Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 248 / Monday, December 29, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 77857 

FEDERAL HOUSING FINANCE 

AGENCY 

12 CFR Part 1291 

Federal Home Loan Banks’ Affordable 

Housing Program 

CFR Correction 

In Title 12 of the Code of Federal 

Regulations, Part 1100 to End, revised as 

of January 1, 2014, on page 344, in 

§ 1291.5, in paragraphs (c)(13)(iii)(A) 

and (B) remove the term ‘‘951.9 of this 

part’’ and add ‘‘1291.9’’ in its place, and 

on page 345, in paragraph (c)(14)(iii), 

remove the term ‘‘951.8, and 951.9, 

respectively, of this part’’ and add in its 

place ‘‘1291.8, and 1291.9’’. 

[FR Doc. 2014–30469 Filed 12–24–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 1505–01–D 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 65 

[Docket No.: FAA–FAA–2014–1000; Amdt. 

No. 65–56A] 

RIN 2120–AK40 

Elimination of the Air Traffic Control 

Tower Operator Certificate for 

Controllers Who Hold a Federal 

Aviation Administration Credential 

With a Tower Rating; Correction 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Final rule; request for 

comments; correction. 

SUMMARY: The FAA is correcting a final 

rule with request for comments, 

published on December 16, 2014 (79 FR 

74607). In that final rule, the FAA 

amended its regulations to eliminate the 

requirement for an air traffic control 

tower operator to hold a control tower 

operator certificate if the individual also 

holds a Federal Aviation Administration 

Credential with a tower rating (FAA 

Credential). In that document, the FAA 

inadvertently made an error in the part 

heading for 14 CFR part 65. This 

document corrects that error. 

DATES: This correction will become 

effective on February 17, 2015. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

technical questions concerning this 

action, contact Michele Cappelle, Air 

Traffic Safety Oversight Service, Federal 

Aviation Administration, 800 

Independence Avenue SW., 

Washington, DC 20591; telephone (202) 

267–5205; email michele.cappelle@

faa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

On December 16, 2014, the FAA 

published a final rule with request for 

comments, entitled ‘‘Elimination of the 

Air Traffic Control Tower Operator 

Certificate for Controllers Who Hold a 

Federal Aviation Administration 

Credential with a Tower Rating’’ (79 

FR74607). 

In that final rule, the FAA revised the 

requirement for an air traffic control 

tower operator to hold a control tower 

operator certificate if the individual also 

holds a Federal Aviation Administration 

Credential with a tower rating (FAA 

Credential). In that final rule, the FAA 

inadvertently printed the incorrect part 

heading for part 65 of Title 14, Code of 

Federal Regulations. 

Correction 

In FR Doc. 2014–29386, beginning on 

page 74611 in the Federal Register of 

December 16, 2014, make the following 

correction. 

Correction to Regulatory Text 

1. On page 74611, in the third 

column, revise the heading of Part 65 to 

read as follows: 

PART 65—CERTIFICATION: AIRMEN 

OTHER THAN FLIGHT 

CREWMEMBERS 

* * * * * 

Issued under authority provided by 49 

U.S.C. 106(f), in Washington, DC, on 

December 19, 2014. 

Brenda D. Courtney, 

Acting Director, Office of Rulemaking . 

[FR Doc. 2014–30269 Filed 12–24–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 91 

[Docket No.: FAA–2014–0225; Amdt. No. 

91–331A] 

RIN 2120–AK56 

Prohibition Against Certain Flights in 

the Simferopol (UKFV) and 

Dnipropetrovsk (UKDV) Flight 

Information Regions (FIRs) 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Immediately adopted final rule. 

SUMMARY: This action amends Special 

Federal Aviation Regulation (SFAR) No. 

113, ‘‘Prohibition Against Certain 

Flights in the Simferopol (UKFV) Flight 

Information Region (FIR),’’ which 

prohibited certain flight operations in a 

portion of the Simferopol (UKFV) 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. This 

action expands the area in which flight 

operations by persons subject to SFAR 

No. 113 are prohibited, to include all of 

the Simferopol (UKFV) FIR, as well as 

the entire Dnipropetrovsk (UKDV) FIR. 

The FAA finds this action to be 

necessary to prevent a potential hazard 

to persons and aircraft engaged in such 

flight operations. 

