Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 235 / Thursday, December 6, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 72709 

SMALL BUSINESS SIZE STANDARDS BY NAICS INDUSTRY—Continued 

NAICS 

codes NAICS U.S. industry title 

Size standards 

in millions 

of dollars 

Size standards 

in number of 

employees 

*******

519190 All Other Information Services ...................................................................................................... 25.5 

*******

Dated: April 25, 2012. 

Karen G. Mills, 

Administrator. 

Editorial Note: This document was 

received at the Office of the Federal Register 

on November 30, 2012. 

[FR Doc. 2012–29360 Filed 12–5–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8025–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 91 

[Docket No. FAA–2003–14766; Amendment 

No. 91–327; SFAR No. 77] 

RIN 2120–AK07 

Prohibition Against Certain Flights 

Within the Territory and Airspace of 

Iraq 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: This action is taken to allow 

U.S. civil flight operations to and from 

Erbil and Sulaymaniyah International 

Airports in Northern Iraq by any United 

States (U.S.) air carrier or commercial 

operator, any person exercising the 

privileges of an airman certificate issued 

by the FAA except such persons 

operating U.S.-registered aircraft for a 

foreign air carrier (who are not covered 

by the prohibition), or a person 

operating an aircraft registered in the 

United States unless the operator of 

such aircraft is a foreign air carrier 

(which also is not covered by the 

prohibition). The FAA has recently 

determined that a full flight prohibition 

is no longer necessary for these airports 

in Northern Iraq, and this action will 

allow flights to be conducted provided 

that certain measures are taken. 

Additional adjustments to the current 

flight prohibition may be appropriate as 

the risk to aviation safety and security 

lessens in other parts of the country, 

and ultimately the prohibition may be 

lifted completely. 

DATES: This action is effective January 7, 

2013. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

technical questions about this final rule, 

contact: Will Gonzalez, Air 

Transportation Division, Flight 

Standards Service, Federal Aviation 

Administration, 800 Independence 

Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591; 

telephone: 202–267–4080. For legal 

questions, contact: Lorna John, Office of 

the Chief Counsel, AGC–200, Federal 

Aviation Administration, 800 

Independence Avenue SW., 

Washington, DC 20591; telephone (202) 

267–3921. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Authority for This Rulemaking 

The FAA is responsible for the safety 

of flight in the United States and for the 

safety of U.S. civil operators, U.S.- 

registered aircraft, and U.S.-certificated 

airmen throughout the world. Also, the 

FAA is responsible for issuing rules 

affecting the safety of air commerce and 

national security. The FAA’s authority 

to issue rules for aviation safety is found 

in Title 49 of the United States Code. 

Subtitle I, Section 106(g), describes the 

authority of the FAA Administrator. 

Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, 

describes in more detail the scope of the 

agency’s authority. Section 40101(d)(1) 

provides that the Administrator shall 

consider in the public interest, among 

other matters, assigning, maintaining, 

and enhancing safety and security as the 

highest priorities in air commerce. 

Section 40105(b)(1)(A) requires the 

Administrator to exercise his authority 

consistently with the obligations of the 

U.S. Government under international 

agreements. Furthermore, the FAA has 

broad authority under section 

44701(a)(5) to prescribe regulations 

governing the practices, methods, and 

procedures the Administrator finds 

necessary for safety in air commerce and 

national security. 

I. Background 

On October 16, 1996, SFAR No. 77 

was issued to prohibit flight operations 

within the territory and airspace of Iraq 

by any U.S. air carrier or commercial 

operator, by any person exercising the 

privileges of an airman certificate issued 

by the FAA except persons operating 

U.S.-registered aircraft for a foreign air 

carrier (who are not covered by the 

prohibition), or by a person operating an 

aircraft registered in the United States, 

unless the operator of such aircraft is a 

foreign air carrier (which also is not 

covered by the prohibition). The 

prohibition was issued in response to 

concerns for the safety and security of 

U.S. civil flights within the territory and 

airspace of Iraq. In the final rule, the 

FAA cited a threat made by then 

President Saddam Hussein who urged 

his air defense forces to ignore both the 

southern and northern no-fly zones and 

to attack ‘‘any air target of the 

aggressors.’’ The FAA was concerned 

that this threat could apply to civilian 

as well as military aircraft, and therefore 

issued SFAR 77. 

In early 2003, a U.S.-led coalition 

removed Saddam Hussein’s regime in 

Iraq from power. The FAA anticipated 

that when hostilities ended in Iraq, 

humanitarian efforts would be needed 

to assist the people of Iraq. To facilitate 

those efforts, in April 2003, the FAA 

amended paragraph 3 of SFAR No. 77 to 

clarify what the approval process was 

for such flights, making clear that 

operations could not be authorized by 

another agency without the approval of 

the FAA. 

On November 19, 2003, the FAA 

determined that certain limited 

overflights of Iraq could be conducted 

safely, subject to the permission of the 

appropriate authorities in Iraq and in 

accordance with the conditions 

established by those authorities. 

Accordingly, the FAA amended SFAR 

No. 77 to permit overflights of Iraq 

above Flight Level (FL) 200. That 

amendment also allowed aircraft 

departing from countries adjacent to 

Iraq to operate at altitudes below FL 200 

within Iraq to the extent necessary to 

permit a climb above FL 200 if the climb 

performance of the aircraft would not 

permit operation above FL 200 prior to 

entering Iraqi airspace. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with 

72710 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 235 / Thursday, December 6, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 

1 In matters relating to aviation security, the FAA 

works closely with the Transportation Security 

Administration (TSA), which, pursuant to Subtitle 

I, Sections 114(d) and (f) of Title 49 of the United 

States Code, is responsible for civil aviation 

security, including the implementation and 

adequacy of security measures at airports and other 

transportation facilities. With respect to foreign 

airports, the TSA, on behalf of the Secretary of the 

Department of Homeland Security (DHS), 

implements the requirement set forth in Section 

44907 of Title 49 to assess the effectiveness of the 

security measures maintained at foreign airports (1) 

Served by an air carrier; (2) from which a foreign 

air carrier serves the United States as a last point 

of departure; (3) that pose a high risk of introducing 

danger to international air travel; or (4) that the 

DHS Secretary considers appropriate. Among its 

other authorities, the TSA has the general authority 

under Section 40113 of Title 49 to prescribe 

regulations, standards, and procedures and issue 

orders in carrying out its security responsibilities. 

2U.S. air carriers also must hold any necessary 

U.S. and Iraqi economic operating authority. 

Results of recent evaluations of 

airports in Iraq prompted the FAA to 

consider removing the flight prohibition 

for Erbil and Sulaymaniyah. The Erbil 

and Sulaymaniyah International 

Airports have supported non-U.S. air 

carrier operations for a number of years 

without incident. Based largely on the 

initiation of those operations and on 

improvements in the operational 

environment, the FAA has determined 

that flights by U.S. operators may now 

be conducted safely to these two 

airports under certain conditions. 

Therefore, the FAA is amending 

paragraph (b) (former paragraph 2) of 

SFAR No. 77 to allow certain flights 

from outside Iraq to and from the 

international airports of Erbil and 

Sulaymaniyah in the northern provinces 

of Iraq by any U.S. air carrier or 

commercial operator, by any person 

exercising the privileges of an airman 

certificate issued by the FAA, except 

persons operating U.S.-registered 

aircraft for a foreign air carrier (who are 

not currently affected by the 

prohibition), or a person operating an 

aircraft registered in the United States, 

unless the operator of such aircraft is a 

foreign air carrier (which also is not 

currently affected by the prohibition). 

The FAA is committed to actively and 

continually evaluating airports in other 

regions of Iraq so that they can be used 

by U.S. civil operators. It is anticipated 

that additional adjustments to the SFAR 

may be appropriate as the risk to 

aviation safety and security lessens in 

other parts of the country, and 

ultimately the SFAR may be lifted 

completely. 

Before U.S. air carriers begin 

commercial operations to either Erbil or 

Sulaymaniyah, the Transportation 

Security Administration (TSA) must 

review the current security situation.1

Consequently, all U.S. air carriers who 

are required to have a TSA-approved 

security program under 49 CFR 

1544.101 that are planning operations to 

and from Erbil or Sulaymaniyah must 

contact TSA before initiating service to 

obtain appropriate security approvals to 

operate the proposed service.2

Under new paragraphs (b)(3) and (4) 

(former paragraphs 2(c) and (d)) of 

SFAR No. 77, flights may be operated by 

persons covered by paragraph (a) 

(former paragraph 1) of the SFAR within 

the territory and airspace of Iraq north 

of the 34°30′ North latitude below 

FL200 to and from Erbil International 

Airport (ORER) or Sulaymaniyah 

International Airport (ORSU) to and 

from points outside Iraq. All other flight 

operations by persons covered by 

paragraph (a) (former paragraph 1) of 

SFAR No. 77 within the territory and 

airspace of Iraq north of the 34°30′ 

North latitude and in other areas within 

the territory and airspace of Iraq must be 

in accordance with paragraphs (b)(1), 

(b)(2), (c) and (d) (former paragraphs 

2(a), 2(b), 3 and 4) of SFAR No. 77. 

Under new paragraph (b)(5) (former 

paragraph 2(e)), prior to conducting 

operations under paragraphs (b)(3) and 

(b)(4) (former paragraphs 2(c) and 2(d)), 

the operator must apply for and obtain 

a letter of authorization (LOA) or 

operations specification (OpSpec), as 

appropriate, from the Director, Flight 

Standards Service, AFS–1, which will 

specify the limitations and conditions 

under which the operation must be 

conducted. An OpSpec or LOA 

addresses operational safety both for the 

particular flight and for continuing 

operations. The FAA often uses 

OpSpecs and LOAs to manage specific 

operations conducted pursuant to 

underlying regulations. In this instance, 

the OpSpecs and LOAs will address the 

residual risk associated with operating 

into and out of ORER or ORSU. 

Generally, the operator must: 

• Have a method for obtaining current 

reports and information on airport 

conditions, navigation aids, weather, 

and any other factors that may affect the 

safety of flight including commercially 

available current threat information. 

This includes both preflight planning 

and enroute operations. 

• Use specific airways to enter Iraqi 

airspace. 

• Operate in accordance with the Iraq 

Aeronautical Information Publication 

(AIP). 

• Minimize time below FL200 within 

the amended airspace. 

• Not land at airports other than 

ORER and ORSU, except in an 

emergency. 

• Report any security incidents/ 

events to the FAA Washington 

Operations Center (WOC) via phone at 

202–267–3333 or email aeocitewatch@faa.gov. 

• Comply with 14 CFR parts 91, 119, 

125, 135 or 121. 

While the conditions imposed in the 

OpSpec or LOA may be similar to the 

conditions imposed in OpSpecs and 

LOAs issued under exemptions or 

approvals for operations to the rest of 

Iraq, the threshold for issuance of an 

OpSpec or an LOA for flight operations 

into and out of ORER or ORSU is 

significantly different and does not rise 

to the level required for an exemption 

or approval for operations to the rest of 

Iraq. In order for an operator to receive 

an OpSpec or LOA under the approval 

process that applies to the rest of Iraq, 

a U.S. government agency must request 

approval of the specific operation or 

series of operations. Approval is granted 

only if the request for approval includes 

a written contract between the U.S. 

government agency and the operator, a 

plan approved by the U.S. government 

agency describing how the threats to the 

operation will be mitigated, and any 

other information requested by the FAA. 

That information will not be required 

for flights into and out of ORER or 

ORSU. The FAA will not require any 

contractual relationship between the 

operator and another U.S. government 

agency, and it will not require another 

agency to request operations be 

permitted. Nor will there be a 

requirement for a threat mitigation plan, 

although there may be some 

requirements that the operator provide 

the FAA with information regarding the 

situation in or around the airports. 

Good Cause Justification for Waiving 

Notice and Comment 

Because the circumstances described 

herein require immediate action and 

results in a lessening of the current 

flight prohibition, I find that notice and 

public comment under 5 U.S.C. 

553(b)(3)(B) are impracticable and 

contrary to the public interest. I also 

find that this action is fully consistent 

with the obligations under 49 U.S.C. 

40105 to ensure that I exercise my 

duties consistently with the obligations 

of the United States under international 

agreements. 

II. Regulatory Evaluation, Regulatory 

Flexibility Determination, International 

Trade Impact Assessment, and 

Unfunded Mandates Assessment 

A. Regulatory Evaluation 

Changes to Federal regulations must 

undergo several economic analyses. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with 

Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 235 / Thursday, December 6, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 72711 

First, Executive Order 12866 and 

Executive Order 13563 direct that each 

Federal agency shall propose or adopt a 

regulation only upon a reasoned 

determination that the benefits of the 

intended regulation justify its costs. 

Second, the Regulatory Flexibility Act 

of 1980 (Pub. L. 96–354) requires 

agencies to analyze the economic 

impact of regulatory changes on small 

entities. Third, the Trade Agreements 

Act (Pub. L. 96–39) prohibits agencies 

from setting standards that create 

unnecessary obstacles to the foreign 

commerce of the United States. In 

developing U.S. standards, the Trade 

Act requires agencies to consider 

international standards and, where 

appropriate, that they be the basis of 

U.S. standards. Fourth, the Unfunded 

Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 

104–4) requires agencies to prepare a 

written assessment of the costs, benefits, 

and other effects of proposed or final 

rules that include a Federal mandate 

likely to result in the expenditure by 

State, local, or tribal governments, in the 

aggregate, or by the private sector, of 

$100 million or more annually (adjusted 

for inflation with the base year of 1995). 

This portion of the preamble 

summarizes the FAA’s analysis of the 

economic impacts of this final rule. 

Department of Transportation Order 

DOT 2100.5 prescribes policies and 

procedures for simplification, analysis, 

and review of regulations. If the 

expected impact on costs and benefits is 

so minimal that a proposed or final rule 

does not warrant a full evaluation, this 

order permits that a statement to that 

effect and the basis for it be included in 

the preamble if a full regulatory 

evaluation of the cost and benefits is not 

prepared. Such a determination has 

been made for this final rule. The 

reasoning for this determination 

follows: This rule will permit additional 

flights to be flown within the territory 

of Iraq north of the 34°30′ North latitude 

to or from Erbil International Airport 

(ORER) and Sulaymaniyah International 

Airport (ORSU). The relaxation of 

restrictions on operations to and from 

these two airports provides more 

commercial opportunities for operators, 

as well as improved consumer choice, 

and therefore, has more benefits than 

costs. Further, this expansion of 

opportunities is likely to lower 

transportation costs associated with 

these trips today. For example, with this 

rule U.S. operators may operate directly 

into these two airports without 

incurring the cost of contracting with a 

foreign operator or using foreignregistered aircraft. Therefore, the rule 

expands commercial opportunities with 

an expected minimal additional cost. 

FAA has, therefore, determined that 

this final rule is not a ‘‘significant 

regulatory action’’ as defined in section 

3(f) of Executive Order 12866, and is not 

‘‘significant’’ as defined in DOT’s 

Regulatory Policies and Procedures. 

B. Regulatory Flexibility Determination 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 

(Pub. L. 96–354) (RFA) establishes ‘‘as a 

principle of regulatory issuance that 

agencies shall endeavor, consistent with 

the objectives of the rule and of 

applicable statutes, to fit regulatory and 

informational requirements to the scale 

of the businesses, organizations, and 

governmental jurisdictions subject to 

regulation. To achieve this principle, 

agencies are required to solicit and 

consider flexible regulatory proposals 

and to explain the rationale for their 

actions to assure that such proposals are 

given serious consideration.’’ The RFA 

covers a wide-range of small entities, 

including small businesses, not-forprofit organizations, and small 

governmental jurisdictions. 

Agencies must perform a review to 

determine whether a rule will have a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities. If 

the agency determines that it will, the 

agency must prepare a regulatory 

flexibility analysis as described in the 

RFA. 

However, if an agency determines that 

a rule is not expected to have a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities, 

section 605(b) of the RFA provides that 

the head of the agency may so certify 

and a regulatory flexibility analysis is 

not required. The certification must 

include a statement providing the 

factual basis for this determination, and 

the reasoning should be clear. 

This rule permits more flights to Iraq; 

permits more direct flights which 

reduce costs; and expands revenue 

opportunity. Therefore, as the acting 

FAA Administrator, I certify that this 

rule will not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities. 

C. International Trade Impact 

Assessment 

The Trade Agreements Act of 1979 

(Pub. L. 96–39), as amended by the 

Uruguay Round Agreements Act (Pub. 

L. 103–465), prohibits Federal agencies 

from establishing standards or engaging 

in related activities that create 

unnecessary obstacles to the foreign 

commerce of the United States. 

Pursuant to these Acts, the 

establishment of standards is not 

considered an unnecessary obstacle to 

the foreign commerce of the United 

States, so long as the standard has a 

legitimate domestic objective, such 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 it will reduce obstacles 

to the foreign commerce of the United 

States and is consistent with this Act. 

D. Unfunded Mandates Assessment 

Title II of the Unfunded Mandates 

Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4) 

requires each Federal agency to prepare 

a written statement assessing the effects 

of any Federal mandate in a proposed or 

final agency rule that may result in an 

expenditure of $100 million or more (in 

1995 dollars) in any one year by State, 

local, and tribal governments, in the 

aggregate, or by the private sector; such 

a mandate is deemed to be a ‘‘significant 

regulatory action.’’ The FAA currently 

uses an inflation-adjusted value of 

$143.1 million in lieu of $100 million. 

This rule does not contain such a 

mandate; therefore, the requirements of 

Title II of the Act do not apply. 

Availability of Rulemaking Documents 

You can get an electronic copy of 

rulemaking documents using the 

Internet by— 

1. Searching the Federal eRulemaking 

Portal (http://www.regulations.gov); 

2. Visiting the FAA’s Regulations and 

Policies Web page at http:// 

www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/ or 

3. Accessing the Government Printing 

Office’s Federal Digital System at: 

http://www.fdsys.gov. 

You can also get a copy by sending a 

request to the Federal Aviation 

Administration, Office of Rulemaking, 

ARM–1, 800 Independence Avenue 

SW., Washington, DC 20591, or by 

calling (202) 267–9680. Make sure to 

identify the amendment or docket 

number of this rulemaking. 

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act 

The Small Business Regulatory 

Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA) of 

1996 requires FAA to comply with 

small entity requests for information or 

advice about compliance with statutes 

and regulations within its jurisdiction. If 

you are a small entity and you have a 

question regarding this document, you 

may contact your local FAA official, or 

the person listed under the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT heading at the 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with 

72712 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 235 / Thursday, December 6, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 

beginning of the preamble. You can find 

out more about SBREFA on the Internet 

at http://www.faa.gov/ 

regulations_policies/rulemaking/ 

sbre_act/. 

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 91 

Air traffic control, Aircraft, Airmen, 

Airports, Aviation safety, Freight, Iraq. 

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(g), 1155, 40103, 

40113, 40120, 44101, 44111, 44701, 44709, 

44711, 44712, 44715, 44716, 44717, 44722, 

46306, 46315, 46316, 46504, 46506–46507, 

47122, 47508, 47528–47531; articles 12 and 

29 of the Convention on International Civil 

Aviation (61 Stat. 1180). 

■ 2. Amend part 91 by removing SFAR 

No. 77. 

■ 3. Amend Subpart M by adding 

§ 91.1605 to read as follows: 

§ 91.1605 Special Federal Aviation 

Regulation No. 77—Prohibition Against 

Certain Flights Within the Territory and 

Airspace of Iraq. 

(a) Applicability. This rule applies to 

the following persons: 

(1) All U.S. air carriers or commercial 

operators; 

(2) All persons exercising the 

privileges of an airman certificate issued 

by the FAA except such persons 

operating U.S.-registered aircraft for a 

foreign air carrier; or 

(3) All operators of aircraft registered 

in the United States except where the 

operator of such aircraft is a foreign air 

carrier. 

(b) Flight prohibition. No person may 

conduct flight operations over or within 

the territory of Iraq, except as provided 

in paragraphs (c) and (d) of this section 

or except as follows: 

(1) Overflights of Iraq may be 

conducted above flight level (FL) 200 

subject to the approval of, and in 

accordance with the conditions 

established by, the appropriate 

authorities of Iraq. 

(2) Flights departing from the 

countries adjacent to Iraq whose climb 

performance will not permit operations 

above FL200 prior to entering Iraqi 

airspace may operate at altitudes below 

FL200 within Iraq to the extent 

necessary to permit a climb above 

FL200, subject to the approval of, and in 

accordance with the conditions 

established by, the appropriate 

authorities of Iraq. 

(3) Flights originating from or 

destined to areas outside of Iraq may be 

operated to or from Erbil International 

Airport (ORER) or Sulaymaniyah 

International Airport (ORSU) within the 

territory of Iraq north of 34°30′ North 

latitude. Such flights may operate below 

FL200 only when initiating an arrival to 

or departure from Erbil International 

Airport (ORER) or Sulaymaniyah 

International Airport (ORSU). 

(4) Flights departing Erbil and 

Sulaymaniyah whose climb 

performance will not permit operation 

above FL200 prior to entering Iraqi 

airspace south of the 34°30′ North 

latitude may operate at altitudes below 

FL 200 to the extent necessary to permit 

a climb above FL200. 

(5) Prior to conducting the flight 

operations described in paragraphs 

(b)(3) and (4) of this section, the 

operator must obtain a letter of 

authorization or operations 

specification, as appropriate, from the 

Director, Flight Standards Service, AFS– 

1, which will specify the limitations and 

conditions under which the operation 

must be conducted. All flights 

conducted under paragraphs (b)(3) and 

(4) of this section are subject to the 

approval of, and must be conducted in 

accordance with the conditions 

established by the appropriate 

authorities of Iraq. 

(c) Permitted Operations. This SFAR 

does not prohibit persons described in 

paragraph (a) of this section from 

conducting flight operations within the 

territory and airspace of Iraq when such 

operations are authorized either by 

another agency of the United States 

Government with the approval of the 

FAA, or by an exemption granted by the 

Administrator. 

(d) Emergency situations. In an 

emergency that requires immediate 

decision and action for the safety of the 

flight, the pilot in command of an 

aircraft may deviate from this SFAR to 

the extent required by that emergency. 

Except for U.S. air carriers or 

commercial operators that are subject to 

the requirements of parts 119, 121, or 

135, each person who deviates from this 

rule shall, within ten (10) days of the 

deviation, excluding Saturdays, 

Sundays, and Federal holidays, submit 

to the Flight Standards Service Air 

Transportation Division (AFS–200) a 

complete report of the operations of the 

aircraft involved in the deviation 

including a description of the deviation 

and the reasons therefore. 

Issued in Washington, DC on November 28, 

2012. 

Michael P. Huerta, 

Acting Administrator. 

[FR Doc. 2012–29412 Filed 12–5–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION 

16 CFR Part 681 

RIN 3084–AA94 

Identity Theft Red Flags and Address 

Discrepancies Under the Fair and 

Accurate Credit Transactions Act of 

2003, as Amended by the Red Flag 

Program Clarification Act of 2010 

AGENCY: Federal Trade Commission. 

ACTION: Interim final rule; request for 

comment. 

SUMMARY: The Federal Trade 

Commission (‘‘FTC’’ or ‘‘Commission’’) 

is amending its Red Flags Rule 

promulgated under Section 615 of the 

Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA), to 

implement the Red Flag Program 

Clarification Act of 2010 (Clarification 

Act or Act). The interim final rule 

amends the definition of ‘‘creditor’’ in 

the original Red Flags Rule to make it 

consistent with the revised definition of 

that term in the Clarification Act. 

DATES: The interim final rule is effective 

on February 11, 2013. Written 

comments must be received on or before 

February 11, 2013. 

ADDRESSES: Interested parties may file a 

comment online or on paper, by 

following the instructions in the 

Request for Comments part of the 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section 

below. Write ‘‘Red Flags Interim Final 

Rule’’ on your comment, and file your 

comment online at https:// 

ftcpublic.commentworks.com/ftc/ 

redflagsinterimrule by following the 

instructions on the web-based form. If 

you prefer to file your comment on 

paper, mail or deliver your comment to 

the following address: Federal Trade 

Commission, Office of the Secretary, 

Room H–113 (Annex M), 600 

Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, 

DC 20580. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Steven Toporoff, Attorney, or Tiffany 

George, Attorney, Federal Trade 

Commission, Division of Privacy and 

Identity Protection, Bureau of Consumer 

Protection, (202) 326–2252, 600 

Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, 

DC 20580. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with