80384 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 192 / Thursday, October 3, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

does not warrant preparation of a 

regulatory evaluation as the anticipated 

impact is so minimal. Since this is a 

routine matter that only affects air traffic 

procedures and air navigation, it is 

certified that this rule, when 

promulgated, does not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities under the 

criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. 

Environmental Review 

The FAA has determined that this 

airspace action of amending RNAV 

Route Q–83 qualifies for categorical 

exclusion under the National 

Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 

4321 et seq.) and its implementing 

regulations at 40 CFR part 1500, and in 

accordance with FAA Order 1050.1F, 

Environmental Impacts: Policies and 

Procedures, paragraph 5–6.5a, which 

categorically excludes from further 

environmental impact review 

rulemaking actions that designate or 

modify classes of airspace areas, 

airways, routes, and reporting points 

(see 14 CFR part 71, Designation of 

Class A, B, C, D, and E Airspace Areas; 

Air Traffic Service Routes; and 

Reporting Points); and paragraph 5– 

6.5b, which categorically excludes from 

further environmental impact review 

‘‘Actions regarding establishment of jet 

routes and Federal airways (see 14 CFR 

71.15, Designation of jet routes and VOR 

Federal airways). . .’’. As such, this 

action is not expected to result in any 

potentially significant environmental 

impacts. In accordance with FAA Order 

1050.1F, paragraph 5–2 regarding 

Extraordinary Circumstances, the FAA 

has reviewed this action for factors and 

circumstances in which a normally 

categorically excluded action may have 

a significant environmental impact 

requiring further analysis. Accordingly, 

the FAA has determined that no 

extraordinary circumstances exist that 

warrant preparation of an 

environmental assessment or 

environmental impact statement. 

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71 

Airspace, Incorporation by reference, 

Navigation (air). 

The Amendment 

In consideration of the foregoing, the 

Federal Aviation Administration 

amends 14 CFR part 71 as follows: 

PART 71—DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, 

B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR 

TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND 

REPORTING POINTS 

■ 1. The authority citation for 14 CFR 

part 71 continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g); 40103, 

40113, 40120; E.O. 10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 

1959–1963 Comp., p. 389. 

§ 71.1 [Amended] 

■ 2. The incorporation by reference in 

14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order JO 7400.11J, 

Airspace Designations and Reporting 

Points, dated July 31, 2024, and 

effective September 15, 2024, is 

amended as follows: 

Paragraph 2006 United States Area 

Navigation Routes. 

* * * * * 

Q–83 JEVED, GA to Greensboro, NC (GSO) [Amended] 

JEVED, GA WP (Lat. 31°15′02.60′′ N, long. 081°03′40.14′′ W) 

ROYCO, GA WP (Lat. 31°35′10.38′′ N, long. 081°02′22.45′′ W) 

WURFL, SC WP (Lat. 32°31′46.59′′ N, long. 081°01′08.07′′ W) 

EFFAY, SC WP (Lat. 34°15′30.67′′ N, long. 080°30′37.94′′ W) 

WHTTL, NC WP (Lat. 35°23′30.04′′ N, long. 080°17′52.25′′ W) 

Greensboro, NC (GSO) VORTAC (Lat. 36°02′44.50′′ N, long. 079°58′34.94′′ W) 

* * * * * 

Issued in Washington, DC, on September 

27, 2024. 

Brian Eric Konie, 

Acting Manager, Rules and Regulations 

Group. 

[FR Doc. 2024–22610 Filed 10–2–24; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 91 

[Docket No. FAA–2020–0874; Amdt. No. 91– 

359B] 

RIN 2120–AL98 

Extension of the Prohibition Against 

Certain Flights in the Tehran Flight 

Information Region (FIR) (OIIX) 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), Department of 

Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: This action extends the 

prohibition against certain flight 

operations in the Tehran Flight 

Information Region (FIR) (OIIX) by all: 

U.S. air carriers; U.S. commercial 

operators; persons exercising the 

privileges of an airman certificate issued 

by the FAA, except when such persons 

are operating U.S.-registered aircraft for 

a foreign air carrier; and operators of 

U.S.-registered civil aircraft, except 

when the operator of such aircraft is a 

foreign air carrier, for an additional 

three years, from October 31, 2024, to 

October 31, 2027. The FAA finds this 

action necessary to address significant 

unacceptable safety-of-flight risks to 

U.S. civil aviation operations that 

continue in the Tehran FIR (OIIX) 

during periods of heightened regional 

tensions and increased military 

activities. The FAA also republishes the 

approval process and exemption 

information for this Special Federal 

Aviation Regulation (SFAR), consistent 

with other recently published flight 

prohibition SFARs. 

DATES: This final rule is effective on 

October 3, 2024. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bill 

Petrak, Flight Standards Service, 

through the Washington Operations 

Center, Federal Aviation 

Administration, 800 Independence 

Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591; 

telephone (202) 267–3203; email 9-FAAOverseasFlightProhibitions@faa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Executive Summary 

This action extends the expiration 

date of SFAR No. 117, § 91.1617 of title 

14, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), 

from October 31, 2024, to October 31, 

2027. SFAR No. 117, § 91.1617, 

prohibits certain flight operations in the 

Tehran FIR (OIIX) by all: U.S. air 

carriers; U.S. commercial operators; 

persons exercising the privileges of an 

airman certificate issued by the FAA, 

except when such persons are operating 

U.S.-registered aircraft for a foreign air 

carrier; and operators of U.S.-registered 

civil aircraft, except when the operator 

of such aircraft is a foreign air carrier. 