DATES: This final rule is effective on 

December 29, 2014. 

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 Robert Frenzel, Office of 

the Chief Counsel, AGC–200, Federal 

Aviation Administration, 800 

Independence Avenue SW., 

Washington, DC 20591; telephone (202) 

267–7638; email robert.frenzel@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 potential 

hazard to civil aviation that now exists 

in the Simferopol (UKFV) and 

Dnepropetrovsk (UKDV) FIRs, as 

described in the Background section of 

this Notice. 

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 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES

77858 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 248 / Monday, December 29, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 

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 prohibits the 

persons subject to paragraph (a) of SFAR 

No. 113 from conducting flight 

operations in the entirety of the 

Simferopol (UKFV) and Dnipropetrovsk 

(UKDV) FIRs due to the potential hazard 

to the safety of such persons’ flight 

operations, as described in the 

‘‘Background’’ section of this document. 

I. Overview of Immediately Adopted 

Final Rule Amending SFAR No. 113 

This action prohibits flight operations 

in the entirety of the Simferopol (UKFV) 

and Dnipropetrovsk (UKDV) FIRs 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 

prevent a potential hazard to persons 

and aircraft engaged in such flight 

operations. 

II. Background 

On April 23, 2014, the FAA issued 

SFAR No. 113, § 91.1607, which 

prohibited flight operations in a portion 

of the Simferopol (UKFV) 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. On 

March 28, 2014, the Russian Federation 

had issued a Notice-to-Airmen 

(NOTAM) purporting to establish 

unilaterally a new FIR, effective April 3, 

2014, in a significant portion of the 

Simferopol (UKFV) FIR, which included 

sovereign Ukrainian airspace over the 

Crimean Peninsula and the associated 

Ukrainian territorial sea, as well as 

international airspace managed by 

Ukraine over the Black Sea and the Sea 

of Azov. Ukraine rejected the Russian 

Federation’s purported establishment of 

a new FIR within the existing 

Simferopol (UKFV) FIR, established a 

prohibited area over the Crimean 

Peninsula for flight operations below 

flight level 290, and closed various air 

traffic services (ATS) route segments. 

The Russian Federation responded by 

issuing a NOTAM that rejected and 

directly conflicted with Ukrainian 

NOTAMs concerning the establishment 

of the prohibited area and the route 

segment closures. On April 2, 2014, the 

International Civil Aviation 

Organization’s (ICAO’s) Regional 

Director for Europe and the North 

Atlantic Regions issued a state letter to 

countries and their civil aviation 

authorities highlighting the possible 

existence of serious risks to the safety of 

international civil flights and 

recommending that consideration be 

given to implementing measures to 

avoid the airspace and to 

circumnavigate the Simferopol (UKFV) 

FIR with alternative routings. 

When SFAR No. 113, § 91.1607, was 

issued, the FAA viewed the possibility 

of civil aircraft receiving confusing and 

conflicting air traffic control 

instructions from both Ukrainian and 

Russian ATS providers when operating 

in the portion of the Simferopol (UKFV) 

FIR covered by SFAR No. 113, 

§ 91.1607, as an unsafe condition that 

presented a potential hazard to civil 

flight operations in the disputed 

airspace. Because political and military 

tensions between Ukraine and the 

Russian Federation remained high, the 

FAA was also concerned that 

compliance with air traffic control 

instructions issued by the authorities of 

one country could result in a civil 

aircraft being misidentified as a threat 

and intercepted or otherwise engaged by 

air defense forces of the other country. 

The FAA continues to have these 

concerns. 

The FAA is now expanding SFAR No. 

113, § 91.1607, due to safety and 

national security concerns regarding 

flight operations in the Simferopol 

(UKFV) and Dnipropetrovsk (UKDV) 

FIRs. The ongoing conflict in the region 

poses a significant threat to civil 

aviation operations in these FIRs. In 

addition to a series of attacks on fixedwing and rotary-wing military aircraft 

flying at lower altitudes, a Ukrainian 

An-26 flying at 21,000 feet southeast of 

Luhansk was shot down on July 14, 

2014, and a Malaysia Airlines Boeing 

777 was shot down on July 17, 2014, 

while flying over Ukraine at 33,000 feet 

just west of the Russian border. 

