[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 200 (Wednesday, October 16, 2024)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 83421-83427]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-23785]



========================================================================
Rules and Regulations
                                                Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________

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. 

========================================================================


Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 200 / Wednesday, October 16, 2024 / 
Rules and Regulations

[[Page 83421]]



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 third-party 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 <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#1b22365d5a5a36546d7e69687e7a685d77727c736f4b6974737279726f727475685b7d7a7a357c746d"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="c6ffeb808787eb89b0a3b4b5a3a7b580aaafa1aeb296b4a9aeafa4afb2afa9a8b586a0a7a7e8a1a9b0">[email protected]</span></a>.

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, Sec.  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, Sec.  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

[[Page 83422]]

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 anti-
aircraft 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 over-restrictive, 
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 under-restrictive, 
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, Sec.  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, 
Sec.  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).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Prohibition Against Certain Flights in the Baghdad Flight 
Information Region (FIR) (ORBB) final rule, 83 FR 53985 (Oct. 26, 
2018).
    \2\ Prohibition Against Certain Flights in the Baghdad Flight 
Information Region (FIR) final rule, 85 FR 65686, (Oct. 16, 2020).
    \3\ Extension of the Prohibition Against Certain Flights in the 
Baghdad Flight Information Region (FIR) (ORBB) final rule, 87 FR 
57384 (Sep. 20, 2022).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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 
T[uuml]rkiye previously had conducted various no-notice cross-border 
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

[[Page 83423]]

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 non-state actor use of an advanced 
anti-aircraft weapons system, likely without full access to a complete 
airspace picture. This likely lack of a complete airspace picture--
including civil aviation operations transiting north-south 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 cross-border 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, Sec.  91.1605, from October 26, 2024, until 
October 26, 2027.
    Further amendments to SFAR No. 77, Sec.  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, Sec.  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, Sec.  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, Sec.  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).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ This 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The requestor must send the request to the Associate Administrator 
for Aviation Safety, Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence

[[Page 83424]]

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 <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#af9682e9eeee82e0d9cadddccacedce9c3c6c8c7dbffddc0c7c6cdc6dbc6c0c1dcefc9cece81c8c0d9"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="4871650e090965073e2d3a3b2d293b0e24212f203c183a2720212a213c2127263b082e2929662f273e">[email protected]</span></a> 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, Sec.  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--
    <bullet> The proposed operation(s), including the nature of the 
mission being supported;
    <bullet> The service the person(s) covered by the SFAR will 
provide;
    <bullet> 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
    <bullet> 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 pre-mission 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 <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#0930244f484824467f6c7b7a6c687a4f65606e617d597b6661606b607d6066677a496f6868276e667f"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="675e4a2126264a2811021514020614210b0e000f133715080f0e050e130e0809142701060649000811">[email protected]</span></a> 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, Sec.  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, Sec.  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

[[Page 83425]]

fulfills the standards described in 14 CFR 11.81, the FAA consistently 
finds necessary the following information:
    <bullet> The proposed operation(s), including the nature of the 
operation;
    <bullet> The service the person(s) covered by the SFAR will 
provide;
    <bullet> 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;
    <bullet> 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
    <bullet> 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, Sec.  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, Sec.  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.

[[Page 83426]]

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.

[[Page 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

0
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).


0
2. Amend Sec.  91.1605 by revising paragraph (e) to read as follows:


Sec.  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


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>