The FAA finds this action necessary to 

address significant unacceptable safetyof-flight risks to U.S. civil aviation that 

continue in the Tehran FIR (OIIX) 

during periods of heightened regional 

tensions and increased military 

activities, conditions that led to the 

January 2020 accidental shootdown of 

Ukraine International Airlines Flight 

752 (PS 752) by Iranian air defense 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 192 / Thursday, October 3, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 80385 

forces. The FAA also republishes the 

approval process and exemption 

information for this flight prohibition 

SFAR, consistent with other recently 

published flight prohibition SFARs. 

II. Authority and Good Cause 

A. Authority 

The FAA is responsible for the safety 

of flight in the U.S. and for the safety 

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

civil aircraft, and U.S.-certificated 

airmen throughout the world. Section 

106(f) of title 49, U.S. Code (U.S.C.), 

subtitle I, establishes the FAA 

Administrator’s authority to issue rules 

on aviation safety. Subtitle VII of title 

49, Aviation Programs, describes in 

more detail the scope of the agency’s 

authority. Section 40101(d)(1) provides 

that the Administrator shall consider in 

the public interest, among other matters, 

assigning, maintaining, and enhancing 

safety and security as the highest 

priorities in air commerce. Section 

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

Administrator to exercise this authority 

consistently with the obligations of the 

U.S. Government under international 

agreements. 

The FAA is promulgating this rule 

under the authority described in 49 

U.S.C. 44701, General requirements. 

Under that section, the FAA is charged 

broadly with promoting safe flight of 

U.S. civil aircraft in air commerce by 

prescribing, among other things, 

regulations and minimum standards for 

practices, methods, and procedures that 

the Administrator finds necessary for 

safety in air commerce and national 

security. 

This regulation is within the scope of 

the FAA’s authority because it 

continues to prohibit the persons 

described in paragraph (a) of SFAR No. 

117, § 91.1617, from conducting flight 

operations in the Tehran FIR (OIIX) due 

to the continuing significant hazards to 

the safety of U.S. civil flight operations 

in the Tehran FIR (OIIX) as described in 

the preamble to this final rule. 

B. Good Cause for Immediate Adoption 

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

authorizes agencies to dispense with 

notice and comment procedures for 

rules when the agency for ‘‘good cause’’ 

finds that those procedures are 

‘‘impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary 

to the public interest.’’ Also, section 

553(d) permits agencies, upon a finding 

of good cause, to issue rules with an 

effective date less than 30 days from the 

date of publication. In this instance, the 

FAA finds good cause to forgo notice 

and comment and the delayed effective 

date because they would be 

impracticable and contrary to the public 

interest. 

Providing notice and the opportunity 

for the public to comment here would 

be impracticable. The FAA’s flight 

prohibitions, and any amendments 

thereto, need to include appropriate 

boundaries that reflect the agency’s 

current understanding of the risk 

environment for U.S. civil aviation. This 

allows the FAA to protect the safety of 

U.S. operators’ aircraft and the lives of 

their passengers and crews without 

over-restricting or under-restricting U.S. 

operators’ routing options. However, the 

risk environment for U.S. civil aviation 

in airspace managed by other countries 

with respect to safety of flight is fluid 

in circumstances involving fighting, 

violent extremist and militant activity, 

or periods of heightened tensions, 

particularly where weapons capable of 

targeting or otherwise negatively 

affecting U.S. civil aviation are or may 

be present. This fluidity, and the 

potential for rapid changes in the risks 

to U.S. civil aviation, significantly limits 

how far in advance of a new or amended 

flight prohibition the FAA can usefully 

assess the risk environment. The delay 

that would be occasioned by providing 

an opportunity to comment on this 

action would significantly increase the 

risk that the resulting final action would 

not accurately reflect the current risks to 

U.S. civil aviation associated with the 

situation and thus would not establish 

boundaries for the flight prohibition 

commensurate with those risks. 

While the FAA sought and responded 

to public comments, the boundaries of 

the area in which unacceptable risks to 

the safety of U.S. civil aviation existed 

might change due to: evolving military 

or political circumstances; violent 

extremist and militant group activity; 

the introduction, removal, or 

repositioning of more advanced antiaircraft weapon systems; or other 

factors. As a result, if the situation 

improved while the FAA sought and 

responded to public comments, the rule 

the FAA finalized might be overrestrictive, unnecessarily limiting U.S. 

operators’ routing options and 

potentially causing them to incur 

unnecessary additional fuel and 

operations-related costs, as well as 

potentially causing passengers to incur 

unnecessarily some costs attributed to 

their time. Conversely, if the situation 

deteriorated while the FAA sought and 

responded to public comments, the rule 

the FAA finalized might be underrestrictive, allowing U.S. civil aviation 

to continue operating in areas where 

unacceptable risks to their safety had 

developed. Such an outcome would 

endanger the safety of these aircraft, as 

well as their passengers and crews, 

exposing them to unacceptable risks of 

death, injury, and property damage that 

could occur if a U.S. operator’s aircraft 

were shot down (or otherwise damaged) 

while operating in the Tehran FIR 

(OIIX). 

Alternatively, if the FAA made 

changes to the area in which U.S. civil 

aviation operations would be prohibited 

between a notice of proposed 

rulemaking and a final rule due to 

changed conditions, the version of the 

rule the public commented on would no 

longer reflect the FAA’s current 

assessment of the risk environment for 

U.S. civil aviation. 

In addition, seeking comment would 

be contrary to the public interest 

because some of the rational basis for 

the rulemaking is based upon classified 

information and controlled unclassified 

information not authorized for public 

release. In order to meaningfully 

provide comment on a proposal, the 

public would need access to the basis 

for the agency’s decision-making, which 

the FAA cannot provide. Disclosing 

classified information or controlled 

unclassified information not authorized 

for public release in order to seek 

meaningful comment on the proposal 

would harm the public interest. 