Approximately 290 passengers and crew 

perished. The use of weapons capable of 

targeting and shooting down aircraft 

flying on civil air routes at cruising 

altitudes poses a significantly dangerous 

threat to civil aircraft flying in the 

Simferopol (UKFV) and Dnipropetrovsk 

(UKDV) FIRs. 

In response to this situation, the FAA 

issued a NOTAM on July 18, 2014 

(UTC), to prohibit operations within the 

Simferopol (UKFV) and Dnipropetrovsk 

(UKDV) FIRs 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. Given the uncertainty about 

when the conflict in the region will end, 

this amendment follows up on that 

action. 

The FAA will continue to actively 

evaluate the area and the airports in the 

region to determine to what extent U.S. 

civil operators may be able to safely 

operate in the region. Amendments to 

the SFAR may be appropriate if the risk 

to aviation safety and security changes. 

The FAA may amend or rescind the 

SFAR as necessary prior to its 

expiration date. This amendment also 

makes a few technical corrections to 

SFAR No. 113, § 91.1607. 

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. However, we will accept any 

comments regarding the impact of this 

action for consideration in any future 

rulemaking action to amend or rescind 

this SFAR. 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. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 248 / Monday, December 29, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 77859 

1 If and when, in connection with an operator’s 

contract with a department, agency, or 

instrumentality of the U.S. Government, an 

operation is covered by a non-premium war risk 

insurance policy issued by FAA under 49 U.S.C. 

44305, coverage under that operator’s FAA 

premium war risk insurance policy is suspended as 

a condition contained in that premium policy. 

Approval Based on Authorization 

Request of an Agency of the United 

States Government 

On April 23, 2014, the FAA put an 

approval process in place as part of 

SFAR No. 113, § 91.1607. In this rule, 

the approval process has been expanded 

to address flight operations by persons 

covered by SFAR No. 113, § 91.1607, in 

the entirety of the Simferopol (UKFV) 

and Dnipropetrovsk (UKDV) FIRs. If a 

department, agency, or instrumentality 

of the U.S. Government determines that 

it has a critical need to engage any 

person covered under SFAR No. 113, 

§ 91.1607, including a U.S. air carrier or 

a U.S. commercial operator, to conduct 

a charter to transport civilian or military 

passengers or cargo in the Simferopol 

(UKFV) FIR and/or the Dnipropetrovsk 

(UKDV) FIR, that department, agency, or 

instrumentality may request the FAA to 

approve persons covered under SFAR 

No. 113, § 91.1607, to conduct such 

operations. An approval request must be 

made to the FAA in a letter signed by 

an appropriate senior official of the 

requesting department, agency, or 

instrumentality of the U.S. Government. 

The letter must be sent to the Associate 

Administrator for Aviation Safety 

(AVS–1), 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 approval request is 

granted. If a requestor wishes to make 

an electronic submission to the FAA, 

the requestor should contact the Air 

Transportation Division, Flight 

Standards Service, at (202) 267–8166, to 

obtain the appropriate email address. A 

single letter may request approval from 

the FAA for multiple persons covered 

under SFAR No. 113, § 91.1607, and/or 

for multiple flight operations. To the 

extent known, the letter must identify 

the person(s) expected to be covered 

under the SFAR on whose behalf the 

U.S. Government department, agency, or 

instrumentality is seeking FAA 

approval, and it must describe— 

• The proposed operation(s), 

including the nature of the mission 

being supported; 

• The service to be provided by the 

person(s) covered by the SFAR; 

• To the extent known, the specific 

locations within the Simferopol (UKFV) 

FIR and/or the Dnipropetrovsk (UKDV) 

FIR covered by this SFAR where the 

proposed operation(s) will be 

conducted; 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 its 

proposed operations (e.g., pre-mission 

planning and briefing, in-flight, and 

post-flight). 

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 

with whom its prime contractor has a 

subcontract(s)) for specific flight 

operations in the Simferopol (UKFV) 

FIR and/or the Dnipropetrovsk (UKDV) 

FIR. Additional such operators may be 

identified to the FAA at any time after 

the FAA approval is issued. Updated 

lists should be sent to the email address 

to be obtained from the Air 

Transportation Division, (202) 267– 

8166. 

If an approval request includes 

classified information, requestors may 

contact Aviation Safety Inspector Will 

Gonzalez for instructions on submitting 

it to the FAA. His contact information 

is listed in the ‘‘For Further Information 

Contact’’ section of this final rule. 

FAA approval of an operation under 

SFAR No. 113, § 91.1607, does not 

relieve persons subject to this SFAR of 

their responsibility to comply with all 

applicable FAA rules and regulations. 

Operators of civil aircraft will have to 

comply with the conditions of their 

certificate and Operations Specifications 

(OpSpecs). Operators will also have to 

comply with all rules and regulations of 

other U.S. Government departments or 

agencies that may apply to the proposed 

operation, including, but not limited to, 

the Transportation Security Regulations 

issued by the Transportation Security 

Administration, Department of 

Homeland Security. 

Approval Conditions 

On April 23, 2014, the FAA put 

approval conditions in place as part of 

SFAR No. 113, § 91.1607. The approval 

conditions will now apply to flight 

operations conducted by persons 

covered by SFAR No. 113, § 91.1607, in 

the entirety of the Simferopol (UKFV) 

and Dnipropetrovsk (UKDV) FIRs. If the 

FAA approves the request, the FAA’s 

Aviation Safety Organization (AVS) 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) The approval will specify that the 

operation is not eligible for coverage 

under a premium war risk insurance 

policy issued by the FAA under chapter 

443 of title 49, U.S. Code.1

(3) If the proposed operation would 

have been covered by a premium war 

risk insurance policy issued by the FAA 

under chapter 443 of title 49, U.S. Code, 

but for SFAR No. 113, § 91.1607, the 

FAA will issue an endorsement to that 

premium policy that specifically 

excludes coverage for any operations 

into, out of, within, or through the 

Simferopol (UKFV) and Dnipropetrovsk 

(UKDV) FIRs, including operations 

under a flight plan that contemplates 

landing in or taking off from Ukrainian 

territory within those two FIRs. The 

endorsement to the premium policy will 

take effect before the approval’s 

effective date. The exclusion specified 

in the endorsement will remain in effect 

as long as this SFAR remains in effect, 

notwithstanding the issuance of any 

approval under, or exemption from, this 

SFAR (the chapter 443 premium policy 

refers to such approval as a ‘‘waiver’’ 

and such exemption as an ‘‘exclusion’’). 

(4) Before any approval takes effect, 

the operator must submit to the FAA a 

written release of the U.S. Government 

(including but not limited to the United 

States of America, as Insurer) from all 

damages, claims, and liabilities, 

including without limitation legal fees 

and expenses, and the operator’s 

agreement to indemnify the U.S. 

Government (including but not limited 

to the United States of America, as 

Insurer) 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 Simferopol 

(UKFV) FIR and/or Dnipropetrovsk 

(UKDV) FIR. The release and agreement 

to indemnify do not preclude an 

operator from raising a claim under an 

applicable non-premium war risk 

insurance policy issued by the FAA 

under chapter 443. 

(5) Other conditions that the FAA 

may specify, including those that may 

be imposed in OpSpecs. 

If the proposed operation or 

operations are approved, the FAA will 

issue OpSpecs to the certificate holder 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES

77860 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 248 / Monday, December 29, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 

authorizing these operations and will 

notify a department, agency, or 

instrumentality that requests FAA 

approval of civil flight operations to be 

conducted by one or more persons 

described in paragraph (a) of SFAR No. 

113, § 91.1607, of any additional 

conditions beyond those contained in 

the approval letter, if the operations are 

approved. 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. 

113, § 91.1607, on whose behalf the 

department, agency, or instrumentality 

requests FAA approval. 

Request for Exemptions 

The FAA included a section about 

requests for exemption when it issued 

SFAR No. 113, § 91.1607, on April 23, 

2014. The section concerning requests 

for exemption has been expanded to 

address flight operations by persons 

covered by SFAR No. 113, § 91.1607, in 

both the Simferopol (UKFV) and the 

Dnipropetrovsk (UKDV) FIRs. Any 

operations not conducted under the 

approval process set forth above must be 

conducted under an exemption from 

SFAR No. 113, § 91.1607. A request by 

any person covered under SFAR No. 

113, § 91.1607, 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 

Simferopol (UKFV) FIR and/or the 

Dnipropetrovsk (UKDV) 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, FAA’s endorsement of 

any premium war risk insurance policy 

issued under chapter 443 of title 49, 

U.S. Code, and the release and 

agreement to indemnify, all as referred 

to above, will be required as a condition 

of any exemption that may be issued 

under SFAR No. 113, § 91.1607. 

The FAA recognizes that operations 

that may be affected by SFAR No. 113, 

§ 91.1607, including this amendment, 

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 Evaluation, Regulatory 

Flexibility Determination, International 

Trade Impact Assessment, and 

Unfunded Mandates Assessment 

Changes to Federal regulations must 

undergo several economic analyses. 

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), as codified in 

5 U.S.C. 603, 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 codified in 19 

U.S.C. 2532, 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 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 prohibits flights in both the 

Simferopol (UKFV) and Dnipropetrovsk 

(UKDV) FIRs due to the significant 

hazards to civil aviation described in 

the Background section of this 

preamble. The alternative flight routes 

result in some additional fuel and 

operations costs to the operators, as well 

as some costs attributed to passenger 

time. However, no U.S. operators are 

now operating in the portion of the 

Simferopol (UKFV) FIR for which flight 

operations have already been prohibited 

by SFAR No. 113. Moreover, almost all 

U.S. operators had already voluntarily 

ceased their operations in these two 

FIRs prior to the issuance of the FAA 

NOTAM on July 18, 2014 (UTC), 

because of the significant hazards 

involved. Accordingly, the incremental 

costs of this proposed amendment to 

SFAR No. 113 are minimal. By 

prohibiting unsafe flights, the benefits of 

this rule will exceed the minimal flight 

deviation costs. 

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 

(Public Law 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. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 248 / Monday, December 29, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 77861 

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. 

U.S. certificate holders affected by 

this final rule are predominately large 

passenger and all-cargo carriers. There 

are some small entity operators flying 

under U.S. government contract and 

some operators providing flights that 

support oil operations that the FAA 

anticipates will also be affected. Many 

of these operations are conducted by 

small entities, but due to the immediacy 

of the potential harm to U.S. certificate 

holders, their passengers, crew, and 

cargo, there is not a sufficient amount of 

time to ascertain exact numbers. There 

are likely to be enough such operators 

to be considered a substantial number of 

small entities. The incremental costs of 

this amendment are minimal because 

operators have largely stopped 

overflying this area voluntarily. 

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 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 its purpose is to protect 

the safety of U.S. civil aviation from a 

potential hazard 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 (the ‘‘Chicago 

Convention’’), it is FAA policy to 

conform to 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 these proposed 

regulations. 

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 312(f) and 

involves no extraordinary 

circumstances. 

The FAA has reviewed the 

implementation of the proposed SFAR 

and determined it is categorically 

excluded from further environmental 

review according to FAA Order 1050.1E, 

‘‘Environmental Impacts: Policies and 

Procedures,’’ paragraph 312(f). The FAA 

has examined possible extraordinary 

circumstances and determined that no 

such circumstances exist. After careful 

and thorough consideration of the 

proposed action, the FAA finds that the 

Federal action does not require 

preparation of an EA or EIS 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 

determined that this action will 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, 

does 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 is not a ‘‘significant 

energy action’’ under the executive 

order and it is not 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, 

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. How To Obtain Additional 

Information 

A. Rulemaking Documents 

An electronic copy of a rulemaking 

document may be obtained by using the 

Internet— 

1. Search the Federal Document 

Management System (FDMS) Portal 

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

2. Visit the FAA’s Regulations and 

Policies Web page at http://

www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/ or 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES

77862 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 248 / Monday, December 29, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 

3. Access the Government Printing 

Office’s Web page at: http://

www.gpo.gov/fdsys/. 

Copies may also be obtained by 

sending a request (identified by notice, 

amendment, or docket number of this 

rulemaking) to the Federal Aviation 

Administration, Office of Rulemaking, 

ARM–1, 800 Independence Avenue 

SW., Washington, DC 20591, or by 

calling (202) 267–9680. 

B. Small Business Regulatory 

Enforcement Fairness Act 

The Small Business Regulatory 

Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 

(SBREFA) requires FAA to comply with 

small entity requests for information or 

advice about compliance with statutes 

and regulations within its jurisdiction. 

A small entity with questions regarding 

this document may contact its local 

FAA official, or the person listed under 

the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT

section 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, 

Ukraine. 

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 is 

revised to read as follows: 

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

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

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

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

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

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

Convention on International Civil Aviation 

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

■ 2. Revise § 91.1607 to read as follows: 

§ 91.1607 Special Federal Aviation 

Regulation No. 113—Prohibition Against 

Certain Flights in the Simferopol (UKFV) 

and the Dnipropetrovsk (UKDV) Flight 

Information Regions (FIRs). 

(a) Applicability. This Special Federal 

Aviation Regulation (SFAR) applies to 

the following persons: 

(1) All U.S. air carriers and U.S. 

commercial operators; 

(2) All persons exercising the 

privileges of an airman certificate issued 

by the FAA, except such persons 

operating U.S.-registered aircraft for a 

foreign air carrier; and 

(3) All operators of U.S.-registered 

civil aircraft, except where the operator 

of such aircraft is a foreign air carrier. 

(b) Flight prohibition. Except as 

provided in paragraphs (c) and (d) of 

this section, no person described in 

paragraph (a) of this section may 

conduct flight operations in the 

Simferopol (UKFV) FIR or the 

Dnipropetrovsk (UKDV) FIR. 

(c) Permitted operations. This section 

does not prohibit persons described in 

paragraph (a) of this section from 

conducting flight operations in either or 

both of the Simferopol (UKFV) and the 

Dnipropetrovsk (UKDV) FIRs, provided 

that such 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 subject 

to paragraph (a)), 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. 

(d) Emergency situations. In an 

emergency that requires immediate 

decision and action for the safety of the 

flight, the pilot in command of an 

aircraft may deviate from this section to 

the extent required by that emergency. 

Except for U.S. air carriers and 

commercial operators that are subject to 

the requirements of 14 CFR parts 119, 

121, 125, or 135, each person who 

deviates from this section must, within 

10 days of the deviation, excluding 

Saturdays, Sundays, and Federal 

holidays, submit to the nearest FAA 

Flight Standards District Office (FSDO) 

a complete report of the operations of 

the aircraft involved in the deviation, 

including a description of the deviation 

and the reasons for it. 

(e) Expiration. This SFAR will remain 

in effect until October 27, 2015. The 

FAA may amend, rescind, or extend this 

SFAR as necessary. 

Issued under authority provided by 49 

U.S.C. 106(f), 40101(d)(1), 40105(b)(1)(A), 

and 44701(a)(5), in Washington, DC, on 

December 19, 2014. 

Michael P. Huerta, 

Administrator. 

[FR Doc. 2014–30365 Filed 12–24–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

Bureau of Industry and Security 

15 CFR Parts 732, 736, 738, 740, 744, 

and 774 

[Docket No. 141027899–4899–01] 

RIN 0694–AG34 

Corrections and Clarifications to the 

Export Administration Regulations 

AGENCY: Bureau of Industry and 

Security, Commerce. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Bureau of Industry and 

Security (BIS) is correcting certain 

provisions of the Export Administration 

Regulations (EAR) that were amended in 

past rulemakings appearing in the 

Federal Register between November 5, 

2007 and October 14, 2014. This final 

rule makes corrections to certain 

provisions to ensure consistency and 

clarity in the regulations. In addition, 

this final rule makes other corrections to 

the EAR to fix typographical errors to 

ensure that the regulations accurately 

reflect the revisions intended by these 

past rulemakings. 

DATES: This rule is effective December 

29, 2014. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Timothy Mooney, Regulatory Policy 

Division, Bureau of Industry and 

Security, Department of Commerce, 

Phone: (202) 482–2440, Fax: (202) 482– 

3355, Email: rpd2@bis.doc.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

The Bureau of Industry and Security 

(BIS) is correcting certain provisions of 

the Export Administration Regulations 

(EAR) that were amended in past 

rulemakings appearing in the Federal 

Register between November 5, 2007 and 

October 14, 2014. In total, this final rule 

makes corrections and clarifications for 

thirteen final rules that amended the 

EAR during this time period. This final 

rule corrects these provisions to 

accurately reflect the revisions intended 

by these past rulemakings. These final 

rulemakings consist of the following: 

Revisions to the Commerce Control List: 

Imposition of Controls on Integrated 

Circuits, Helicopter Landing System 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES