regulation
justify the costs. Second, the Regulatory
Flexibility Act of 1980 (Pub. L. 96–354)
requires agencies to analyze the
economic impact of regulatory changes
on small entities. Third, the Trade
Agreements Act of 1979 (Pub. L. 96–39)
prohibits agencies from setting
standards that create unnecessary
obstacles to the foreign commerce of the
United States. Fourth, the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L.
104–4) 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
annually for inflation) in any one year.
The current threshold after adjustment
for inflation is $177 million using the
most current (2022) Implicit Price
Deflator for the Gross Domestic Product.
This portion of the preamble
summarizes the FAA’s analysis of the
economic impacts of this final rule.
In conducting these analyses, the FAA
has determined this final rule has
benefits that justify its costs. This rule
is a significant regulatory action, as
defined in section 3(f) of Executive
Order 12866 as amended by Executive
E:\FR\FM\27DER1.SGM
27DER1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 247 / Wednesday, December 27, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
Order 14094. As 5 U.S.C. 553 does not
require notice and comment for this
final rule, 5 U.S.C. 603 and 604 do not
require regulatory flexibility analyses
regarding impacts on small entities.
This rule will not create unnecessary
obstacles to the foreign commerce of the
United States. This rule will not impose
an unfunded mandate on State, local, or
Tribal governments, or on the private
sector, by exceeding the threshold
identified previously.
A. Regulatory Evaluation
This action extends the expiration
date of the SFAR prohibiting certain
flight operations in the Damascus FIR
(OSTT) for an additional five years due
to the significant, continuing risks to
U.S. civil aviation detailed in the
preamble of this final rule. The FAA
acknowledges this flight prohibition
might result in additional costs to some
U.S. operators, such as increased fuel
costs and other operational-related
costs. However, the FAA expects the
benefits of this action to exceed the
costs because it will result in the
avoidance of risks of fatalities, injuries,
and property damage that could occur if
a U.S. operator’s aircraft were shot
down (or otherwise damaged) while
operating in the Damascus FIR (OSTT).
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES1
B. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA),
in 5 U.S.C. 603, requires an agency to
prepare an initial regulatory flexibility
analysis describing impacts on small
entities whenever 5 U.S.C. 553 or any
other law requires an agency to publish
a general notice of proposed rulemaking
for any proposed rule. Similarly, 5
U.S.C. 604 requires an agency to prepare
a final regulatory flexibility analysis
when an agency issues a final rule
under 5 U.S.C. 553, after that section or
any other law requires publication of a
general notice of proposed rulemaking.
The FAA concludes good cause exists to
forgo notice and comment and to not
delay the effective date for this rule. As
5 U.S.C. 553 does not require notice and
comment in this situation, 5 U.S.C. 603
and 604 similarly do not require
regulatory flexibility analyses.
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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:06 Dec 26, 2023
Jkt 262001
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 risks to their
operations in the Damascus FIR (OSTT),
a location outside the U.S. Therefore,
the rule complies with the Trade
Agreements Act of 1979.
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 $177
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
(44 U.S.C. 3507(d)) requires the FAA to
consider the impact of paperwork and
other information collection burdens it
imposes on the public. The FAA has
determined no new requirement for
information collection is associated
with this final rule.
F. International Compatibility and
Cooperation
In keeping with U.S. obligations
under the Convention on International
Civil Aviation, the FAA’s policy is to
conform to International Civil Aviation
Organization (ICAO) Standards and
Recommended Practices to the
maximum extent practicable. The FAA
has determined no ICAO Standards and
Recommended Practices correspond to
this regulation. The FAA finds this
action is fully consistent with the
obligations under 49 U.S.C.
40105(b)(1)(A) to ensure the FAA
exercises its duties consistently with the
obligations of the United States under
international agreements.
While the FAA’s flight prohibition
does not apply to foreign air carriers,
DOT codeshare authorizations prohibit
foreign air carriers from carrying a U.S.
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
89299
codeshare partner’s code on a flight
segment that operates in airspace for
which the FAA has issued a flight
prohibition for U.S. civil aviation. In
addition, foreign air carriers and other
foreign operators may choose to avoid,
or be advised or directed by their civil
aviation authorities to avoid, airspace
for which the FAA has issued a flight
prohibition for U.S. civil aviation.
G. Environmental Analysis
The FAA has analyzed this action
under Executive Order 12114,
Environmental Effects Abroad of Major
Federal Actions, and DOT Order
5610.1C, Paragraph 16. Executive Order
12114 requires the FAA to be informed
of environmental considerations and
take those considerations into account
when making decisions on major
Federal actions that could have
environmental impacts anywhere
beyond the borders of the United States.
The FAA has determined this action is
exempt pursuant to Section 2–5(a)(i) of
Executive Order 12114 because it does
not have the potential for a significant
effect on the environment outside the
United States.
In accordance with FAA Order
1050.1F, Environmental Impacts:
Policies and Procedures, paragraph 8–
6(c), FAA has prepared a memorandum
for the record stating the reason(s) for
this determination and has placed it in
the docket for this rulemaking.
IX. Executive Order Determinations
A. Executive Order 13132, Federalism
The FAA has analyzed this rule under
the principles and criteria of Executive
Order 13132, Federalism. The Agency
has determined 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. Therefore, this
rule will not have federalism
implications.
B. Executive Order 13211, Regulations
That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use
The FAA analyzed this rule under
Executive Order 13211, Actions
Concerning Regulations that
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use. The Agency has
determined it is not a ‘‘significant
energy action’’ under the Executive
order and will not be likely to have a
significant adverse effect on the supply,
distribution, or use of energy.
E:\FR\FM\27DER1.SGM
27DER1
89300
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 247 / Wednesday, December 27, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
C. Executive Order 13609, Promoting
International Regulatory Cooperation
visit https://www.faa.gov/regulations_
policies/rulemaking/sbre_act/.
Executive Order 13609, Promoting
International Regulatory Cooperation,
promotes international regulatory
cooperation to meet shared challenges
involving health, safety, labor, security,
environmental, and other issues and to
reduce, eliminate, or prevent
unnecessary differences in regulatory
requirements. The FAA has analyzed
this action under the policies and
agency responsibilities of Executive
Order 13609 and has determined that
this action will have no effect on
international regulatory cooperation.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 91
X. Additional Information
A. Electronic Access
Except for classified and controlled
unclassified material not authorized for
public release, all documents the FAA
considered in developing this rule,
including economic analyses and
technical reports, may be accessed from
the internet through the docket for this
rulemaking.
Those documents may be viewed
online at https://www.regulations.gov
using the docket number listed above. A
copy of this rule will be placed in the
docket. Electronic retrieval help and
guidelines are available on the website.
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
website at https://
www.federalregister.gov and the
Government Publishing Office’s website
at https://www.govinfo.gov. A copy may
also be found at the FAA’s Regulations
and Policies website at https://
www.faa.gov/regulations_policies.
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.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES1
B. Small Business Regulatory
Enforcement Fairness Act
15:06 Dec 26, 2023
Jkt 262001
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), 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, Pub. L. 114–190, 130 Stat. 615
(49 U.S.C. 44703 note); articles 12 and 29 of
the Convention on International Civil
Aviation (61 Stat. 1180), (126 Stat. 11).
2. Amend § 91.1609 by revising
paragraph (e) to read as follows:
■
§ 91.1609 Special Federal Aviation
Regulation No. 114—Prohibition Against
Certain Flights in the Damascus Flight
Information Region (FIR) (OSTT).
*
*
*
*
*
(e) Expiration. This SFAR will remain
in effect until December 30, 2028. The
FAA may amend, rescind, or extend this
SFAR, as necessary.
Issued in Washington, DC, under the
authority of 49 U.S.C. 106(f) and (g),
40101(d)(1), 40105(b)(1)(A), and 44701(a)(5).
Michael Gordon Whitaker,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2023–28502 Filed 12–26–23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Background
Office of the Secretary
The Federal Civil Penalties Inflation
Adjustment Act of 1990 (Pub. L. 101–
410; 28 U.S.C. 2461), as amended by the
Debt Collection Improvement Act of
1996 (Pub. L. 104–134), provided for
agencies’ adjustments for inflation to
CMPs to ensure that CMPs continue to
maintain their deterrent value and that
CMPs due to the Federal Government
were properly accounted for and
collected.
A CMP is defined as any penalty, fine,
or other sanction that:
1. Is for a specific monetary amount
as provided by Federal law, or has a
maximum amount provided for by
Federal law; and,
2. Is assessed or enforced by an
agency pursuant to Federal law; and,
15 CFR Part 6
[Docket No. 231129–0280]
The Small Business Regulatory
Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996
(SBREFA) (Pub. L. 104–121) (set forth as
a note to 5 U.S.C. 601) 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,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
Air traffic control, Aircraft, Airmen,
Airports, Aviation safety, Freight, Syria.
States Department of Commerce
(Department of Commerce). The Federal
Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act
of 1990, as amended by the Debt
Collection Improvement Act of 1996
and the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation
Adjustment Act Improvements Act of
2015, required the head of each agency
to adjust for inflation its CMP levels in
effect as of November 2, 2015, under a
revised methodology that was effective
for 2016 which provided for initial
catch up adjustments for inflation in
2016, and requires adjustments for
inflation to CMPs under a revised
methodology for each year thereafter.
The Department of Commerce’s 2024
adjustments for inflation to CMPs apply
only to CMPs with a dollar amount, and
will not apply to CMPs written as
functions of violations. The Department
of Commerce’s 2024 adjustments for
inflation to CMPs apply only to those
CMPs, including those whose associated
violation predated such adjustment,
which are assessed by the Department of
Commerce after the effective date of the
new CMP level.
DATES: This rule is effective January 15,
2024.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Stephen M. Kunze, Deputy Chief
Financial Officer and Director for
Financial Management, Office of
Financial Management, at (202) 482–
1207, Department of Commerce, 1401
Constitution Avenue NW, Room D200,
Washington, DC 20230. The Department
of Commerce’s Civil Monetary Penalty
Adjustments for Inflation are available
for downloading from the Department of
Commerce, Office of Financial
Management’s website at the following
address: https://www.osec.doc.gov/ofm/
OFM_Publications.html.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
RIN 0605–AA66
Civil Monetary Penalty Adjustments for
Inflation
Office of the Chief Financial
Officer and Assistant Secretary for
Administration, Department of
Commerce.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
This final rule is being issued
to adjust for inflation each civil
monetary penalty (CMP) provided by
law within the jurisdiction of the United
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\27DER1.SGM
27DER1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 247 (Wednesday, December 27, 2023)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 89294-89300]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-28502]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 91
[Docket No.: FAA-2017-0768; Amdt. No. 91-348D]
RIN 2120-AL91
Extension of the Prohibition Against Certain Flights in the
Damascus Flight Information Region (FIR) (OSTT)
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This action extends the prohibition against certain flight
operations in the Damascus Flight Information Region (FIR) (OSTT) 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 U.S.-registered aircraft for a foreign air
carrier; and operators of U.S.-registered civil aircraft, except when
the operator of such aircraft is a foreign air carrier, for an
additional five years, from December 30, 2023, until December 30, 2028.
The FAA finds this action necessary to address significant safety-of-
flight risks to U.S. civil aviation associated with the enduring
complex conflict in Syria. The FAA also republishes the approval
process and exemption information for this Special Federal Aviation
Regulation (SFAR), consistent with other recently published flight
prohibition SFARs.
DATES: This final rule is effective on December 27, 2023.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bill Petrak, Flight Standards Service,
through the Washington Operations Center, Federal Aviation
Administration, 800 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591;
telephone (202) 267-3203; email [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Executive Summary
This action extends the expiration date of SFAR No. 114, Sec.
91.1609 of title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), from December
30, 2023, to December 30, 2028. SFAR No. 114, Sec. 91.1609, prohibits
certain flight operations in the Damascus FIR (OSTT) 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 U.S.-registered aircraft for a foreign air carrier; and
operators of U.S.-registered civil aircraft, except when the operator
of such aircraft is a foreign air carrier. The FAA finds this action
necessary to address significant safety-of-flight risks to U.S. civil
aviation in the Damascus FIR (OSTT) associated with the enduring
complex conflict in Syria. The FAA also republishes the approval
process and exemption information for this flight prohibition SFAR,
consistent with other recently published flight prohibition SFARs.
II. Authority and Good Cause
A. Authority
The FAA is responsible for the safety of flight in the U.S. and for
the safety of U.S. civil operators, U.S.-registered civil aircraft, and
U.S.-certificated airmen throughout the world. Sections 106(f) and (g)
of title 49, U.S. Code (U.S.C.), subtitle I, establish the FAA
Administrator's authority to issue rules on aviation safety. 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 this authority consistently with the
obligations of the U.S. Government under international agreements.
[[Page 89295]]
The FAA is promulgating this rule under the authority described in
49 U.S.C. 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 the FAA's authority because
it continues to prohibit the persons described in paragraph (a) of SFAR
No. 114, Sec. 91.1609, from conducting flight operations in the
Damascus FIR (OSTT) due to the significant safety-of-flight risks to
U.S. civil flight operations in that airspace, as described in the
preamble to this final rule.
B. Good Cause for Immediate Adoption
Section 553(b)(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.'' Also, section 553(d)
permits agencies, upon a finding of good cause, to issue rules with an
effective date less than 30 days from the date of publication. In this
instance, the FAA finds good cause to forgo notice and comment and the
delayed effective date because they would be impracticable and contrary
to the public interest.
Providing notice and the opportunity for the public to comment here
would be impracticable. The FAA's flight prohibitions, and any
amendments thereto, need to include appropriate boundaries that reflect
the agency's current understanding of the risk environment for U.S.
civil aviation. This allows the FAA to protect the safety of U.S.
operators' aircraft and the lives of their passengers and crews without
over-restricting or under-restricting U.S. operators' routing options.
However, the risk environment for U.S. civil aviation in airspace
managed by other countries with respect to safety of flight is fluid in
circumstances involving fighting, violent extremist and militant
activity, or periods of heightened tensions, particularly where weapons
capable of targeting or otherwise negatively affecting U.S. civil
aviation are or may be present. This fluidity, and the potential for
rapid changes in the risks to U.S. civil aviation, significantly limits
how far in advance of a new or amended flight prohibition the FAA can
usefully assess the risk environment. The delay that would be
occasioned by providing an opportunity to comment on this action would
significantly increase the risk that the resulting final action would
not accurately reflect the current risks to U.S. civil aviation
associated with the situation and thus would not establish boundaries
for the flight prohibition commensurate with those risks.
While the FAA sought and responded to public comments, the
boundaries of the area in which unacceptable risks to the safety of
U.S. civil aviation existed might change due to: evolving military or
political circumstances; violent extremist and militant group activity;
the introduction, removal, or repositioning of more advanced anti-
aircraft weapon systems; or other factors. As a result, if the
situation improved while the FAA sought and responded to public
comments, the rule the FAA finalized might be over-restrictive,
unnecessarily limiting U.S. operators' routing options and potentially
causing them to incur unnecessary additional fuel and operations-
related costs, as well as potentially causing passengers to incur
unnecessarily some costs attributed to their time. Conversely, if the
situation deteriorated while the FAA sought and responded to public
comments, the rule the FAA finalized might be under-restrictive,
allowing U.S. civil aviation to continue operating in areas where
unacceptable risks to their safety had developed. Such an outcome would
endanger the safety of these aircraft, as well as their passengers and
crews, exposing them to unacceptable risks of death, injury, and
property damage that could occur if a U.S. operator's aircraft were
shot down (or otherwise damaged) while operating in the Damascus FIR
(OSTT).
Alternatively, if the FAA made changes to the area in which U.S.
civil aviation operations would be prohibited between a notice of
proposed rulemaking and a final rule due to changed conditions, the
version of the rule the public commented on would no longer reflect the
FAA's current assessment of the risk environment for U.S. civil
aviation.
In addition, seeking comment would be contrary to the public
interest because some of the rational basis for the rulemaking is based
upon classified information and controlled unclassified information not
authorized for public release. In order to meaningfully provide comment
on a proposal, the public would need access to the basis for the
agency's decision-making, which the FAA cannot provide. Disclosing
classified or controlled unclassified information in order to seek
meaningful comment on the proposal would harm the public interest.
Accordingly, the FAA meaningfully seeking comment on the proposal is
contrary to the public interest.
Therefore, providing notice and the opportunity for comment would
be impracticable as it would hinder the FAA's ability to maintain
appropriate flight prohibitions based on up-to-date risk assessments of
the risks to the safety of U.S. civil aviation operations in airspace
managed by other countries, and contrary to the public interest, as the
FAA cannot protect classified and controlled unclassified information
and meaningfully seek public comment.
For the same reasons discussed above, the potential safety impacts
and the need for prompt action on up-to-date information that is not
public would make delaying the effective date impracticable and
contrary to the public interest.
Accordingly, the FAA finds good cause exists to forgo notice and
comment and any delay in the effective date for this rule.
III. Background
On December 30, 2020, the FAA amended SFAR No. 114, Sec. 91.1609,
to extend the expiration date of the flight prohibition for U.S.
operators and airmen in the Damascus FIR (OSTT) from December 30, 2020,
to December 30, 2023.\1\ In issuing the 2020 final rule, the FAA
determined the situation in the Damascus FIR (OSTT) remained hazardous
for U.S. civil aviation due to a variety of aviation safety risks
associated with the ongoing conflict in Syria.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Extension of the Prohibition Against Certain Flights in the
Damascus Flight Information Region (FIR) (OSTT) final rule, 85 FR
75840, (Nov. 27, 2020).
\2\ Id. at 75841.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In 2020, the FAA determined the presence of third parties
conducting independent military operations in Syria against pro-Assad
regime forces, opposition groups, and violent extremist elements
presented an unacceptable level of risk to U.S. civil aviation
operations. Third-party airstrikes in Syria often resulted in Syrian
military air defense responses. Syrian authorities did not adequately
de-conflict these air defense activities, which included indiscriminate
surface-to-air missile (SAM) fire, with civil aviation operations in
the Damascus FIR (OSTT), including, but not limited to, civil flight
operations in close proximity to international airports in Syria. In
late February 2020, Syrian air defense activities forced a commercial
Cham Wings Airbus 320 passenger flight on final approach to Damascus
[[Page 89296]]
International Airport (ICAO code: OSDI) to divert to an alternate
airfield in Syria.
The lack of de-confliction of Syrian air defense activity with
civil air traffic was just one of the risks to U.S. civil aviation
operations in the Damascus FIR (OSTT) emanating from third-party
involvement in Syria. Russia, Iran, and the Lebanese terrorist
organization, Hizballah, all of which are Syrian regime allies,
continued to conduct military operations in Syria and had deployed
significant air defense and electronic warfare capabilities, including
Global Positioning System (GPS) jammers, which presented a risk to U.S.
civil aviation operations in the Damascus FIR (OSTT). In March 2020,
Russian, Turkish, and Syrian forces clashed in Idlib Province. During
these clashes, fighter aircraft and possible SAMs shot down several
manned and unmanned aircraft.
In addition to the hazards associated with third-party involvement
in the Syrian conflict, violent extremist threats to civil aviation
safety existed in Syria. Terrorist groups, including the Islamic State
of Iraq and ash-Sham (ISIS) and al-Qaida-aligned entities, possessed or
had access to a wide array of anti-aircraft weapons that posed a risk
to civil aviation operations in the Damascus FIR (OSTT). Anti-regime
forces, violent extremists, and militants had successfully shot down
multiple military aircraft using man-portable air defense systems
(MANPADS) during the Syrian conflict. Additionally, various elements
had successfully targeted military aircraft using advanced anti-tank
guided missiles (ATGMs). ATGMs primarily pose a risk to civil aircraft
operating near, or parked at, an airport. Finally, various groups had
employed unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) to surveil and attack Syrian
and Syrian-allied fielded forces and airfields.
IV. Discussion of the Final Rule
The FAA has determined the enduring complex conflict in Syria
continues to present an unacceptable level of risk for U.S. civil
aviation safety in the entirety of the Damascus FIR (OSTT) at all
altitudes. Various third parties, including but not limited to Russia,
Iran, Turkey, and Israel, continue to conduct uncoordinated military
operations in Syria, resulting in various risks to U.S. civil aviation
operations in the Damascus FIR (OSTT). Such military operations include
tactical crewed aircraft and UAS intelligence collection and strike
operations, electronic warfare operations, indirect fire attacks,
missiles, and potential anti-aircraft weapons use that may not be de-
conflicted adequately with civil aviation operations in the Damascus
FIR (OSTT).
Recent third-party military operations have resulted in damage and
operational disruptions at Damascus International Airport (ICAO code:
OSDI) and Aleppo International Airport (ICAO code: OSAP). In mid
October 2023, third party attacks resulted in cratering of the runways
at both Damascus International Airport (OSDI) and at Aleppo
International Airport (OSAP) resulting in operational disruptions and
at least one civil aircraft changing its routing out of Syrian
airspace. Previous attacks on Syrian airports had occurred in early
January 2023, third-party attacks in Damascus caused damage and
operational disruptions at Damascus International Airport (OSDI).
Third-party airstrikes also had targeted Damascus International Airport
(OSDI) in June and September 2022. In March 2023 and in early May 2023,
third-party airstrikes on Aleppo International Airport (OSAP) occurred.
The early May 2023 airstrikes against military targets at the airport
resulted in a temporary shutdown of airport operations. Past Syrian air
defense responses to third-party missile attacks and airstrikes in
Syria have included indiscriminate surface-to-air missile (SAM) fire
not adequately de-conflicted with civil aviation operations in the
Damascus FIR (OSTT). Additionally, Russia, Iran, and the Lebanese
terrorist organization Hizballah, have deployed significant air defense
and electronic warfare capabilities in Syria, including GPS jammers,
which also may not be de-conflicted adequately with civil aviation
operations, further contributing to the inadvertent risks to the safety
of U.S. civil aviation operations in the Damascus FIR (OSTT). The FAA
remains concerned about the potential for inadvertent damage to or
destruction of civil aircraft operating in the Damascus FIR (OSTT) and
while on the ground at or near targeted locations in Syria.
In addition to the continued hazards associated with third-party
involvement in the Syrian conflict, violent extremist threats to civil
aviation safety continue to exist in the Damascus FIR (OSTT). Anti-
regime forces, violent extremists, and militants have successfully shot
down multiple crewed military aircraft using man-portable air defense
systems (MANPADS) during the Syrian conflict, as well as multiple UAS.
In addition, in early 2023, Iranian-aligned militia groups (IAMGs)
increased their targeting of U.S. forces in Syria with rockets and
weaponized UAS, as demonstrated by a January 2023 UAS attack on U.S.
interests at Al-Tanf and a March 2023 UAS attack on U.S. forces located
in northeastern Syria. UAS attack operations present increased safety-
of-flight risks to civil aircraft operating at low altitudes in the
Damascus FIR (OSTT) and at targeted locations in Syria.
Open-source reporting also indicates that Iran has discussed
deploying advanced air defense capabilities to Syria, and potentially
proliferating these capabilities to IAMGs, to counter third-party
airstrikes in Syria. If confirmed, the proliferation of advanced air
defense capabilities to IAMGs would likely increase risk concerns for
U.S. civil aviation in the Damascus FIR (OSTT) due to the potential for
uncoordinated SAM launches by operators who would likely lack adequate
training and a complete airspace picture.
As a result of the significant, continuing, unacceptable risks to
the safety of U.S. civil aviation operations in the Damascus FIR
(OSTT), the FAA extends the expiration date of SFAR No. 114, Sec.
91.1609, from December 30, 2023, until December 30, 2028.
Further amendments to SFAR No. 114, Sec. 91.1609, might be
appropriate if the risk to U.S. civil aviation safety and security
changes. In this regard, the FAA will continue to monitor the situation
and evaluate the extent to which persons described in paragraph (a) of
this rule might be able to operate safely in the Damascus FIR (OSTT).
The FAA also republishes the details concerning the approval and
exemption processes in Sections V and VI of this preamble, consistent
with other recently published flight prohibition SFARs, to enable
interested persons to refer to this final rule for comprehensive
information about requesting relief from the FAA from the provisions of
SFAR No. 114, Sec. 91.1609.
V. Approval Process Based on a Request From a Department, Agency, or
Instrumentality of the United States Government
A. Approval Process Based on an Authorization Request From a
Department, Agency, or Instrumentality of the United States Government
In some instances, U.S. government departments, agencies, or
instrumentalities may need to engage U.S. civil aviation to support
their activities in the Damascus FIR (OSTT). If a department, agency,
or instrumentality of the U.S. Government determines that it has a
critical need to engage any person described in SFAR No. 114, Sec.
91.1609, including a U.S. air carrier or commercial operator, to
transport civilian or military passengers
[[Page 89297]]
or cargo or conduct other operations in the Damascus FIR (OSTT), that
department, agency, or instrumentality may request the FAA to approve
persons described in paragraph (a) of SFAR No. 114, Sec. 91.1609, to
conduct such operations.
The requesting department, agency, or instrumentality of the U.S.
Government must submit the request for approval to the FAA's Associate
Administrator for Aviation Safety in a letter signed by an appropriate
senior official of the requesting department, agency, or
instrumentality.\3\ The FAA will not accept or consider requests for
approval from anyone other than the requesting department, agency, or
instrumentality. In addition, the senior official signing the letter
requesting FAA approval on behalf of the requesting department, agency,
or instrumentality must be sufficiently positioned within the
organization to demonstrate that the senior leadership of the
requesting department, agency, or instrumentality supports the request
for approval and is committed to taking all necessary steps to minimize
aviation safety and security risks to the proposed flights. The senior
official must also be in a position to: (1) attest to the accuracy of
all representations made to the FAA in the request for approval, and
(2) ensure that any support from the requesting U.S. Government
department, agency, or instrumentality described in the request for
approval is in fact brought to bear and is maintained over time. Unless
justified by exigent circumstances, requests for approval must be
submitted to the FAA no less than 30 calendar days before the date on
which the requesting department, agency, or instrumentality wishes the
proposed operation(s) to commence.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ This approval procedure applies to U.S. Government
departments, agencies, or instrumentalities; it does not apply to
the public. The FAA describes this procedure in the interest of
providing transparency with respect to the FAA's process for
interacting with U.S. Government departments, agencies, or
instrumentalities that seek to engage U.S. civil aviation to operate
within the area in which this SFAR would prohibit their operations
in the absence of specific FAA authorization.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The requestor must send the request to the Associate Administrator
for Aviation Safety, Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence
Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591. Electronic submissions are acceptable,
and the requesting entity may request that the FAA notify it
electronically as to whether the FAA grants the approval request. If a
requestor wishes to make an electronic submission to the FAA, the
requestor should contact the Washington Operations Center by telephone
at (202) 267-3203 or by email at [email protected] for submission instructions. The
requestor must not submit its letter requesting FAA approval or related
supporting documentation to the Washington Operations Center. Rather,
the Washington Operation Center will refer the requestor to an
appropriate staff member of the Air Transportation Division, Flight
Standards Service, for further assistance.
A single letter may request approval from the FAA for multiple
persons described in SFAR No. 114, Sec. 91.1609, or for multiple
flight operations. To the extent known, the letter must identify the
person(s) the requester expects the SFAR to cover on whose behalf the
U.S. Government department, agency, or instrumentality seeks FAA
approval, and it must describe--
The proposed operation(s), including the nature of the mission
being supported;
The service that the person(s) covered by the SFAR will provide;
To the extent known, the specific locations in the Damascus FIR
(OSTT) where the proposed operation(s) will occur, including, but not
limited to, the flight path and altitude of the aircraft while it is
operating in the Damascus FIR (OSTT) and the airports, airfields, or
landing zones at which the aircraft will take off and land; and
The method by which the department, agency, or instrumentality will
provide, or how the operator will otherwise obtain, current threat
information and an explanation of how the operator will integrate this
information into all phases of the proposed operations (i.e., the pre-
mission planning and briefing, in-flight, and post-flight phases).
The request for approval must also include a list of operators with
whom the U.S. Government department, agency, or instrumentality
requesting FAA approval has a current contract(s), grant(s), or
cooperative agreement(s) (or its prime contractor has a subcontract(s))
for specific flight operations in the Damascus FIR (OSTT). The
requestor may identify additional operators to the FAA at any time
after the FAA issues its approval. Neither the operators listed in the
original request, nor any operators the requestor subsequently seeks to
add to the approval, may commence operations under the approval until
the FAA issues them an Operations Specification (OpSpec) or Letter of
Authorization (LOA), as appropriate, for operations in the Damascus FIR
(OSTT). The approval conditions discussed below apply to all operators,
whether included in the original list or subsequently added to the
approval. Requestors should contact the Washington Operations Center by
telephone at (202) 267-3203 or by email at [email protected] for instructions on how to submit
the names of additional operators it wishes to add to an existing
approval to the FAA. The requestor must not submit the names of
additional operators it wishes to add to an existing approval to the
Washington Operations Center. Rather, the Washington Operation Center
will refer the requestor to an appropriate staff member of the Air
Transportation Division, Flight Standards Service, for further
assistance.
If an approval request includes classified information or
controlled unclassified information not authorized for public release,
requestors may contact the Washington Operations Center for
instructions on submitting it to the FAA. The Washington Operations
Center's contact information appears in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section of this final rule.
FAA approval of an operation under SFAR No. 114, Sec. 91.1609,
does not relieve persons subject to this SFAR of the responsibility to
comply with all other applicable FAA rules and regulations. Operators
of civil aircraft must comply with the conditions of their
certificates, OpSpecs, and LOAs, as applicable. Operators must also
comply with all rules and regulations of other U.S. Government
departments or agencies that may apply to the proposed operation(s),
including, but not limited to, regulations issued by the Transportation
Security Administration.
B. Approval Conditions
If the FAA approves the request, the FAA's Aviation Safety
organization will send an approval letter to the requesting department,
agency, or instrumentality informing it that the FAA's approval is
subject to all of the following conditions:
(1) The approval will stipulate those procedures and conditions
that limit, to the greatest degree possible, the risk to the operator,
while still allowing the operator to achieve its operational
objectives.
(2) 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, relating to any event arising out of or related to the
approved operations in the Damascus FIR (OSTT); and
(b) The operator's written agreement to indemnify the U.S.
Government with respect to any and all third-party
[[Page 89298]]
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 Damascus FIR (OSTT).
(3) Other conditions the FAA may specify, including those the FAA
might impose in OpSpecs or LOAs, as applicable.
The release and agreement to indemnify do not preclude an operator
from raising a claim under an applicable non-premium war risk insurance
policy the FAA issues under chapter 443 of title 49, U.S. Code.
If the FAA approves the proposed operation(s), the FAA will issue
an OpSpec or LOA, as applicable, to the operator(s) identified in the
original request, and any operators the requestor subsequently adds to
the approval, authorizing them to conduct the approved operation(s). In
addition, as stated in paragraph (3) of this section V.B., the FAA
notes that it may include additional conditions beyond those contained
in the approval letter in any OpSpec or LOA associated with a
particular operator operating under this approval, as necessary in the
interests of aviation safety. U.S. Government departments, agencies,
and instrumentalities requesting FAA approval on behalf of entities
with which they have a contract or subcontract, grant, or cooperative
agreement should request a copy of the relevant OpSpec or LOA directly
from the entity with which they have any of the foregoing types of
arrangements, if desired.
VI. Information Regarding Petitions for Exemption
Any operations not conducted under an approval the FAA issues
through the approval process set forth previously may only occur in
accordance with an exemption from SFAR No. 114, Sec. 91.1609. A
petition for exemption must comply with 14 CFR part 11. The FAA will
consider whether exceptional circumstances exist beyond those the
approval process described in the previous section contemplates. To
determine whether a petition for exemption from the prohibition this
SFAR establishes fulfills the standard of 14 CFR 11.81, the FAA
consistently finds necessary the following information:
The proposed operation(s), including the nature of the
operation(s);
The service the person(s) covered by the SFAR will provide;
The specific locations in the Damascus FIR (OSTT) where the
proposed operation(s) will occur, including, but not limited to, the
flight path and altitude of the aircraft while it is operating in the
Damascus FIR (OSTT) and the airports, airfields, or landing zones at
which the aircraft will take off and land;
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 (i.e., the pre-
mission planning and briefing, in-flight, and post-flight phases); and
The plans and procedures the operator will use to minimize the
risks, identified in this preamble, to the proposed operations, to
establish that granting the exemption would not adversely affect safety
or would provide a level of safety at least equal to that provided by
this SFAR. The FAA has found comprehensive, organized plans and
procedures of this nature to be helpful in facilitating the agency's
safety evaluation of petitions for exemption from flight prohibition
SFARs.
The FAA includes, as a condition of each such exemption it issues,
a release and agreement to indemnify, as described previously.
The FAA recognizes that, with the support of the U.S. Government,
the governments of other countries could plan operations that may be
affected by SFAR No. 114, Sec. 91.1609. While the FAA will not permit
these operations through the approval process, the FAA will consider
exemption requests for such operations on an expedited basis and in
accordance with the order of preference set forth in paragraph (c) of
SFAR No. 114, Sec. 91.1609.
If a petition for exemption includes information that is sensitive
for security reasons or proprietary information, requestors may contact
the Washington Operations Center for instructions on submitting it to
the FAA. The Washington Operations Center's contact information appears
in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this final rule.
Requestors must not submit their petitions for exemption or related
supporting documentation to the Washington Operations Center. Rather,
the Washington Operation Center will refer the requestor to the
appropriate staff member of the Air Transportation Division, Flight
Standards Service, or the Office of Rulemaking for further assistance.
VII. Severability
Congress authorized the FAA by statute to promote safe flight of
civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing, among other things,
regulations and minimum standards for practices, methods, and
procedures the Administrator finds necessary for safety in air commerce
and national security. 49 U.S.C. 44701. Consistent with that mandate,
the FAA is prohibiting certain persons from conducting flight
operations in the Damascus FIR (OSTT) due to the continuing hazards to
the safety of U.S. civil flight operations. The purpose of this rule is
to operate holistically in addressing a range of hazards and needs in
the Damascus FIR (OSTT). However, the FAA recognizes that certain
provisions focus on unique factors. Therefore, the FAA finds that the
various provisions of this final rule are severable and able to operate
functionally if severed from each other. In the event a court were to
invalidate one or more of this final rule's unique provisions, the
remaining provisions should stand, thus allowing the FAA to continue to
fulfill its Congressionally authorized role of promoting safe flight of
civil aircraft in air commerce.
VIII. Regulatory Notices and Analyses
Federal agencies consider impacts of regulatory actions under a
variety of executive orders and other requirements. First, Executive
Order 12866 and Executive Order 13563, as amended by Executive Order
14094 (``Modernizing Regulatory Review''), direct that each Federal
agency shall propose or adopt a regulation only upon a reasoned
determination that the benefits of the intended regulation justify the
costs. Second, the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (Pub. L. 96-354)
requires agencies to analyze the economic impact of regulatory changes
on small entities. Third, the Trade Agreements Act of 1979 (Pub. L. 96-
39) prohibits agencies from setting standards that create unnecessary
obstacles to the foreign commerce of the United States. Fourth, the
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4) 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 annually for inflation) in any one
year. The current threshold after adjustment for inflation is $177
million using the most current (2022) Implicit Price Deflator for the
Gross Domestic Product. This portion of the preamble summarizes the
FAA's analysis of the economic impacts of this final rule.
In conducting these analyses, the FAA has determined this final
rule has benefits that justify its costs. This rule is a significant
regulatory action, as defined in section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866
as amended by Executive
[[Page 89299]]
Order 14094. As 5 U.S.C. 553 does not require notice and comment for
this final rule, 5 U.S.C. 603 and 604 do not require regulatory
flexibility analyses regarding impacts on small entities. This rule
will not create unnecessary obstacles to the foreign commerce of the
United States. This rule will not impose an unfunded mandate on State,
local, or Tribal governments, or on the private sector, by exceeding
the threshold identified previously.
A. Regulatory Evaluation
This action extends the expiration date of the SFAR prohibiting
certain flight operations in the Damascus FIR (OSTT) for an additional
five years due to the significant, continuing risks to U.S. civil
aviation detailed in the preamble of this final rule. The FAA
acknowledges this flight prohibition might result in additional costs
to some U.S. operators, such as increased fuel costs and other
operational-related costs. However, the FAA expects the benefits of
this action to exceed the costs because it will result in the avoidance
of risks of fatalities, injuries, and property damage that could occur
if a U.S. operator's aircraft were shot down (or otherwise damaged)
while operating in the Damascus FIR (OSTT).
B. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), in 5 U.S.C. 603, requires an
agency to prepare an initial regulatory flexibility analysis describing
impacts on small entities whenever 5 U.S.C. 553 or any other law
requires an agency to publish a general notice of proposed rulemaking
for any proposed rule. Similarly, 5 U.S.C. 604 requires an agency to
prepare a final regulatory flexibility analysis when an agency issues a
final rule under 5 U.S.C. 553, after that section or any other law
requires publication of a general notice of proposed rulemaking. The
FAA concludes good cause exists to forgo notice and comment and to not
delay the effective date for this rule. As 5 U.S.C. 553 does not
require notice and comment in this situation, 5 U.S.C. 603 and 604
similarly do not require regulatory flexibility analyses.
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 potential effect of this final rule and
determined that its purpose is to protect the safety of U.S. civil
aviation from risks to their operations in the Damascus FIR (OSTT), a
location outside the U.S. Therefore, the rule complies with the Trade
Agreements Act of 1979.
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 $177 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 (44 U.S.C. 3507(d)) requires
the FAA to consider the impact of paperwork and other information
collection burdens it imposes on the public. The FAA has determined no
new requirement for information collection is associated with this
final rule.
F. International Compatibility and Cooperation
In keeping with U.S. obligations under the Convention on
International Civil Aviation, the FAA's policy is to conform to
International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) Standards and
Recommended Practices to the maximum extent practicable. The FAA has
determined no ICAO Standards and Recommended Practices correspond to
this regulation. The FAA finds this action is fully consistent with the
obligations under 49 U.S.C. 40105(b)(1)(A) to ensure the FAA exercises
its duties consistently with the obligations of the United States under
international agreements.
While the FAA's flight prohibition does not apply to foreign air
carriers, DOT codeshare authorizations prohibit foreign air carriers
from carrying a U.S. codeshare partner's code on a flight segment that
operates in airspace for which the FAA has issued a flight prohibition
for U.S. civil aviation. In addition, foreign air carriers and other
foreign operators may choose to avoid, or be advised or directed by
their civil aviation authorities to avoid, airspace for which the FAA
has issued a flight prohibition for U.S. civil aviation.
G. Environmental Analysis
The FAA has analyzed this action under Executive Order 12114,
Environmental Effects Abroad of Major Federal Actions, and DOT Order
5610.1C, Paragraph 16. Executive Order 12114 requires the FAA to be
informed of environmental considerations and take those considerations
into account when making decisions on major Federal actions that could
have environmental impacts anywhere beyond the borders of the United
States. The FAA has determined this action is exempt pursuant to
Section 2-5(a)(i) of Executive Order 12114 because it does not have the
potential for a significant effect on the environment outside the
United States.
In accordance with FAA Order 1050.1F, Environmental Impacts:
Policies and Procedures, paragraph 8-6(c), FAA has prepared a
memorandum for the record stating the reason(s) for this determination
and has placed it in the docket for this rulemaking.
IX. Executive Order Determinations
A. Executive Order 13132, Federalism
The FAA has analyzed this rule under the principles and criteria of
Executive Order 13132, Federalism. The Agency has determined 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. Therefore, this rule will not have federalism implications.
B. Executive Order 13211, Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use
The FAA analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13211, Actions
Concerning Regulations that Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use. The Agency has determined it is not a
``significant energy action'' under the Executive order and will not be
likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply,
distribution, or use of energy.
[[Page 89300]]
C. Executive Order 13609, Promoting International Regulatory
Cooperation
Executive Order 13609, Promoting International Regulatory
Cooperation, promotes international regulatory cooperation to meet
shared challenges involving health, safety, labor, security,
environmental, and other issues and to reduce, eliminate, or prevent
unnecessary differences in regulatory requirements. The FAA has
analyzed this action under the policies and agency responsibilities of
Executive Order 13609 and has determined that this action will have no
effect on international regulatory cooperation.
X. Additional Information
A. Electronic Access
Except for classified and controlled unclassified material not
authorized for public release, all documents the FAA considered in
developing this rule, including economic analyses and technical
reports, may be accessed from the internet through the docket for this
rulemaking.
Those documents may be viewed online at https://www.regulations.gov
using the docket number listed above. A copy of this rule will be
placed in the docket. Electronic retrieval help and guidelines are
available on the website. 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 website at https://www.federalregister.gov and the Government Publishing Office's website
at https://www.govinfo.gov. A copy may also be found at the FAA's
Regulations and Policies website at https://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies.
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.
B. Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act
The Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996
(SBREFA) (Pub. L. 104-121) (set forth as a note to 5 U.S.C. 601)
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, Syria.
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), 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, Pub. L. 114-190, 130 Stat. 615 (49 U.S.C.
44703 note); articles 12 and 29 of the Convention on International
Civil Aviation (61 Stat. 1180), (126 Stat. 11).
0
2. Amend Sec. 91.1609 by revising paragraph (e) to read as follows:
Sec. 91.1609 Special Federal Aviation Regulation No. 114--Prohibition
Against Certain Flights in the Damascus Flight Information Region (FIR)
(OSTT).
* * * * *
(e) Expiration. This SFAR will remain in effect until December 30,
2028. The FAA may amend, rescind, or extend this SFAR, as necessary.
Issued in Washington, DC, under the authority of 49 U.S.C.
106(f) and (g), 40101(d)(1), 40105(b)(1)(A), and 44701(a)(5).
Michael Gordon Whitaker,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2023-28502 Filed 12-26-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P