Accordingly, the FAA meaningfully 

seeking comment on the proposal is 

contrary to the public interest. 

Therefore, providing notice and the 

opportunity for comment would be 

impracticable as it would hinder the 

FAA’s ability to maintain appropriate 

flight prohibitions based on up-to-date 

risk assessments of the risks to the 

safety of U.S. civil aviation operations 

in airspace managed by other countries, 

and contrary to the public interest, as 

the FAA cannot protect classified 

information and controlled unclassified 

information not authorized for public 

release and meaningfully seek public 

comment. 

For the same reasons discussed above, 

the potential safety impacts and the 

need for prompt action on up-to-date 

information that is not public would 

make delaying the effective date 

impracticable and contrary to the public 

interest. 

Accordingly, the FAA finds good 

cause exists to forgo notice and 

comment and any delay in the effective 

date for this rule. 

III. Background and Discussion of the 

Final Rule 

The FAA originally issued a 

prohibition on U.S. civil aviation 

operations in the Tehran FIR (OIIX) after 

Iran conducted retaliatory ballistic 

missile strikes targeting U.S. air bases in 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES1
80386 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 192 / Thursday, October 3, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

1Prohibition Against Certain Flights in the 

Tehran Flight Information Region (FIR) (OIIX) final 

rule, 85 FR 68435 (Oct. 29, 2020). 

2 Id. 

3 Id. SFAR No. 117, 14 CFR 91.1617, and this 

rulemaking action are limited in scope to the 

Tehran FIR (OIIX). 

4 Id. 

5 Id. 

6 Id. 

7 Id. 

8Extension of the Prohibition Against Certain 

Flights in the Tehran Flight Information Region 

(FIR) (OIIX) final rule, 87 FR 57379 (Sept. 20, 2022). 

9 Id. 

Iraq on January 7, 2020, following the 

death of Iranian Revolutionary Guard 

Corps (IRGC) Quds Force Commander 

Qassem Soleimani in a U.S. airstrike.1

Due to the heightened military activities 

in the region at that time, including the 

heightened alert status of Iranian 

military forces, and increased political 

tensions in the Middle East, which 

included the potential for further 

escalation, the FAA determined an 

unacceptable risk to U.S. civil aviation 

existed in the Baghdad FIR (ORBB), the 

Tehran FIR (OIIX), and the overwater 

areas of the Persian Gulf and the Gulf of 

Oman due to the potential for 

miscalculation or misidentification.2

To address these immediate safety-offlight hazards, on January 7, 2020, UTC, 

the FAA issued Notices-to-Airmen 

(NOTAMs) KICZ A0001/20, A0002/20, 

and A0003/20, which prohibited U.S. 

civil flight operations in the Baghdad 

FIR (ORBB), the Tehran FIR (OIIX), and 

the overwater airspace above the Persian 

Gulf and the Gulf of Oman, 

respectively.3 Unfortunately, within 

hours after the FAA issued NOTAM 

KICZ A0002/20, Iranian air defense 

forces accidentally shot down PS 752 

shortly after its departure from Tehran 

Imam Khomeini International Airport 

(OIIE).4 These forces apparently 

misidentified the aircraft, which was 

conducting a regularly scheduled 

passenger flight, as a missile threat.5

There were no survivors out of the 176 

passengers and crew. 

Following this tragedy, there was 

uncertainty about how long the hazards 

to civil aviation in the Tehran FIR 

(OIIX) would persist; whether Iran 

would be transparent in its investigation 

into the downing of PS 752; and 

whether Iran would implement changes 

in its air defense command and control 

procedures, airspace de-confliction 

processes, and rules of engagement for 

air defense engagements to reduce the 

risk of further tragedies sufficiently to 

allow for safe U.S. civil aviation 

operations in the Tehran FIR (OIIX). The 

FAA was also concerned about the risks 

to U.S. civil aviation associated with the 

wide array of military activities then 

occurring in, emanating from, or 

transiting the Tehran FIR (OIIX), in an 

environment of heightened regional 

tensions and the potential inadvertent 

risks from Iranian-fielded GPS and 

communications jammers.6 Due to the 

unacceptable risk environment for U.S. 

civil aviation in the Tehran FIR (OIIX) 

created by this confluence of 

circumstances, on October 29, 2020, the 

FAA published SFAR No. 117, 14 CFR 

91.1617, in the Federal Register, 

incorporating the flight prohibition for 

the Tehran FIR (OIIX) contained in 

NOTAM KICZ A0002/20 into the Code 

of Federal Regulations.7

On September 20, 2022, the FAA 

published a final rule in the Federal 

Register extending SFAR No. 117, 14 

CFR 91.1617, for an additional two 

years due to continued concerns, 

described in more detail in the preamble 

to that final rule, regarding the potential 

for unannounced Iranian ballistic 

missile fire, as well as UAS activity, 

originating from western Iran and 

targeting sites in the region.8 The FAA 

was concerned about the safety-of-flight 

hazards to civil aviation and airspace 

de-confliction challenges posed by such 

activity.9

The FAA continues to assess the 

situation in the Tehran FIR (OIIX) as 

presenting an unacceptable risk to the 

safety of U.S. civil aviation. Since the 

early October 2023 Hamas attack on 

Israel and the initiation of Israeli 

military operations in the Gaza Strip, 

which remain ongoing, regional 

tensions have further escalated, 

resulting in increased Iranian military 

activities and heightened alert status of 

Iranian military forces posing safety-offlight risk concerns similar to those that 

led to the tragic shootdown of PS752. 

The FAA also has not observed any 

transparent sustained changes to Iran’s 

air defense command and control 

procedures, airspace de-confliction 

procedures, and rules of engagement 

that would sufficiently diminish the risk 

of another accidental shootdown of a 

civil aircraft by Iranian air defense units 

in the Tehran FIR (OIIX) during future 

periods of heightened tensions for U.S. 

civil aviation operations to resume 

safely. 

The FAA acknowledges Iranian 

authorities proactively issued a series of 

NOTAMs to deconflict and mitigate 

risks to civil aviation operations prior to 

the April 13, 2024, retaliatory 

operations emanating out of western 

Iran, which represented some level of 

improved civil-military coordination. 

Additionally, Iranian authorities took 

actions to mitigate risks to civil aviation 

operations during the April 19, 2024, 

strikes in Isfahan, Iran. However, the 

FAA continues to closely monitor 

Iranian activities for indications of 

sustained and consistent improvements 

in Iran’s ability to proactively mitigate 

risks to civil aviation operations during 

periods of heightened regional tensions 

and increased military operations in, or 

emanating out of, the Tehran FIR (OIIX). 

Additionally, the FAA has continued 

concerns regarding the potential for 

unannounced Iranian ballistic missile 

launches and weaponized UAS activity 

originating from Iran and targeting sites 

across the region. For example, in 

January 2024, Iran conducted 

uncoordinated cross-border attacks on 

targets in Syria, Iraq, and Pakistan, 

using weaponized UAS and missile 

strikes. These military operations 

presented airspace deconfliction 

challenges and safety-of-flight hazards 

to civil aircraft, including those 

operating on international air routes in 

the region. Additionally, the FAA has 

concerns with the increased level of 

Global Positioning System (GPS) and 

communications jamming in the region, 

which poses additional safety concerns 

for flight operations in the Tehran FIR 

(OIIX). In April 2024, Iranian authorities 

issued a NOTAM to advise operators of 

the potential for GPS/Global Navigation 

Satellite System interruptions in the 

Tehran FIR (OIIX). The FAA 

acknowledges Iran’s provision of safety 

information to the international civil 

aviation community in this particular 

instance; however, the FAA reiterates 

the need for sustained and consistent 

improvements in Iran’s ability to 

proactively mitigate risks to civil 

aviation operations during periods of 

heightened regional tensions and 

increased military operations in, or 

emanating out of, the Tehran FIR (OIIX). 

Therefore, as a result of the significant 

continuing unacceptable risks to the 

safety of U.S. civil aviation operations 

in the Tehran FIR (OIIX), the FAA 

extends the expiration date of SFAR No. 

117, § 91.1617, from October 31, 2024, 

until October 31, 2027. 

Further amendments to SFAR No. 

117, § 91.1617, might be appropriate if 

the risk to U.S. civil aviation safety and 

security changes. In this regard, the 

FAA will continue to monitor the 

situation and evaluate the extent to 

which persons described in paragraph 

(a) of this rule might be able to operate 

safely in the Tehran FIR (OIIX). 

The FAA also republishes the details 

concerning the approval and exemption 

processes in Sections IV and V of this 

preamble, consistent with other recently 

published flight prohibition SFARs, to 

enable interested persons to refer to this 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 192 / Thursday, October 3, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 80387 

10This approval procedure applies to U.S. 

Government departments, agencies, or 

instrumentalities; it does not apply to the public. 

The FAA describes this procedure in the interest of 

providing transparency with respect to the FAA’s 

process for interacting with U.S. Government 

departments, agencies, or instrumentalities that 

seek to engage U.S. civil aviation to operate in the 

area in which this SFAR would prohibit their 

operations in the absence of specific FAA approval. 

final rule for comprehensive 

information about requesting relief from 

the FAA from the provisions of SFAR 

No. 117, § 91.1617. 

IV. Approval Process Based on a 

Request From a Department, Agency, or 

Instrumentality of the United States 

Government 

A. Approval Process Based on an 

Authorization Request From a 

Department, Agency, or Instrumentality 

of the United States Government 

In some instances, U.S. Government 

departments, agencies, or 

instrumentalities may need to engage 

U.S. civil aviation to support their 

activities in the Tehran FIR (OIIX). If a 

department, agency, or instrumentality 

of the U.S. Government determines that 

it has a critical need to engage any 

person described in paragraph (a) of 

SFAR No. 117, § 91.1617, including a 

U.S. air carrier or commercial operator, 

to transport civilian or military 

passengers or cargo or conduct other 

operations in the Tehran FIR (OIIX), that 

department, agency, or instrumentality 

may request the FAA to approve 

persons described in paragraph (a) of 

SFAR No. 117, § 91.1617, to conduct 

such operations. 

The requesting U.S. Government 

department, agency, or instrumentality 

must submit the request for approval to 

the FAA’s Associate Administrator for 

Aviation Safety in a letter signed by an 

appropriate senior official of the 

requesting department, agency, or 

instrumentality.10 The FAA will not 

accept or consider requests for approval 

from anyone other than the requesting 

U.S. Government department, agency, or 

instrumentality. In addition, the senior 

official signing the letter requesting 

FAA approval must be sufficiently 

positioned within the requesting 

department, agency, or instrumentality 

to demonstrate that the organization’s 

senior leadership supports the request 

for approval and is committed to taking 

all necessary steps to minimize aviation 

safety and security risks to the proposed 

flights. The senior official must also be 

in a position to: (1) attest to the accuracy 

of all representations made to the FAA 

in the request for approval, and (2) 

ensure that any support from the 

requesting U.S. Government 

department, agency, or instrumentality 

described in the request for approval is 

in fact brought to bear and is maintained 

over time. Unless justified by exigent 

circumstances, requesting U.S. 

Government departments, agencies, or 

instrumentalities must submit requests 

for approval to the FAA no less than 30 

calendar days before the date on which 

the requesting department, agency, or 

instrumentality wishes the operator(s) to 

commence the proposed operation(s). 

The requestor must send the request 

to the Associate Administrator for 

Aviation Safety, Federal Aviation 

Administration, 800 Independence 

Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591. 

Electronic submissions are acceptable, 

and the requesting entity may request 

that the FAA notify it electronically as 

to whether the FAA grants the request 

for approval. If a requestor wishes to 

make an electronic submission to the 

FAA, the requestor should contact the 

Washington Operations Center by 

telephone at (202) 267–3203 or by email 

at 9-FAA-OverseasFlightProhibitions@

faa.gov for submission instructions. The 

requestor must not submit its letter 

requesting FAA approval or related 

supporting documentation to the 

Washington Operations Center. Rather, 

the Washington Operations Center will 

refer the requestor to an appropriate 

staff member of the Flight Standards 

Service for further assistance. 

A single letter may request approval 

from the FAA for multiple persons 

described in SFAR No. 117, § 91.1617, 

or for multiple flight operations. To the 

extent known, the letter must identify 

the person(s) the requester expects the 

SFAR to cover on whose behalf the U.S. 

Government department, agency, or 

instrumentality seeks FAA approval, 

and it must describe— 

• The proposed operation(s), 

including the nature of the mission 

being supported; 

• The service the person(s) covered 

by the SFAR will provide; 

• To the extent known, the specific 

locations in the Tehran FIR (OIIX) 

where the proposed operation(s) will 

occur, including, but not limited to, the 

flight path and altitude of the aircraft 

while it is operating in the Tehran FIR 

(OIIX) and the airports, airfields, or 

landing zones at which the aircraft will 

take off and land; and 

• The method by which the 

requesting department, agency, or 

instrumentality will provide, or how the 

operator will otherwise obtain, current 

threat information and an explanation of 

how the operator will integrate this 

information into all phases of the 

proposed operations (i.e., the premission planning and briefing, in-flight, 

and post-flight phases). 

The request for approval must also 

include a list of operators with whom 

the U.S. Government department, 

agency, or instrumentality requesting 

FAA approval has a current contract(s), 

grant(s), or cooperative agreement(s) (or 

its prime contractor has a 

subcontract(s)) for specific flight 

operations in the Tehran FIR (OIIX). The 

requestor may identify additional 

operators to the FAA at any time after 

the FAA issues its approval. Neither the 

operators listed in the original request, 

nor any operators the requestor 

subsequently seeks to add to the 

approval, may commence operations 

under the approval until the FAA issues 

them an Operations Specification 

(OpSpec) or Letter of Authorization 

(LOA), as appropriate, for operations in 

the Tehran FIR (OIIX). The approval 

conditions discussed below apply to all 

operators. Requestors should contact the 

Washington Operations Center by 

telephone at (202) 267–3203 or by email 

at 9-FAA-OverseasFlightProhibitions@

faa.gov for instructions on how to 

submit the names of additional 

operators the requestor wishes to add to 

an existing approval to the FAA. The 

requestor must not submit the names of 

additional operators it wishes to add to 

an existing approval to the Washington 

Operations Center. Rather, the 

Washington Operations Center will refer 

the requestor to an appropriate staff 

member of the Flight Standards Service 

for further assistance. 

If an approval request includes 

classified information or controlled 

unclassified information not authorized 

for public release, requestors may 

contact the Washington Operations 

Center for instructions on submitting it 

to the FAA. The Washington Operations 

Center’s contact information appears in 

the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT

section of this final rule. 

FAA approval of an operation under 

SFAR No. 117, § 91.1617, does not 

relieve persons subject to this SFAR of 

the responsibility to comply with all 

other applicable FAA rules and 

regulations. Operators of civil aircraft 

must comply with the conditions of 

their certificates, OpSpecs, and LOAs, 

as applicable. Operators must also 

comply with all rules and regulations of 

other U.S. Government departments, 

agencies, or instrumentalities that may 

apply to the proposed operation(s), 

including, but not limited to, 

regulations issued by the Transportation 

Security Administration. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES1
80388 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 192 / Thursday, October 3, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

B. Approval Conditions 

If the FAA approves the request, the 

FAA’s Aviation Safety organization will 

send an approval letter to the requesting 

U.S. Government department, agency, or 

instrumentality informing it that the 

FAA’s approval is subject to all of the 

following conditions: 

(1) The approval will stipulate those 

procedures and conditions that limit, to 

the greatest degree possible, the risk to 

the operator while still allowing the 

operator to achieve its operational 

objectives. 

(2) Before any approval takes effect, 

the operator must submit to the FAA: 

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

Government from all damages, claims, 

and liabilities, including without 

limitation legal fees and expenses, 

relating to any event arising out of or 

related to the approved operations in 

the Tehran FIR (OIIX); and 

(b) The operator’s written 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 out of or related to the approved 

operations in the Tehran FIR (OIIX). 

(3) Other conditions the FAA may 

specify, including those the FAA might 

impose in OpSpecs or LOAs, as 

applicable. 

The release and agreement to 

indemnify do not preclude an operator 

from raising a claim under an applicable 

non-premium war risk insurance policy 

the FAA issues under chapter 443 of 

title 49, U.S. Code. 

If the FAA approves the proposed 

operation(s), the FAA will issue an 

OpSpec or LOA, as applicable, to the 

operator(s) identified in the original 

request and any operators the requestor 

subsequently adds to the approval, 

authorizing them to conduct the 

approved operation(s). In addition, as 

stated in paragraph (3) of this section 

V.B., the FAA notes that it may include 

additional conditions beyond those 

contained in the approval letter in any 

OpSpec or LOA associated with a 

particular operator operating under this 

approval, as necessary in the interests of 

aviation safety. U.S. Government 

departments, agencies, and 

instrumentalities requesting FAA 

approval on behalf of entities with 

which they have a contract or 

subcontract, grant, or cooperative 

agreement should request a copy of the 

relevant OpSpec or LOA directly from 

the entity with which they have any of 

the foregoing types of arrangements, if 

desired. 

V. Information Regarding Petitions for 

Exemption 

Any operations not conducted under 

an approval the FAA issues through the 

approval process set forth previously 

may only occur in accordance with an 

exemption from SFAR No. 117, 

§ 91.1617. A petition for exemption 

must comply with 14 CFR part 11. The 

FAA will consider whether exceptional 

circumstances exist beyond those 

described in the approval process in the 

previous section. To determine whether 

a petition for exemption from the 

prohibition this SFAR establishes 

fulfills the standards described in 14 

CFR 11.81, the FAA consistently finds 

necessary the following information: 

• The proposed operation(s), 

including the nature of the operation; 

• The service the person(s) covered 

by the SFAR will provide; 

• The specific locations in the Tehran 

FIR (OIIX) where the proposed 

operation(s) will occur, including, but 

not limited to, the flight path and 

altitude of the aircraft while it is 

operating in the Tehran FIR (OIIX) and 

the airports, airfields, or landing zones 

at which the aircraft will take off and 

land; 

• The method by which the operator 

will obtain current threat information 

and an explanation of how the operator 

will integrate this information into all 

phases of its proposed operations (i.e., 

the pre-mission planning and briefing, 

in-flight, and post-flight phases); and 

• The plans and procedures the 

operator will use to minimize the risks 

identified in this preamble to the 

proposed operations to support the 

relief sought and demonstrate that 

granting such relief would not adversely 

affect safety or would provide a level of 

safety at least equal to that provided by 

this SFAR. The FAA has found 

comprehensive, organized plans and 

procedures of this nature to be helpful 

in facilitating the agency’s safety 

evaluation of petitions for exemption 

from flight prohibition SFARs. 

The FAA includes, as a condition of 

each such exemption it issues, a release 

and agreement to indemnify, as 

described previously. 

The FAA recognizes that, with the 

support of the U.S. Government, the 

governments of other countries could 

plan operations that may be affected by 

SFAR No. 117, § 91.1617. While the 

FAA will not permit these operations 

through the approval process, the FAA 

will consider exemption requests for 

such operations on an expedited basis 

and in accordance with the order of 

preference set forth in paragraph (c) of 

SFAR No. 117, § 91.1617. 

If a petition for exemption includes 

information that is sensitive for security 

reasons or proprietary information, 

requestors may contact the Washington 

Operations Center for instructions on 

submitting it to the FAA. The 

Washington Operations Center’s contact 

information is listed in the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT section of this 

final rule. Requestors must not submit 

their petitions for exemption or related 

supporting documentation to the 

Washington Operations Center. Rather, 

the Washington Operations Center will 

refer the requestor to the appropriate 

staff member of the Flight Standards 

Service or the Office of Rulemaking for 

further assistance. 

VI. Severability 

Congress authorized the FAA by 

statute to promote safe flight of civil 

aircraft in air commerce by prescribing, 

among other things, regulations and 

minimum standards for practices, 

methods, and procedures the 

Administrator finds necessary for safety 

in air commerce and national security. 

49 U.S.C. 44701. Consistent with that 

mandate, the FAA is prohibiting certain 

persons from conducting flight 

operations in the Tehran FIR (OIIX) due 

to the continuing hazards to the safety 

of U.S. civil flight operations. The 

purpose of this rule is to operate 

holistically in addressing a range of 

hazards and needs in the Tehran FIR 

(OIIX). However, the FAA recognizes 

that certain provisions focus on unique 

factors. Therefore, the FAA finds that 

the various provisions of this final rule 

are severable and able to operate 

functionally if severed from each other. 

In the event a court were to invalidate 

one or more of this final rule’s unique 

provisions, the remaining provisions 

should stand, thus allowing the FAA to 

continue to fulfill its Congressionally 

authorized role of promoting safe flight 

of civil aircraft in air commerce. 

VII. Regulatory Notices and Analyses 

Federal agencies consider the impacts 

of regulatory actions under a variety of 

executive orders and other 

requirements. First, Executive Order 

12866, Executive Order 13563, and 

Executive Order 14094 (‘‘Modernizing 

Regulatory Review’’), direct that each 

Federal agency shall propose or adopt a 

regulation only upon a reasoned 

determination that the benefits of the 

intended regulation justify 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 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 192 / Thursday, October 3, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 80389 

1979 (Pub. L. 96–39), as codified in 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. Chapter 

25, 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. 

In conducting these analyses, the FAA 

has determined this final rule has 

benefits that justify its costs. This rule 

is a significant regulatory action, as 

defined in section 3(f) of Executive 

Order 12866 as amended by Executive 

Order 14094. As 5 U.S.C. 553 does not 

require notice and comment for this 

final rule, 5 U.S.C. 603 and 604 do not 

require regulatory flexibility analyses 

regarding impacts on small entities. 

This rule will not create unnecessary 

obstacles to the foreign commerce of the 

United States. This rule will not impose 

an unfunded mandate on State, local, or 

Tribal governments, or on the private 

sector, by exceeding the threshold 

identified previously. 

A. Regulatory Evaluation 

This action extends the expiration 

date of the SFAR prohibiting certain 

flight operations in the Tehran FIR 

(OIIX) for an additional three years due 

to the significant, continuing risks to 

U.S. civil aviation detailed in the 

preamble of this final rule. The FAA 

acknowledges this flight prohibition 

might result in additional costs to some 

U.S. operators, such as increased fuel 

costs and other operational-related 

costs. However, the FAA expects the 

benefits of this action to exceed the 

costs because it will result in the 

avoidance of risks of fatalities, injuries, 

and property damage that could occur if 

a U.S. operator’s aircraft were shot 

down (or otherwise damaged) while 

operating in the Tehran FIR (OIIX). 

B. Regulatory Flexibility Act 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), 

in 5 U.S.C. 603, requires an agency to 

prepare an initial regulatory flexibility 

analysis describing impacts on small 

entities whenever 5 U.S.C. 553 or any 

other law requires an agency to publish 

a general notice of proposed rulemaking 

for any proposed rule. Similarly, 5 

U.S.C. 604 requires an agency to prepare 

a final regulatory flexibility analysis 

when an agency issues a final rule 

under 5 U.S.C. 553 after that section or 

any other law requires publication of a 

general notice of proposed rulemaking. 

The FAA concludes good cause exists to 

forgo notice and comment and to not 

delay the effective date for this rule. As 

5 U.S.C. 553 does not require notice and 

comment in this situation, 5 U.S.C. 603 

and 604 similarly do not require 

regulatory flexibility analyses. 

C. International Trade Impact 

Assessment 

The Trade Agreements Act of 1979 

(Pub. L. 96–39) prohibits Federal 

agencies from establishing standards or 

engaging in related activities that create 

unnecessary obstacles to the foreign 

commerce of the United States. 

Pursuant to this Act, the establishment 

of standards is not considered an 

unnecessary obstacle to the foreign 

commerce of the United States, so long 

as the standard has a legitimate 

domestic objective, such as the 

protection of safety, and does not 

operate in a manner that excludes 

imports that meet this objective. The 

statute also requires consideration of 

international standards and, where 

appropriate, that they be the basis for 

U.S. standards. 

The FAA has assessed the potential 

effect of this final rule and determined 

that its purpose is to protect the safety 

of U.S. civil aviation from risks to their 

operations in the Tehran FIR (OIIX), a 

location outside the U.S. Therefore, the 

rule complies with the Trade 

Agreements Act of 1979. 

D. Unfunded Mandates Assessment 

Title II of the Unfunded Mandates 

Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4) 

requires each Federal agency to prepare 

a written statement assessing the effects 

of any Federal mandate in a proposed or 

final agency rule that may result in an 

expenditure of $100 million or more (in 

1995 dollars) in any one year by State, 

local, and Tribal governments, in the 

aggregate, or by the private sector; such 

a mandate is deemed to be a ‘‘significant 

regulatory action.’’ The FAA currently 

uses an inflation-adjusted value of $183 

million in lieu of $100 million. 

This final rule does not contain such 

a mandate. Therefore, the requirements 

of Title II of the Act do not apply. 

E. Paperwork Reduction Act 

The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 

(44 U.S.C. 3507(d)) requires the FAA to 

consider the impact of paperwork and 

other information collection burdens it 

imposes on the public. The FAA has 

determined no new requirement for 

information collection is associated 

with this final rule. 

F. International Compatibility and 

Cooperation 

In keeping with U.S. obligations 

under the Convention on International 

Civil Aviation, the FAA’s policy is to 

conform to International Civil Aviation 

Organization (ICAO) Standards and 

Recommended Practices to the 

maximum extent practicable. The FAA 

has determined no ICAO Standards and 

Recommended Practices correspond to 

this regulation. The FAA finds this 

action is fully consistent with the 

obligations under 49 U.S.C. 

40105(b)(1)(A) to ensure the FAA 

exercises its duties consistently with the 

obligations of the United States under 

international agreements. 

While the FAA’s flight prohibition 

does not apply to foreign air carriers, 

DOT codeshare authorizations prohibit 

foreign air carriers from carrying a U.S. 

codeshare partner’s code on a flight 

segment that operates in airspace for 

which the FAA has issued a flight 

prohibition for U.S. civil aviation. In 

addition, foreign air carriers and other 

foreign operators may choose to avoid, 

or be advised or directed by their civil 

aviation authorities to avoid, airspace 

for which the FAA has issued a flight 

prohibition for U.S. civil aviation. 

G. Environmental Analysis 

The FAA has analyzed this action 

under Executive Order 12114, 

Environmental Effects Abroad of Major 

Federal Actions, and DOT Order 

5610.1C, Paragraph 16. Executive Order 

12114 requires the FAA to be informed 

of environmental considerations and 

take those considerations into account 

when making decisions on major 

Federal actions that could have 

environmental impacts anywhere 

beyond the borders of the United States. 

The FAA has determined this action is 

exempt pursuant to Section 2–5(a)(i) of 

Executive Order 12114 because it does 

not have the potential for a significant 

effect on the environment outside the 

United States. 

In accordance with FAA Order 

1050.1F, Environmental Impacts: 

Policies and Procedures, paragraph 8– 

6(c), the FAA has prepared a 

memorandum for the record stating the 

reason(s) for this determination and has 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES1
80390 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 192 / Thursday, October 3, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

placed it in the docket for this 

rulemaking. 

VIII. Executive Order Determinations 

A. Executive Order 13132, Federalism 

The FAA has analyzed this rule under 

the principles and criteria of Executive 

Order 13132. The agency has 

determined 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. Therefore, this 

rule will not have federalism 

implications. 

B. Executive Order 13211, Regulations 

That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use 

The FAA analyzed this rule under 

Executive Order 13211. The agency has 

determined it is not a ‘‘significant 

energy action’’ under the executive 

order and will not be likely to have a 

significant adverse effect on the supply, 

distribution, or use of energy. 

C. Executive Order 13609, Promoting 

International Regulatory Cooperation 

Executive Order 13609 promotes 

international regulatory cooperation to 

meet shared challenges involving 

health, safety, labor, security, 

environmental, and other issues and to 

reduce, eliminate, or prevent 

unnecessary differences in regulatory 

requirements. The FAA has analyzed 

this action under the policies and 

agency responsibilities of Executive 

Order 13609 and has determined that 

this action will have no effect on 

international regulatory cooperation. 

IX. Additional Information 

A. Electronic Access 

Except for classified and controlled 

unclassified material not authorized for 

public release, all documents the FAA 

considered in developing this rule, 

including economic analyses and 

technical reports, may be accessed from 

the internet through the docket for this 

rulemaking. 

Those documents may be viewed 

online at https://www.regulations.gov 

using the docket number listed above. A 

copy of this rule will be placed in the 

docket. Electronic retrieval help and 

guidelines are available on the website. 

It is available 24 hours each day, 365 

days each year. An electronic copy of 

this document may also be downloaded 

from the Office of the Federal Register’s 

website at https://

www.federalregister.gov and the 

Government Publishing Office’s website 

at https://www.govinfo.gov. A copy may 

also be found on the FAA’s Regulations 

and Policies website at https://

www.faa.gov/regulations_policies. 

Copies may also be obtained by 

sending a request to the Federal 

Aviation Administration, Office of 

Rulemaking, ARM–1, 800 Independence 

Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591, or 

by calling (202) 267–9677. 

B. Small Business Regulatory 

Enforcement Fairness Act 

The Small Business Regulatory 

Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 

(SBREFA) (Pub. L. 104–121) (set forth as 

a note to 5 U.S.C. 601) requires the FAA 

to comply with small entity requests for 

information or advice about compliance 

with statutes and regulations within its 

jurisdiction. A small entity with 

questions regarding this document may 

contact its local FAA official or the 

persons listed under the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT heading at the 

beginning of the preamble. To find out 

more about SBREFA on the internet, 

visit 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, Iran. 

The Amendment 

In consideration of the foregoing, the 

Federal Aviation Administration 

amends part 91 of title 14, Code of 

Federal Regulations, as follows: 

PART 91—GENERAL OPERATING AND 

FLIGHT RULES 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 91 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g), 40101, 

40103, 40105, 40113, 40120, 44101, 44111, 

44701, 44704, 44709, 44711, 44712, 44715, 

44716, 44717, 44722, 46306, 46315, 46316, 

46504, 46506–46507, 47122, 47508, 47528– 

47531, 47534, Pub. L. 114–190, 130 Stat. 615 

(49 U.S.C. 44703 note); articles 12 and 29 of 

the Convention on International Civil 

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

■ 2. Amend § 91.1617 by revising 

paragraph (e) to read as follows: 

§ 91.1617 Special Federal Aviation 

Regulation No. 117—Prohibition Against 

Certain Flights in the Tehran Flight 

Information Region (FIR) (OIIX). 

* * * * * 

(e) Expiration. This SFAR will remain 

in effect until October 31, 2027. The 

FAA may amend, rescind, or extend this 

SFAR as necessary. 

Issued in Washington, DC, under the 

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

40105(b)(1)(A), and 44701(a)(5). 

Michael G. Whitaker, 

Administrator. 

[FR Doc. 2024–22731 Filed 10–2–24; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

Office of the Secretary 

32 CFR Part 49 

[Docket ID: DoD–2024–OS–0054] 

RIN 0790–AL61 

Implementation of HAVANA Act of 

2021 

AGENCY: Office of the Under Secretary of 

Defense for Personnel and Readiness 

(OUSD(P&R)), Department of Defense 

(DoD). 

ACTION: Direct final rule with request for 

comments. 

SUMMARY: This rule implements within 

DoD (the Department) amendments 

made by the Helping American Victims 

Afflicted by Neurological Attacks 

(HAVANA) Act of 2021, which provide 

authority for the Secretary of State and 

other agency heads to provide payments 

to certain individuals who have 

incurred qualifying injuries to the brain. 

This rule covers current and former DoD 

employees, and dependents of current 

or former DoD employees and is vitally 

important to those who have 

experienced such injuries. 

DATES: This rule will be effective on 

November 18, 2024 unless comments 

are received that would result in a 

contrary determination. If significant 

adverse comments are received, the 

Department will publish a timely 

withdrawal of the rule in the Federal 

Register. Comments will be accepted on 

or before November 4, 2024. 

ADDRESSES: Interested parties may 

submit comments, identified by docket 

number and/or regulatory identifier 

number (RIN) and title, by one of the 

following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Mail: Department of Defense, Office 

of the Assistant to the Secretary of 

Defense for Privacy, Civil Liberties, and 

Transparency, Regulatory Directorate, 

4800 Mark Center Drive, Attn: Mailbox 

24, Suite 08D09, Alexandria, VA 22350– 

1700. 

Instructions: All submissions received 

must include the agency name and 

docket number or RIN for this Federal 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES1