This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER

contains regulatory documents having general

applicability and legal effect, most of which

are keyed to and codified in the Code of

Federal Regulations, which is published under

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

The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by

the Superintendent of Documents.

Rules and Regulations Federal Register

83421 

Vol. 89, No. 200 

Wednesday, October 16, 2024 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 91 

[Docket No.: FAA–2018–0927; Amdt. No. 

91–353C] 

RIN 2120–AL97 

Extension of the Prohibition Against 

Certain Flights in the Baghdad Flight 

Information Region (FIR) (ORBB) 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), Department of 

Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: This action extends the 

prohibition against certain flight 

operations in the Baghdad Flight 

Information Region (FIR) (ORBB) at 

altitudes below Flight Level (FL) 320 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 26, 2024, to 

October 26, 2027. The FAA finds this 

action necessary to address the 

unacceptable level of risk to the safety 

of U.S. civil aviation operations in the 

Baghdad FIR (ORBB) at altitudes below 

FL320 from Iranian-aligned militia 

groups’ (IAMGs’) activities and thirdparty military operations that are not 

likely to be effectively deconflicted with 

civil aviation. 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 

October 16, 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. 77, title 14 Code of 

Federal Regulations (14 CFR) 91.1605, 

from October 26, 2024, to October 26, 

2027. SFAR No. 77, § 91.1605, prohibits 

certain flight operations in the Baghdad 

FIR (ORBB) at altitudes below FL320 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 safety-of-flight risks to 

U.S. civil aviation in the Baghdad FIR 

(ORBB) at altitudes below FL320 due to 

IAMGs’ activities and third-party 

military operations that are not likely to 

be effectively deconflicted with civil 

aviation. Consistent with other recently 

published flight prohibition SFARs, this 

action also republishes the approval 

process and exemption information for 

this flight prohibition SFAR. 

II. Authority and Good Cause 

A. Authority 

The FAA is responsible for the safety 

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

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

civil aircraft, and U.S.-certificated 

airmen throughout the world. Sections 

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

(U.S.C.), subtitle I, establish the FAA 

Administrator’s authority to issue rules 

on aviation safety. Subtitle VII of title 

49, Aviation Programs, describes in 

more detail the scope of the agency’s 

authority. Section 40101(d)(1) provides 

that the Administrator shall consider in 

the public interest, among other matters, 

assigning, maintaining, and enhancing 

safety and security as the highest 

priorities in air commerce. Section 

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

Administrator to exercise this authority 

consistently with the obligations of the 

U.S. Government under international 

agreements. 

The FAA is promulgating this rule 

under the authority described in 49 

U.S.C. 44701, General requirements. 

Under that section, the FAA is charged 

broadly with promoting safe flight of 

civil aircraft in air commerce by 

prescribing, among other things, 

regulations and minimum standards for 

practices, methods, and procedures that 

the Administrator finds necessary for 

safety in air commerce and national 

security. 

This regulation is within the scope of 

the FAA’s authority because it 

continues to prohibit the persons 

described in paragraph (a) of SFAR No. 

77, § 91.1605, from conducting flight 

operations in the Baghdad FIR (ORBB) 

at altitudes below FL320 due to the 

continuing hazards to the safety of U.S. 

civil flight operations, 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 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
83422 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 200 / Wednesday, October 16, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

1Prohibition Against Certain Flights in the 

Baghdad Flight Information Region (FIR) (ORBB) 

final rule, 83 FR 53985 (Oct. 26, 2018). 

2Prohibition Against Certain Flights in the 

Baghdad Flight Information Region (FIR) final rule, 

85 FR 65686, (Oct. 16, 2020). 

3Extension of the Prohibition Against Certain 

Flights in the Baghdad Flight Information Region 

(FIR) (ORBB) final rule, 87 FR 57384 (Sep. 20, 

2022). 

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 Baghdad FIR 

(ORBB) at altitudes below FL320. 

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. 

It would also be 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 

On October 26, 2018, the FAA 

published a final rule in the Federal 

Register reissuing, with amendments to 

reflect then-current conditions in Iraq, 

SFAR No. 77, § 91.1605.1 That rule 

prohibited certain flight operations in 

the Baghdad FIR (ORBB) at altitudes 

below FL260. On October 16, 2020, the 

FAA again extended and amended 

SFAR No. 77, § 91.1605, amending the 

flight prohibition from altitudes below 

FL260 to altitudes below FL320, based 

on an assessment of the then-current 

aviation safety risks.2 In its 2022 final 

rule extending the prohibition against 

certain flights in the Baghdad FIR 

(ORBB) at altitudes below FL320,3 the 

FAA assessed the situation in the 

Baghdad FIR (ORBB) at altitudes below 

FL320 continued to present an 

unacceptable risk to the safety of U.S. 

civil aviation. IAMGs had publicly 

threatened to attack coalition forces 

remaining in Iraq after December 31, 

2020, and continued to demonstrate 

their capability and intent to attack U.S. 

and international interests in Iraq, as 

well as selected Iraqi government 

targets. That final rule described in 

more detail a series of attacks and 

attempted attacks against locations in 

Iraq, including but not limited to U.S. 

interests co-located with Baghdad 

International Airport (ORBI). 

IAMGs also had access to unmanned 

aircraft systems (UAS) and anti-aircraft 

capable weapons systems, including the 

Iranian-produced 358 loitering hybrid 

surface-to-air missile (SAM) system, 

which presented inadvertent risks to the 

safety of U.S. civil aviation operations 

in the Baghdad FIR (ORBB) at altitudes 

below FL320 and at potentially targeted 

airports. IAMGs likely lacked the ability 

to conduct effective target identification 

and airspace de-confliction, increasing 

the risk of an accidental shootdown of 

a civil aircraft due to misidentification 

or miscalculation. 

In addition, at the time of the 2022 

final rule, the FAA remained concerned 

about cross-border military activity. 

Both Iran and Tu ̈rkiye previously had 

conducted various no-notice crossborder operations striking targets in 

northern Iraq using a variety of 

weapons, including short-range ballistic 

missiles, rockets, and weaponized UAS. 

In general, unannounced third-party 

cross-border operations in the Baghdad 

FIR (ORBB) presented a low altitude 

safety-of-flight risk for aircraft flying in 

the vicinity of the targeted location(s) 

and for aircraft on the ground at airports 

co-located with, or in close proximity 

to, the intended targets. These activities 

also posed an airspace de-confliction 

challenge. Additionally, there continued 

to be an inadvertent risk to civil aviation 

operations in the Baghdad FIR (ORBB) 

from global positioning system (GPS) 

jammers. 

IV. Discussion of the Final Rule 

The FAA continues to assess the 

situation in the Baghdad FIR (ORBB) at 

altitudes below FL320 as presenting an 

unacceptable risk to the safety of U.S. 

civil aviation. The security environment 

in Iraq remains challenging due to the 

resumption of IAMGs’ attack operations 

against U.S. and coalition forces in the 

region and attempted long-range attacks 

on Israeli interests originating from or 

transiting the Baghdad FIR (ORBB) since 

the October 2023 start of the Israel-Gaza 

conflict. In addition to the increased 

IAMG attack operations, third-party 

military forces have conducted 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 200 / Wednesday, October 16, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 83423 

4This 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. 

operations striking targets in northern 

Iraq, as well as launching weapons 

transiting the Baghdad FIR (ORBB) 

enroute to targets across the region as 

Iran-Israel tensions spiked in 2024. 

Following the October 2023 start of 

the Israel-Gaza conflict, IAMGs 

operating from Iraq have launched 

numerous attacks targeting U.S. and 

coalition forces located across the region 

using a variety of weapons, from 

indirect fire weapons to weaponized 

UAS. Such attacks pose risks to civil 

aviation operations during low altitude 

phases of flight and to aircraft and 

infrastructure at targeted installations 

often collocated at airports or airfields 

in Iraq. IAMGs have also claimed 

responsibility for numerous attacks 

against Israel, launching missiles and 

weaponized UAS from Iraq, 

underscoring continued safety-of-flight 

risk concerns in the Baghdad FIR 

(ORBB) at altitudes below FL320. 

Furthermore, IAMGs maintain access 

to a variety of anti-aircraft weapons 

systems, including man-portable air 

defense systems (MANPADS) and 

Iranian-produced loitering SAM 

systems. IAMGs claimed to have 

downed a U.S.-operated MQ–9 

surveillance platform in mid-January 

2024, likely using an Iranian-provided 

advanced anti-aircraft weapons system. 

This incident highlights potential nonstate actor use of an advanced antiaircraft weapons system, likely without 

full access to a complete airspace 

picture. This likely lack of a complete 

airspace picture—including civil 

aviation operations transiting northsouth along heavily traveled 

international air routes over eastern 

Iraq—coupled with likely insufficient 

training on an advanced anti-aircraft 

weapons system, demonstrates the 

potential for significant inadvertent risk 

concerns for U.S. civil aviation 

operations in the Baghdad FIR (ORBB) 

at altitudes below FL320. 

Since the 2022 extension of the SFAR, 

uncoordinated and often unannounced 

third-party military operations into Iraq 

or transiting the Baghdad FIR (ORBB) 

have also continued, including Turkish 

counter-Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) 

opposition operations in northern Iraq 

incorporating a variety of weapons 

systems. Recent negotiations between 

the Turkish and Iraqi governments may 

also pave the way for expanded Turkish 

military operations into northern Iraq. 

In January 2024, Iran launched attacks 

from western Iran on targets in northern 

Iraq and launched attacks transiting the 

Baghdad FIR (ORBB) enroute to targets 

in Syria. Prior to the Iranian crossborder operations, there was no 

NOTAM issued advising operators of 

the potential risks to civil aviation 

associated with the weapons activity, 

nor did Iraq issue a NOTAM during the 

Iranian weapons activity. In mid-April 

2024, Iran launched hundreds of cruise 

and ballistic missiles and one-way 

attack UAS during a massive attempted 

retaliatory strike on Israel, with some of 

the launched weapons transiting the 

Baghdad FIR (ORBB) while enroute to 

the intended targets in Israel. The FAA 

acknowledges Iraq issued a NOTAM 

prior to the Iranian attempted strikes on 

Israel, mitigating the risks to civil 

aviation operations in that particular 

instance. However, Iraq has not 

consistently issued NOTAMs for 

previous third-party operations into the 

Baghdad FIR (ORBB). Furthermore, 

images posted to social media later in 

April appeared to show debris 

discovered south of Baghdad, possibly 

associated with an alleged Israeli 

counterstrike on Iran and underscoring 

the multifaceted risks of cross-border 

military operations to civil aviation 

operations in the Baghdad FIR (ORBB) 

at altitudes below FL320. 

Therefore, as a result of the 

significant, continuing, unacceptable 

risks to the safety of U.S. civil aviation 

operations in the Baghdad FIR (ORBB) 

at altitudes below FL320, the FAA 

extends the expiration date of SFAR No. 

77, § 91.1605, from October 26, 2024, 

until October 26, 2027. 

Further amendments to SFAR No. 77, 

§ 91.1605, 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 Baghdad FIR (ORBB) at 

altitudes below FL320. 

The FAA also republishes the details 

concerning the approval and exemption 

processes in Sections V and VI of this 

preamble, consistent with other recently 

published flight prohibition SFARs, to 

enable interested persons to refer to this 

final rule for comprehensive 

information about requesting relief from 

the FAA from the provisions of SFAR 

No. 77, § 91.1605. 

V. Approval Process Based on a 

Request From a Department, Agency, or 

Instrumentality of the United States 

Government 

A. Approval Process Based on an 

Authorization Request From a 

Department, Agency, or Instrumentality 

of the United States Government 

In some instances, U.S. Government 

departments, agencies, or 

instrumentalities may need to engage 

U.S. civil aviation to support their 

activities in the Baghdad FIR (ORBB) at 

altitudes below FL320. 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. 

77, § 91.1605, including a U.S. air 

carrier or commercial operator, to 

transport civilian or military passengers 

or cargo or conduct other operations in 

the Baghdad FIR (ORBB) at altitudes 

below FL320, that department, agency, 

or instrumentality may request the FAA 

to approve persons described in 

paragraph (a) of SFAR No. 77, § 91.1605, 

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.4 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 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
83424 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 200 / Wednesday, October 16, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

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. 77, § 91.1605, 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 Baghdad FIR (ORBB) at 

altitudes below FL320 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 Baghdad FIR (ORBB) 

at altitudes below FL320 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 Baghdad FIR (ORBB) 

at altitudes below FL320. 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 Baghdad FIR (ORBB) 

at altitudes below FL320. 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. 77, § 91.1605, 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. 

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 Baghdad FIR (ORBB) at altitudes 

below FL320; 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 Baghdad FIR (ORBB) 

at altitudes below FL320. 

(3) Other conditions the FAA may 

specify, including those the FAA might 

impose in OpSpecs or LOAs, as 

applicable. 

The release and agreement to 

indemnify do not preclude an operator 

from raising a claim under an applicable 

non-premium war risk insurance policy 

the FAA issues under chapter 443 of 

title 49, U.S. Code. 

If the FAA approves the proposed 

operation(s), the FAA will issue an 

OpSpec or LOA, as applicable, to the 

operator(s) identified in the original 

request and any operators the requestor 

subsequently adds to the approval, 

authorizing them to conduct the 

approved operation(s). In addition, as 

stated in paragraph (3) of this section 

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

additional conditions beyond those 

contained in the approval letter in any 

OpSpec or LOA associated with a 

particular operator operating under this 

approval, as necessary in the interests of 

aviation safety. U.S. Government 

departments, agencies, and 

instrumentalities requesting FAA 

approval on behalf of entities with 

which they have a contract or 

subcontract, grant, or cooperative 

agreement should request a copy of the 

relevant OpSpec or LOA directly from 

the entity with which they have any of 

the foregoing types of arrangements, if 

desired. 

VI. Information Regarding Petitions for 

Exemption 

Any operations not conducted under 

an approval the FAA issues through the 

approval process set forth previously 

may only occur in accordance with an 

exemption from SFAR No. 77, 

§ 91.1605. 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 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 200 / Wednesday, October 16, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 83425 

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 

Baghdad FIR (ORBB) at altitudes below 

FL320 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 

Baghdad FIR (ORBB) at altitudes below 

FL320 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. 77, § 91.1605. 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. 

77, § 91.1605. 

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. 

VII. Severability 

Congress authorized the FAA by 

statute to promote safe flight of civil 

aircraft in air commerce by prescribing, 

among other things, regulations and 

minimum standards for practices, 

methods, and procedures the 

Administrator finds necessary for safety 

in air commerce and national security. 

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

mandate, the FAA is prohibiting certain 

persons from conducting flight 

operations in the Baghdad FIR (ORBB) 

at altitudes below FL320 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 Baghdad FIR (ORBB) at altitudes 

below FL320. However, the FAA 

recognizes that certain provisions focus 

on unique factors. Therefore, the FAA 

finds that the various provisions of this 

final rule are severable and able to 

operate functionally if severed from 

each other. In the event a court were to 

invalidate one or more of this final 

rule’s unique provisions, the remaining 

provisions should stand, thus allowing 

the FAA to continue to fulfill its 

Congressionally authorized role of 

promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in 

air commerce. 

VIII. Regulatory Notices and Analyses 

Federal agencies consider the impacts 

of regulatory actions under a variety of 

executive orders and other 

requirements. First, Executive Orders 

12866, 13563, and 14094, direct that 

each Federal agency shall propose or 

adopt a regulation only upon a reasoned 

determination that the benefits of the 

intended regulation justify its costs. 

Second, the Regulatory Flexibility Act 

of 1980 (Pub. L. 96–354), as codified in 

5 U.S.C. 603 et seq., requires agencies to 

analyze the economic impact of 

regulatory changes on small entities. 

Third, the Trade Agreements Act of 

1979 (Pub. L. 96–39), as 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 rule continues to prohibit U.S. 

civil flights in the Baghdad FIR (ORBB) 

at altitudes below FL320 due to the 

significant hazards to U.S. civil aviation 

described in 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. 

Accordingly, the incremental costs of 

the extension of this flight prohibition 

SFAR are minimal. By prohibiting 

unsafe flights, the benefits of this rule 

will exceed the minimal flight deviation 

costs. Therefore, the FAA finds that the 

incremental costs of extending SFAR 

No. 77, 14 CFR 91.1605, will be minimal 

and are exceeded by the benefits of 

avoided risks of deaths, injuries, and 

property damage that could occur if a 

U.S. operator’s aircraft were shot down 

(or otherwise damaged) while operating 

in the Baghdad FIR (ORBB) at altitudes 

below FL320. 

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. 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
83426 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 200 / Wednesday, October 16, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

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 Baghdad FIR (ORBB) 

at altitudes below FL320, 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 

placed it in the docket for this 

rulemaking. 

IX. Executive Order Determinations 

A. Executive Order 13132, Federalism 

The FAA has analyzed this rule under 

the principles and criteria of Executive 

Order 13132. 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. 

X. Additional Information 

A. Electronic Access 

Except for classified and controlled 

unclassified material not authorized for 

public release, all documents the FAA 

considered in developing this rule, 

including economic analyses and 

technical reports, may be accessed from 

the internet through the docket for this 

rulemaking. 

Those documents may be viewed 

online at https://www.regulations.gov 

using the docket number listed above. A 

copy of this rule will be placed in the 

docket. Electronic retrieval help and 

guidelines are available on the website. 

It is available 24 hours each day, 365 

days each year. An electronic copy of 

this document may also be downloaded 

from the Office of the Federal Register’s 

website at https://

www.federalregister.gov and the 

Government Publishing Office’s website 

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

also be found 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. 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 200 / Wednesday, October 16, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 83427 

B. Small Business Regulatory 

Enforcement Fairness Act 

The Small Business Regulatory 

Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 

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

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

comply with small entity requests for 

information or advice about compliance 

with statutes and regulations within its 

jurisdiction. A small entity with 

questions regarding this document may 

contact its local FAA official or the 

persons listed under the FOR FURTHER 

INFORMATION CONTACT heading at 

the beginning of the preamble. To find 

out more about SBREFA on the internet, 

visit http://www.faa.gov/regulations_

policies/rulemaking/sbre_act/. 

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 91 

Air traffic control, Aircraft, Airmen, 

Airports, Aviation safety, Freight, Iraq. 

The Amendment 

In consideration of the foregoing, the 

Federal Aviation Administration 

amends chapter I of title 14, Code of 

Federal Regulations, as follows: 

PART 91—GENERAL OPERATING AND 

FLIGHT RULES 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 91 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(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 § 91.1605 by revising 

paragraph (e) to read as follows: 

§ 91.1605 Special Federal Aviation 

Regulation No. 77—Prohibition Against 

Certain Flights in the Baghdad Flight 

Information Region (FIR) (ORBB). 

* * * * * 

(e) Expiration. This SFAR will remain 

in effect until October 26, 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 Gordon Whitaker, 

Administrator. 

[FR Doc. 2024–23785 Filed 10–15–24; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

Bureau of Industry and Security 

15 CFR Part 740 

[Docket No. 240917–0241] 

RIN 0694–AJ89 

Updated License Exception 

Implemented Export Controls (IEC) 

Eligible Items and Destinations 

AGENCY: Bureau of Industry and 

Security, Department of Commerce. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: This rule revises the version 

date for the License Exception 

Implemented Export Controls (IEC) table 

posted on the Bureau of Industry and 

Security (BIS) website and replaces the 

long URL address for the table to a 

shorter and simpler URL address. BIS 

posted an updated table on September 

17, 2024, that updated the eligible 

countries for License Exception IEC by 

adding Denmark, Finland, and Japan to 

appropriate items in the table. 

DATES: This rule is effective October 16, 

2024. The incorporation by reference of 

certain material listed in the rule is 

approved by the Director of the Federal 

Register as of October 16, 2024. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Office of National Security Controls, 

phone: 202–482–0092; email: 

LicenseExceptionIEC@bis.doc. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

On August 27, 2024, the Office of the 

Federal Register approved an 

Incorporation By Reference (IBR) 

request submitted by BIS to post a table 

entitled ‘‘License Exception 

Implemented Export Controls (IEC) 

eligible items and destinations’’ on BIS’ 

website. The table includes items and 

countries eligible for License Exception 

IEC, see § 740.24 of the EAR. 

On September 5, 2024, BIS posted on 

its website updates to that table. The 

updates included changing the last 

modified date from ‘‘August 27, 2024’’ 

to ‘‘September 5, 2024’’; changing the 

eligibility date for all the rows from 

‘‘August 27, 2024’’ to ‘‘September 6, 

2024’’ (which was the date of 

publication for the rule entitled 

‘‘Commerce Control List Additions and 

Revisions; Implementation of Controls 

on Advanced Technologies Consistent 

with Controls Implemented by 

International Partners,’’ RIN 0694–AJ60 

(89 FR 72926)); and correcting the 

misspelling of ‘‘eligibility’’ in the table 

title. 

On September 17, 2024, BIS posted on 

its website an update to the table that 

added Denmark, Finland to the table, 

and modified the entries for Japan on 

the table for appropriate item eligibility 

to match the implementation by these 

countries. 

Finally, this rule revises paragraph (c) 

of § 740.24 by revising the last modified 

date to September 17, 2024, and 

changing the URL to a simpler address 

of www.bis.gov/IEC. 

Export Control Reform Act of 2018 

On August 13, 2018, the President 

signed into law the John S. McCain 

National Defense Authorization Act for 

Fiscal Year 2019, which included the 

Export Control Reform Act of 2018 

(ECRA) (codified, as amended, at 50 

U.S.C. 4801–4852). ECRA provides the 

legal basis for BIS’s principal authorities 

and serves as the authority under which 

BIS issues this rule. In particular, and as 

noted elsewhere, Section 1753 of ECRA 

(50 U.S.C. 4812) authorizes the 

regulation of exports, reexports, and 

transfers (in-country) of items subject to 

U.S. jurisdiction. Further, Section 

1754(a)(1)–(16) of ECRA (50 U.S.C. 

4813(a)(1)–(16)) authorizes, inter alia, 

the establishment of a list of controlled 

items; the prohibition of unauthorized 

exports, reexports, and transfers (incountry) of controlled items; the 

requirement of licenses or other 

authorizations for exports, reexports, 

and transfers (in-country) of controlled 

items; apprising the public of changes in 

policy, regulations, and procedures; and 

any other action necessary to carry out 

ECRA that is not otherwise prohibited 

by law. Pursuant to Section 1762(a) of 

ECRA (50 U.S.C. 4821(a)), these changes 

can be imposed in a final rule without 

prior notice and comment. 

Rulemaking Requirements 

1. Executive Orders 12866, 13563, and 

14094 direct agencies to assess all costs 

and benefits of available regulatory 

alternatives and, if regulation is 

necessary, to select regulatory 

approaches that maximize net benefits 

(including potential economic, 

environmental, public health and safety 

effects and distributive impacts and 

equity). Executive Order 13563 

emphasizes the importance of 

quantifying both costs and benefits and 

of reducing costs, harmonizing rules, 

and promoting flexibility. This final rule 

has not been designated a significant 

regulatory action under section 3(f) of 

Executive Order 12866, as amended by 

Executive Order 14094. 

2. Notwithstanding any other 

provision of law, no person is required 

to respond to, nor shall any person be 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1