This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER

contains regulatory documents having general

applicability and legal effect, most of which

are keyed to and codified in the Code of

Federal Regulations, which is published under

50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.

The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by

the Superintendent of Documents. Prices of

new books are listed in the first FEDERAL

REGISTER issue of each week.

Rules and Regulations Federal Register

15503 

Vol. 80, No. 56 

Tuesday, March 24, 2015 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 91 

[Docket No.: FAA–2011–0246; Amdt. No. 

91–321B] 

RIN 2120–AK70 

Prohibition Against Certain Flights 

Within the Tripoli (HLLL) Flight 

Information Region (FIR); Extension of 

Expiration Date 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Final rule and extension of 

expiration date. 

SUMMARY: This action extends the 

prohibition of flight operations within 

the Tripoli (HLLL) Flight Information 

Region (FIR) by all: U.S. air carriers; 

U.S. commercial operators; persons 

exercising the privileges of an airman 

certificate issued by the FAA, except 

when such persons are operating a U.S.- 

registered aircraft for a foreign air 

carrier; and operators of U.S.-registered 

civil aircraft, except operators of such 

aircraft that are foreign air carriers. The 

extension of the expiration date is 

necessary to address a potential hazard 

to persons and aircraft engaged in such 

flight operations. Additionally, the FAA 

is amending the prohibition to make 

clear that operations by sub-contractors 

under a U.S. Government department, 

agency, or instrumentality’s contract, 

grant, or cooperative agreement may be 

included in an approval request and to 

remove an obsolete reference to 

paragraph 8 of United Nations Security 

Council Resolution (UNSCR) 1973. The 

FAA is also revising the approval 

conditions that will apply to operations 

authorized by other U.S. Government 

departments, agencies, and 

instrumentalities that are approved by 

the FAA, and the information about 

requests for exemption, to reflect the 

termination of statutory authorization 

for the FAA premium war risk 

insurance program. 

DATES: The final rule is effective March 

20, 2015. This action extends the period 

during which Special Federal Aviation 

Regulation (SFAR) No. 112, scheduled 

to expire on March 20, 2015, will 

remain in effect. The expiration date is 

extended until March 20, 2017. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

technical questions concerning this 

action, contact Will Gonzalez, Air 

Transportation Division, AFS–220, 

Flight Standards Service Federal 

Aviation Administration, 800 

Independence Avenue SW., 

Washington, DC 20591; telephone 202– 

267–8166; email will.gonzalez@faa.gov. 

For legal questions concerning this 

action, contact Mary Mason, Office of 

the Chief Counsel, AGC–200, Federal 

Aviation Administration, 800 

Independence Avenue SW., 

Washington, DC 20591; telephone (202) 

267–8018; email mary.mason@faa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Good Cause for Immediate Adoption 

Section 553(b)(3)(B) of title 5, U.S. 

Code, authorizes agencies to dispense 

with notice and comment procedures 

for rules when the agency for ‘‘good 

cause’’ finds that those procedures are 

‘‘impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary 

to the public interest.’’ In this instance, 

the FAA finds that notice and public 

comment to this immediately adopted 

final rule, as well as any delay in the 

effective date of this rule, are contrary 

to the public interest due to the 

immediate need to address the 

continued potential hazard to civil 

aviation that exists in the Tripoli (HLL) 

FIR, as described in the Background 

section of this rule. 

Authority for This Rulemaking 

The FAA is responsible for the safety 

of flight in the United States (U.S.) and 

for the safety of U.S. civil operators, 

U.S.-registered civil aircraft, and U.S.- 

certificated airmen throughout the 

world. The FAA’s authority to issue 

rules on aviation safety is found in title 

49, U.S. Code. Subtitle I, section 106(f), 

describes the authority of the FAA 

Administrator. Subtitle VII of title 49, 

Aviation Programs, describes in more 

detail the scope of the agency’s 

authority. Section 40101(d)(1) provides 

that the Administrator shall consider in 

the public interest, among other matters, 

assigning, maintaining, and enhancing 

safety and security as the highest 

priorities in air commerce. Section 

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

Administrator to exercise his authority 

consistently with the obligations of the 

U.S. Government under international 

agreements. 

This rulemaking is promulgated 

under the authority described in 

Subtitle VII, Part A, subpart III, section 

44701, General requirements. Under 

that section, the FAA is charged broadly 

with promoting safe flight of civil 

aircraft in air commerce by prescribing, 

among other things, regulations and 

minimum standards for practices, 

methods, and procedures that the 

Administrator finds necessary for safety 

in air commerce and national security. 

This regulation is within the scope of 

that authority, because it extends the 

prohibition against the persons subject 

to paragraph (a) of SFAR No. 112, 14 

CFR 91.1603, conducting flight 

operations in the Tripoli (HLLL) FIR 

due to the continued potential hazard to 

the safety of such persons’ flight 

operations, as described in the 

Background section of this document. 

I. Executive Summary 

This action extends the prohibition of 

flight operations in the Tripoli (HLLL) 

FIR by all: U.S. air carriers; U.S. 

commercial operators; persons 

exercising the privileges of a U.S. 

airman certificate, except when such 

persons are operating a U.S.-registered 

aircraft for a foreign air carrier; and 

operators of U.S.-registered civil aircraft, 

except when such operators are foreign 

air carriers. The FAA finds this action 

necessary to address potential hazards 

to persons and aircraft engaged in such 

flight operations. The prohibition, 

which is scheduled to expire on March 

20, 2015, is hereby extended to March 

20, 2017. 

II. Background 

As a result of safety and national 

security concerns regarding flight 

operations in the Tripoli (HLLL) FIR, 

the FAA issued § 91.1603 of title 14, 

Code of Federal Regulations, SFAR No. 

112, in March 2011 (76 FR 16238, 

March 23, 2011). SFAR No. 112 

prohibits all U.S. air carriers; U.S. 

commercial operators; persons 

exercising the privileges of an airman 


TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
15504 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 56 / Tuesday, March 24, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 

certificate issued by the FAA, except 

when such persons are operating a U.S.- 

registered aircraft for a foreign air 

carrier; and operators of U.S.-registered 

civil aircraft, except operators of such 

aircraft that are foreign air carriers, from 

conducting flight operations in the 

Tripoli (HLLL) FIR, except as provided 

in paragraphs (c) and (d) of the SFAR. 

When SFAR No. 112 was issued, an 

armed conflict was ongoing in Libya 

and presented a potential hazard to civil 

aviation. The FAA was concerned that 

runways at Libya’s international 

airports, including the main 

international airports serving Benghazi 

(HLLB) and Tripoli (HLLT), might be 

damaged or degraded. There was also 

concern that air navigation services in 

the Tripoli FIR might be unavailable or 

degraded. In addition, the proliferation 

of air defense weapons, including ManPortable Air-Defense Systems 

(MANPADS), and the presence of 

military operations, including Libyan 

aerial bombardments and unplanned 

military flights entering and departing 

the Tripoli (HLLL) FIR, posed a 

potential hazard to U.S. operators, U.S.- 

registered aircraft, and FAA-certificated 

airmen that might operate within the 

Tripoli (HLLL) FIR. Additionally, the 

United Nations Security Council 

adopted Resolution 1973 on March 18, 

2011, which mandated a ban on all 

flights in the airspace of Libya, with 

certain exceptions. 

By March 2014, although the Gadhafi 

regime had been overthrown and the 

UN-mandated ban on flights in Libyan 

airspace had been lifted, the FAA 

continued to have significant security 

concerns for Libya and for the safety of 

U.S. civil aviation operations in that 

country. On March 20, 2014, the FAA 

extended the expiration date of SFAR 

No. 112, § 91.1603, to March 20, 2015. 

The FAA considered that, on December 

12, 2013, the Department of State had 

issued a Travel Warning strongly 

advising against all non-essential travel 

to Libya. Various groups had called for 

attacks against U.S. citizens and U.S. 

interests in Libya. Many military-grade 

weapons remained in the hands of 

private individuals and groups, among 

them anti-aircraft weapons that could be 

used against civil aviation, including 

MANPADS. The Travel Warning also 

warned that closures or threats of 

closures of the international airports 

occurred regularly for maintenance, 

labor, or security-related reasons. For 

those reasons, on March 21, 2014, the 

FAA published a final rule (79 FR 

15679; corrected at 79 FR 19288, April 

8, 2014) extending the expiration date of 

SFAR No. 112, § 91.1603, to March 20, 

2015. 

The FAA continues to have 

significant concerns regarding the safety 

of U.S. civil aviation operations in the 

Tripoli (HLLL) FIR at all altitudes due 

to the hazardous situation created by the 

ongoing fighting involving various 

militant groups and Libyan military 

forces in various areas of Libya, 

including some near Tripoli and 

Benghazi. Islamist militant groups hold 

and control significant portions of 

Western Libya, including Tripoli 

International Airport (HLLT). Militant 

groups, such as Libyan Dawn, possess a 

variety of anti-aircraft weapons, which 

give them the capability to target aircraft 

upon landing and departure and at 

higher altitudes. 

Civil aviation infrastructure is at risk 

from indirect fire from mortars and 

rockets targeting Libyan airports during 

the ongoing fighting. Civil aviation in 

the Tripoli FIR is also at risk from aerial 

combat operations and other military 

activity conducted by Libyan forces. 

Furthermore, the security situation in 

the Tripoli (HLLL) FIR continues to be 

unpredictable and unstable. Therefore, 

since there is a significant continuing 

risk to the safety of U.S. civil aviation 

in the Tripoli (HLLL) FIR, the FAA 

hereby extends the expiration date of 

SFAR No. 112, § 91.1603, for an 

additional two years. 

The FAA will continue to actively 

evaluate the area to determine to what 

extent U.S. civil operators may be able 

to safely operate therein. Adjustments to 

this SFAR may be appropriate if the risk 

to aviation safety and security changes. 

The FAA may amend or rescind this 

SFAR as necessary prior to its 

expiration date. 

Additionally, the FAA is amending 

paragraph (c), Permitted operations, of 

SFAR No. 112, § 91.1603, to make clear 

that operations by sub-contractors under 

a U.S. Government department, agency, 

or instrumentality’s contract, grant, or 

cooperative agreement may be included 

in an approval request and to remove an 

obsolete reference to paragraph 8 of 

UNSCR 1973. UNSCR 2016 (2011) 

terminated paragraphs 6 to 12 of UNSCR 

1973, effective 23:59 p.m. Libyan local 

time on October 31, 2011. The FAA is 

also revising the approval conditions 

that will apply to operations authorized 

by other U.S. Government departments, 

agencies, and instrumentalities and 

approved by the FAA, and the 

information about requests for 

exemption, to reflect the termination of 

statutory authorization for the FAA 

premium war risk insurance program. 

Section 102 of Division L of the 

Consolidated and Further Continuing 

Appropriations Act, 2015, Public Law 

113–235, December 16, 2014, inter alia, 

amended 49 U.S.C. 44302(f) and 

44310(a) to specify the termination 

dates in those sections as December 11, 

2014. The effect was to terminate 

coverage under FAA’s premium war risk 

insurance program as of December 11, 

2014. 

Because the circumstances described 

herein warrant immediate action by the 

FAA, I find that notice and public 

comment under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(B) are 

impracticable and contrary to the public 

interest. Further, I find that good cause 

exists under 5 U.S.C. 553(d) for making 

this rule effective immediately upon 

issuance. I also find that this action is 

fully consistent with the obligations 

under 49 U.S.C. 40105 to ensure that I 

exercise my duties consistently with the 

obligations of the United States under 

international agreements. 

Revised Approval Conditions 

As noted above, Congress terminated 

coverage under FAA’s premium war risk 

insurance program as of December 11, 

2014. Consequently, the FAA is revising 

the approval conditions that will apply 

to any approvals that the FAA may grant 

for flight operations authorized by 

another U.S. Government department, 

agency or instrumentality in the Tripoli 

(HLLL) FIR to remove material related to 

this program. When the FAA approves 

such operations, the FAA’s Aviation 

Safety Organization (AVS) will send a 

letter to the requesting department, 

agency, or instrumentality confirming 

that the FAA’s approval is subject to the 

following conditions: 

(1) Any approval will stipulate those 

procedures and conditions that limit, to 

the greatest degree possible, the risk to 

the operator, while still allowing the 

operator to achieve its operational 

objectives. 

(2) Before any approval takes effect, 

the operator must submit to the FAA: 

(a) a written release of the U.S. 

Government from all damages, claims, 

and liabilities, including without 

limitation legal fees and expenses; and 

(b) the operator’s agreement to 

indemnify the U.S. Government with 

respect to any and all third-party 

damages, claims, and liabilities, 

including without limitation legal fees 

and expenses, relating to any event 

arising from or related to the approved 

operations in the Tripoli (HLLL) FIR; 

and 

(3) Other conditions that the FAA 

may specify, including those that may 

be imposed in OpSpecs. 

The release and agreement to 

indemnify do not preclude an operator 

from raising a claim under an applicable 

non-premium war risk insurance policy 


TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 56 / Tuesday, March 24, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 15505 

issued by the FAA under chapter 443 of 

title 49, United States Code. 

If the proposed operation or 

operations are approved, the FAA will 

issue OpSpecs to the certificate holder 

authorizing these operations and will 

notify the department, agency, or 

instrumentality that requested FAA 

approval of civil flight operations to be 

conducted by one or more persons 

described in paragraph (a) of SFAR No. 

112, § 91.1603, of any additional 

conditions beyond those contained in 

the approval letter. The requesting 

department, agency, or instrumentality 

must have a contract, grant, or 

cooperative agreement (or its prime 

contractor must have a subcontract) 

with the person(s) described in 

paragraph (a) of SFAR No. 112, 

§ 91.1603, on whose behalf the 

department, agency, or instrumentality 

requests FAA approval. 

Requests for Exemption 

Any operations not conducted under 

the approval process set forth above 

must be conducted under an exemption 

from SFAR No. 112, § 91.1603. A 

request by any person covered under 

this SFAR for an exemption must 

comply with 14 CFR part 11 and will 

require exceptional circumstances 

beyond those contemplated by the 

approval process set forth above. In 

addition to the information required by 

14 CFR 11.81, at a minimum, the 

requestor must describe in its 

submission to the FAA— 

• The proposed operation(s), 

including the nature of the operation; 

• The service to be provided by the 

person(s) covered by the SFAR; 

• The specific locations within the 

Tripoli FIR where the proposed 

operation(s) will be conducted; and 

• The method by which the operator 

will obtain current threat information, 

and an explanation of how the operator 

will integrate this information into all 

phases of its proposed operations (e.g., 

the pre-mission planning and briefing, 

in-flight, and post-flight phases). 

Additionally, the release and 

agreement to indemnify, as referred to 

above, will be required as a condition of 

any exemption issued under this SFAR. 

The FAA recognizes that operations that 

may be affected by SFAR No. 112, 

§ 91.1603, may be planned for the 

governments of other countries with the 

support of the U.S. Government. While 

these operations will not be permitted 

through the approval process, the FAA 

will process exemption requests for 

such operations on an expedited basis 

and prior to any private exemption 

requests. 

III. Regulatory Notices and Analyses 

Changes to Federal regulations must 

undergo several economic analyses. 

First, Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 

direct that each Federal agency shall 

propose or adopt a regulation only upon 

a reasoned determination that the 

benefits of the intended regulation 

justify its costs. Second, the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act of 1980 (Pub. L. 96–354), 

as codified in 5 U.S.C. 603 et seq., 

requires agencies to analyze the 

economic impact of regulatory changes 

on small entities. Third, the Trade 

Agreements Act of 1979 (Pub. L. 96–39), 

as amended, 19 U.S.C. Chapter 13, 

prohibits agencies from setting 

standards that create unnecessary 

obstacles to the foreign commerce of the 

United States. In developing U.S. 

standards, the Trade Agreements Act 

requires agencies to consider 

international standards and, where 

appropriate, that they be the basis of 

U.S. standards. Fourth, the Unfunded 

Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 

104–4), as codified in 2 U.S.C. 1532, 

requires agencies to prepare a written 

assessment of the costs, benefits, and 

other effects of proposed or final rules 

that include a Federal mandate likely to 

result in the expenditure by State, local, 

or tribal governments, in the aggregate, 

or by the private sector, of $100 million 

or more annually (adjusted for inflation 

with a base year of 1995). This portion 

of the preamble summarizes the FAA’s 

analysis of the economic impacts of this 

final rule. 

Department of Transportation (DOT) 

Order 2100.5 prescribes policies and 

procedures for simplification, analysis, 

and review of regulations. If the 

expected cost impact is so minimal that 

a proposed or final rule does not 

warrant a full evaluation, this order 

permits that a statement to that effect 

and the basis for it to be included in the 

preamble if a full regulatory evaluation 

of the cost and benefits is not prepared. 

Such a determination has been made for 

this final rule. The reasoning for this 

determination follows: 

This rule extends, by an additional 

two years, the prohibition by SFAR No. 

112 of flight operations within the 

Tripoli (HLLL) Flight Information 

Region (FIR) by all: U.S. air carriers, 

U.S. commercial operators; persons 

exercising the privileges of an airman 

certificate issued by the FAA, except 

when such persons are operating a U.S.- 

registered aircraft for a foreign air 

carrier; and operators of U.S.-registered 

civil aircraft, except operators of such 

aircraft that are foreign air carriers. 

Because of the civil war that was 

ongoing in Libya when SFAR No. 112 

was issued, the FAA believed that few, 

if any, operators were operating in the 

Tripoli (HLLL) FIR. Consequently, the 

FAA found the costs of SFAR No. 112 

to be minimal. Given the continuing 

threats to civil aviation in the Tripoli 

(HLLL) FIR described in the Background 

section of this final rule, including but 

not limited to ongoing fighting 

involving various groups, the FAA has 

determined that the costs of continuing 

to prohibit U.S. civil flights in the 

Tripoli FIR are still minimal. These 

minimal costs are exceeded by the 

benefits of avoiding the significant 

hazards to civil aviation detailed above 

in the Background section of this 

preamble. 

In conducting these analyses, FAA 

has determined this final rule is a 

‘‘significant regulatory action,’’ as 

defined in section 3(f) of Executive 

Order 12866, because it raises novel 

policy issues contemplated under that 

executive order. The rule is also 

‘‘significant’’ as defined in DOT’s 

Regulatory Policies and Procedures. The 

final rule, if adopted, will not have a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities, 

will not create unnecessary obstacles to 

international trade and will not impose 

an unfunded mandate on state, local, or 

tribal governments, or on the private 

sector. 

A. Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 

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

a principle of regulatory issuance that 

agencies shall endeavor, consistent with 

the objectives of the rule and of 

applicable statutes, to fit regulatory and 

informational requirements to the scale 

of the businesses, organizations, and 

governmental jurisdictions subject to 

regulation. To achieve this principle, 

agencies are required to solicit and 

consider flexible regulatory proposals 

and to explain the rationale for their 

actions to assure that such proposals are 

given serious consideration.’’ The RFA 

covers a wide-range of small entities, 

including small businesses, not-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 


TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
15506 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 56 / Tuesday, March 24, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 

the head of the agency may so certify 

and a regulatory flexibility analysis is 

not required. The certification must 

include a statement providing the 

factual basis for this determination, and 

the reasoning should be clear. 

As discussed above, the FAA 

estimates the costs of this rule will be 

minimal. Therefore, as provided in 

section 605(b), the head of the FAA 

certifies that this rulemaking will not 

result in a significant economic impact 

on a substantial number of small 

entities. 

B. International Trade Impact 

Assessment 

The Trade Agreements Act of 1979 

(Pub. L. 96–39), as amended, prohibits 

Federal agencies from establishing 

standards or engaging in related 

activities that create unnecessary 

obstacles to the foreign commerce of the 

United States. Pursuant to this Act, the 

establishment of standards is not 

considered an unnecessary obstacle to 

the foreign commerce of the United 

States, so long as the standard has a 

legitimate domestic objective, such as 

the protection of safety, and does not 

operate in a manner that excludes 

imports that meet this objective. The 

statute also requires consideration of 

international standards and, where 

appropriate, that they be the basis for 

U.S. standards. The FAA has assessed 

the potential effect of this final rule and 

determined that its purpose is to protect 

the safety of U.S. civil aviation from 

potential hazards outside the U.S. 

Therefore, the rule is in compliance 

with the Trade Agreements Act. 

C. Unfunded Mandates Assessment 

Title II of the Unfunded Mandates 

Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4) 

requires each Federal agency to prepare 

a written statement assessing the effects 

of any Federal mandate in a proposed or 

final agency rule that may result in an 

expenditure of $100 million or more (in 

1995 dollars) in any one year by State, 

local, and tribal governments, in the 

aggregate, or by the private sector; such 

a mandate is deemed to be a ‘‘significant 

regulatory action.’’ The FAA currently 

uses an inflation-adjusted value of 

$151.0 million in lieu of $100 million. 

This final rule does not contain such 

a mandate; therefore, the requirements 

of Title II of the Act do not apply. 

D. Paperwork Reduction Act 

The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 

(44 U.S.C. 3507(d)) requires that the 

FAA consider the impact of paperwork 

and other information collection 

burdens imposed on the public. The 

FAA has determined that there is no 

new requirement for information 

collection associated with this 

immediately adopted final rule. 

E. International Compatibility and 

Cooperation 

In keeping with U.S. obligations 

under the Convention on International 

Civil Aviation, it is FAA policy to 

conform to International Civil Aviation 

Organization (ICAO) Standards and 

Recommended Practices to the 

maximum extent practicable. The FAA 

has determined that there are no ICAO 

Standards and Recommended Practices 

that correspond to this regulation. 

F. Environmental Analysis 

FAA Order 1050.1E identifies FAA 

actions that are categorically excluded 

from preparation of an environmental 

assessment or environmental impact 

statement under the National 

Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) in the 

absence of extraordinary circumstances. 

The FAA has determined this 

rulemaking action qualifies for the 

categorical exclusion identified in 

paragraph 312f of this order and 

involves no extraordinary 

circumstances. 

The FAA has reviewed the 

implementation of the SFAR and 

determined it is categorically excluded 

from further environmental review 

according to FAA Order 1050.1E, 

‘‘Environmental Impacts: Policies and 

Procedures,’’ paragraph 312f. The FAA 

has examined possible extraordinary 

circumstances and determined that no 

such circumstances exist. After careful 

and thorough consideration of the 

action, the FAA finds that this Federal 

action does not require preparation of 

an Environmental Assessment or 

Environmental Impact Statement in 

accordance with the requirements of 

NEPA, Council on Environmental 

Quality (CEQ) regulations, and FAA 

Order 1050.1E. 

IV. Executive Order Determinations 

A. Executive Order 13132, Federalism 

The FAA has analyzed this 

immediately adopted final rule under 

the principles and criteria of Executive 

Order 13132, Federalism. The agency 

has determined that this action would 

not have a substantial direct effect on 

the States, or the relationship between 

the Federal Government and the States, 

or on the distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government, and, therefore, 

would not have Federalism 

implications. 

B. Executive Order 13211, Regulations 

That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use 

The FAA analyzed this immediately 

adopted final rule under Executive 

Order 13211, Actions Concerning 

Regulations that Significantly Affect 

Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use 

(May 18, 2001). The agency has 

determined that it would not be a 

‘‘significant energy action’’ under the 

executive order and would not be likely 

to have a significant adverse effect on 

the supply, distribution, or use of 

energy. 

C. Executive Order 13609, Promoting 

International Regulatory Cooperation 

Executive Order 13609, Promoting 

International Regulatory Cooperation, 

(77 FR 26413, May 4, 2012) promotes 

international regulatory cooperation to 

meet shared challenges involving 

health, safety, labor, security, 

environmental, and other issues and to 

reduce, eliminate, or prevent 

unnecessary differences in regulatory 

requirements. The FAA has analyzed 

this action under the policies and 

agency responsibilities of Executive 

Order 13609, and has determined that 

this action would have no effect on 

international regulatory cooperation. 

V. Additional Information 

A. Availability of Rulemaking 

Documents 

An electronic copy of rulemaking 

documents may be obtained from the 

Internet by— 

• Searching the Federal eRulemaking 

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

• Visiting the FAA’s Regulations and 

Policies Web page at http://

www.faa.gov/regulations_policies or 

• Accessing the Government Printing 

Office’s Web page at http://

www.fdsys.gov. 

Copies may also be obtained by 

sending a request to the Federal 

Aviation Administration, Office of 

Rulemaking, ARM–1, 800 Independence 

Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591, or 

by calling (202) 267–9680. Please 

identify the docket or amendment 

number of this rulemaking in your 

request. 

All documents the FAA considered in 

developing this rule, including 

economic analyses and technical 

reports, may be accessed from the 

Internet through the Federal 

eRulemaking Portal referenced above. 

B. Small Business Regulatory 

Enforcement Fairness Act 

The Small Business Regulatory 

Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 


TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 56 / Tuesday, March 24, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 15507 

1Enhancing Protections Afforded Customers and 

Customer Funds Held by Futures Commission 

Merchants and Derivatives Clearing Organizations, 

Final Rule, 78 FR 68506 (Nov. 14, 2013) (amending 

17 CFR parts 1, 3, 22, 30 and 140). 

2See 17 CFR 1.22(c)(3)(i). As defined in 

Regulation 1.22(c)(1), a customer’s account is 

‘‘undermargined,’’ when the value of the customer 

funds for a customer’s account is less than the total 

amount of collateral required by derivatives 

clearing organizations for that account’s contracts. 

See 78 FR 68513, n.30. 

3See 17 CFR 1.22(c)(5)(ii); See 78 FR at 68578. 

4See 17 CFR 1.22(c)(5)(iii)(A). 

5See 17 CFR 1.22(c)(5)(iii)(C). 

6Residual Interest Deadline for Futures 

Commission Merchants, Notice of Proposed 

Rulemaking, 79 FR 68148 (Nov. 14, 2014) 

(amending 17 CFR part 1). 

(SBREFA) requires FAA to comply with 

small entity requests for information or 

advice about compliance with statutes 

and regulations within its jurisdiction. 

A small entity with questions regarding 

this document may contact its local 

FAA official, or the person listed under 

the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT

heading at the beginning of the 

preamble. To find out more about 

SBREFA on the Internet, visit 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, Libya. 

The Amendment 

In consideration of the foregoing, the 

Federal Aviation Administration 

amends chapter I of title 14, Code of 

Federal Regulations as follows: 

PART 91—GENERAL OPERATING AND 

FLIGHT RULES 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 91 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g), 1155, 

40101, 40103, 40105, 40113, 40120, 44101, 

44111, 44701, 44704, 44709, 44711, 44712, 

44715, 44716, 44717, 44722, 46306, 46315, 

46316, 46504, 46506–46507, 47122, 47508, 

47528–47531, 47534, articles 12 and 29 of the 

Convention on International Civil Aviation 

(61 Stat. 1180), (126 Stat. 11). 

■ 2. In § 91.1603, revise paragraphs (c) 

and (e) to read as follows: 

§ 91.1603 Special Federal Aviation 

Regulation No. 112—Prohibition Against 

Certain Flights Within the Tripoli (HLLL) 

Flight Information Region (FIR). 

* * * * * 

(c) Permitted operations. This section 

does not prohibit persons described in 

paragraph (a) of this section from 

conducting flight operations within the 

Tripoli (HLLL) FIR under the following 

conditions: 

(1) Flight operations are conducted 

under a contract, grant, or cooperative 

agreement with a department, agency, or 

instrumentality of the U.S. government 

(or under a subcontract between the 

prime contractor of the department, 

agency, or instrumentality, and the 

person described in paragraph (a) of this 

section), with the approval of the FAA, 

or under an exemption issued by the 

FAA. The FAA will process requests for 

approval or exemption in a timely 

manner, with the order of preference 

being: First, for those operations in 

support of U.S. government-sponsored 

activities; second, for those operations 

in support of government-sponsored 

activities of a foreign country with the 

support of a U.S. government 

department, agency, or instrumentality; 

and third, for all other operations. 

(2) [Reserved] 

* * * * * 

(e) Expiration. This Special Federal 

Aviation Regulation will remain in 

effect until March 20, 2017. The FAA 

may amend, rescind, or extend this 

Special Federal Aviation Regulation as 

necessary. 

Issued in Washington, DC, under the 

authority of 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 40101(d)(1), 

40105(b)(1)(A), and 44701(a)(5), on March 19, 

2015. 

Michael P. Huerta, 

Administrator. 

[FR Doc. 2015–06697 Filed 3–20–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING 

COMMISSION 

17 CFR Part 1 

RIN 3038–AE22 

Residual Interest Deadline for Futures 

Commission Merchants 

AGENCY: Commodity Futures Trading 

Commission. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Commodity Futures 

Trading Commission (‘‘Commission’’ or 

‘‘CFTC’’) is amending its regulations to 

remove the December 31, 2018 

automatic termination date for the 

phased-in compliance schedule for 

futures commission merchants 

(‘‘FCMs’’) and provides assurance that 

the residual interest deadline, as 

defined in the regulations (‘‘Residual 

Interest Deadline’’), will only be revised 

through a separate Commission 

rulemaking. 

DATES: The final rule is effective May 

26, 2015. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Division of Swap Dealer and 

Intermediary Oversight: Thomas Smith, 

Acting Director, 202–418–5495, tsmith@

cftc.gov; Jennifer Bauer, Special 

Counsel, 202–418–5472, jbauer@

cftc.gov; Joshua Beale, AttorneyAdvisor, 202–418–5446, jbeale@

cftc.gov, Three Lafayette Centre, 1155 

21st Street NW., Washington, DC 20581. 

Division of Clearing and Risk: Kirsten 

V.K. Robbins, Associate Chief Counsel, 

202–418–5313, krobbins@cftc.gov, 

Three Lafayette Centre, 1155 21st Street 

NW., Washington, DC 20581. 

Office of the Chief Economist: 

Stephen Kane, Research Economist, 

202–418–5911, skane@cftc.gov, Three 

Lafayette Centre, 1155 21st Street NW., 

Washington, DC 20581. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

On October 30, 2013, the Commission 

amended Regulation 1.22 to enhance the 

safety of funds deposited by customers 

with FCMs as margin for futures 

transactions.1 The amendments require 

an FCM to maintain its own capital 

(hereinafter referred to as the FCM’s 

‘‘Residual Interest’’) in customer 

segregated accounts in an amount equal 

to or greater than its customers’ 

aggregate undermargined amounts.2 The 

Commission established a phased-in 

compliance schedule for Regulation 

1.22 with an initial Residual Interest 

Deadline of 6:00 p.m. Eastern Time on 

the date of the settlement referenced in 

Regulation 1.22(c)(2)(i) or (c)(4) (the 

‘‘Settlement Date’’), beginning 

November 14, 2014.3 Amended 

Regulation 1.22 also directs staff to host 

a public roundtable and publish a report 

for public comment by May 16, 2016 

addressing, to the extent information is 

practically available, the practicability 

(for both FCMs and customers) of 

moving the Residual Interest Deadline 

from 6:00 p.m. Eastern Time on the 

Settlement Date, to the time of 

settlement or to some other time of day.4

Furthermore, amended Regulation 1.22 

provides that, absent Commission 

action, the phased-in compliance period 

for the Residual Interest Deadline 

automatically terminates on December 

31, 2018.5 In the case of such automatic 

termination, the Residual Interest 

Deadline would change to the time of 

settlement on the Settlement Date. 

II. The Proposal 

On November 3, 2014, the 

Commission proposed to revise 

Regulation 1.22 to remove the December 

31, 2018 automatic termination of the 

phase-in compliance period.6 In the 

NPRM, the Commission stated the 

intention to retain the Residual Interest 


TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES