### 19861 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 66 / Wednesday, April 6, 2016 / Rules and Regulations

1 73 FR 29550 (May 21, 2008).

2 73 FR 3510 (Jan. 18, 2008). 3 80 FR 1274. number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

Environmental Review

The FAA has determined that this action qualifies for categorical exclusion
under the National Environmental Policy Act in accordance with FAA Order 1050.1F, ‘‘Environmental Impacts: Policies and Procedures,’’ paragraph 5–6.5a. This airspace action is not expected to cause any potentially significant environmental impacts, and no extraordinary circumstances exist that warrant preparation of an
environmental assessment.

Lists of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

Adoption of the Amendment

In consideration of the foregoing, the
Federal Aviation Administration amends 14 CFR part 71 as follows:

**PART 71—DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR**  **TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND**
**REPORTING POINTS**

■ 1. The authority citation for Part 71
continues to read as follows:

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g); 40103,
40113, 40120, E.O. 10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959–1963 Comp., p. 389.

**§ 71.1 [Amended]**

■ 2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order 7400.9Z, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 6, 2015, effective September 15, 2015, is amended as
follows:

Paragraph 5000 Class D Airspace.

* * * * *

ASO FL D Bartow, FL [Amended]

Bartow Municipal Airport, FL

(Lat. 27 ° 56 ′ 36 ′′ N., long. 81 ° 47 ′00 ′′ W.)
That airspace extending upward from the surface to and including 1,600 feet MSL within a 4-mile radius of Bartow Municipal Airport. This Class D airspace area is effective during the specific dates and times established in advance by a Notice to

Airmen. The effective date and time will thereafter be continuously published in the Airport/Facility Directory.

Issued in College Park, Georgia, on March

29, 2016. Ryan W. Almasy,

Manager, Operations Support Group Eastern Service Center, Air Traffic Organization.

[FR Doc. 2016–07783 Filed 4–5–16; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 4910–13–P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION** 

**Federal Aviation Administration**

**14 CFR Part 93**

**[Docket No.: FAA–2008–0221]**

**Change of Newark Liberty International Airport (EWR) Designation** 

**AGENCY :**  Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

**ACTION :**  Change of Newark Liberty International Airport (EWR) Designation.

**SUMMARY :**  This document announces that the FAA will designate Newark Liberty International Airport (EWR) as a Level 2, schedule-facilitated airport under the International Air Transport Association (IATA) Worldwide Slot Guidelines (WSG) effective for the Winter 2016 scheduling season, which begins on October 30, 2016. The FAA has determined this designation is necessary based on an updated demand and capacity analysis of the airport. The current FAA Order designating EWR as a Level 3, slot-controlled airport will expire on October 29, 2016.

**DATES :**  This designation takes effect on October 30, 2016.

**ADDRESSES :**  Requests may be submitted by mail to Slot Administration Office, AGC–220 Office of the Chief Counsel, 800 Independence Ave. SW., Washington, DC 20591; facsimile: 202– 267–7277; or by email to: 7-AWAslotadmin@faa.gov.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  For questions contact: Susan Pfingstler, System Operations Services, Air Traffic Organization, Federal Aviation Administration, 600 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591; telephone (202) 267–6462; email susan.pfingstler@faa.gov.

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :** 
Background

By Order dated May 21, 2008, the FAA placed temporary limits on scheduled operations at EWR to mitigate congestion and delays at the airport. 1 The Order addressed the FAA’s concern about a spillover effect in the summer 2008 scheduling season resulting from the Agency’s Order limiting operations at John F. Kennedy International Airport (JFK), which took effect in March 2008. 2

Under the EWR Order, the FAA (1) established hourly limits of 81 scheduled operations during the peak period; (2) imposed an 80 percent minimum usage requirement for Operating Authorizations (OAs or slots) with defined exceptions; (3) provided a
mechanism for withdrawal of OAs for FAA operational reasons; (4) established procedures to allocate withdrawn, surrendered, or unallocated OAs; and, (5) allowed for trades and leases of OAs
for consideration for the duration of the
Order.

On January 8, 2015, the Department of Transportation (DOT) and FAA issued the Slot Management and Transparency for LaGuardia Airport, John F. Kennedy International Airport, and Newark Liberty International Airport Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM). 3 The DOT and FAA are currently reviewing
the comments received on the NPRM and considering the impacts of the EWR Level 2 designation on the rulemaking.

Based on the FAA’s review of operational performance, demand, and capacity discussed in this document, Level 3 slot controls are no longer warranted for EWR. Rather, the FAA will transition EWR to a Level 2, schedule-facilitated airport, starting with the Winter 2016 scheduling season. In addition, the FAA also has updated the performance, demand, and capacity analyses for JFK and LGA and
has determined that Level 3 slotcontrolled restrictions remain necessary for these airports. Therefore, through separate notices published in the Federal Register , the FAA will be extending the JFK and LGA Orders until October 27, 2018.

This document confirms the EWR Order will expire on October 29, 2016. A copy of this document will be placed
in Docket FAA–2008–0221. As explained herein, the FAA is designating EWR as a Level 2 airport effective October 30, 2016. As further explained in this document, the FAA has conducted a screening for potential impacts to noise and air emissions as a result of this change in designation at
EWR and has determined that the proposed action does not have the potential to cause a significant impact.

Capacity and Operational Performance

Review

The FAA regularly reviews operational performance and demand at the New York City area airports as part of ongoing efforts to improve the efficiency of the air traffic control system. Section 413 of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act, Pub. L. 112–95, 126 Stat. 11 (Feb. 14, 2012), requires the FAA to take actions to ensure that aircraft operations of air carriers do not exceed the hourly


### 19862 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 66 / Wednesday, April 6, 2016 / Rules and Regulations

4 On-time gate arrivals have a gate arrival delay of less than 15 minutes. The gate arrival delay is
the difference in minutes between the actual time the aircraft arrives at the gate and the scheduled gate arrival time.

5 A copy of the MITRE summary of performance comparing 2015 and 2007 has been placed in the dockets for the EWR Order (Docket No. FAA–2008– 0221), JFK Order (Docket No. FAA–2007–29320), LGA Order (Docket No. FAA–2006–25755) and the Slot Management and Transparency for LaGuardia Airport, John F. Kennedy International Airport, and Newark Liberty International Airport NPRM (Docket No. FAA–2014–1073). 6 There are a few additional flights by carriers
such as FedEx and UPS that are allocated slots and do not publish schedules in the FAA’s Innovata
schedule database. maximum departure and arrival rate established by the Administrator for such operations. The FAA reviews data on actual operations, including the number of hourly and daily air traffic operations, runway capacity and utilization, aircraft fleet mix, scheduled and unscheduled demand, on-time performance relative to schedule, the number and duration of flight arrival and departure delays, airfield or other capacity changes, and air traffic control procedures.

On an annual basis since adopting the 2008 Order, the FAA has performed analyses to compare and contrast operational and performance data for each year subsequent to the peak 2007 summer scheduling season to identify operational and performance trends. Such analyses have consistently placed particular emphasis on the May through August months since this period includes the peak summer demand. The on-time performance and delay metrics at EWR show significant improvements during such peak periods of demand. For example, on-time gate arrivals at EWR have increased by about 11 percentage points when comparing May through August 2015 to the same period

in 2007. 4 On-time gate departures improved by approximately three percentage points. The mean arrival and departure delays are down by about 33 percent, and the delays greater than 60 minutes are down by 37 percent for arrivals and 38 percent for departures.

The FAA recently modeled the summer 2015 demand against summer 2015 runway capacity and then compared the results to the delay profile
that was the basis for the 2008 Order. Operations in 2015 were down by 8 percent, total minutes of arrival delays went from 16,100 to 10,100 for a 37 percent decrease, mean arrival delays
decreased from 24.0 minutes to 16.3 minutes, and mean departure delays
from 18.0 minutes to 14.2 minutes. 5

The FAA also reviewed scheduled flights at EWR over the last few years. Scheduled demand was routinely below the 81 hourly scheduling limits in the Order, even during the busiest early morning, afternoon, and evening hours. For example, in the 3 p.m. through 8:59 p.m. local hours, weekday scheduled demand in the May-August period averaged 71 flights per hour in 2011, 74 flights per hour in 2013, and 72 flights per hour in 2015. 6 Early summer 2016
schedules reflect similar demand patterns. At the same time, the FAA denied requests for new flights as slots are allocated up to the scheduling limits. Carriers are generally maintaining historic slots and meeting the minimum usage rules under the Order; therefore, weekday slots in peak hours do not regularly revert to the FAA
for reallocation. The result is scheduled
demand that is well below the FAA scheduling limits and runway capacity at the airport to handle additionalflights. This is unlike other FAA slotcontrolled airports, which have significantly fewer differences between
the number of allocated slots and the scheduled demand, especially in peak periods.

FAA Level 2 Determination and
Planned Schedule Review

In light of the FAA’s demand and capacity analysis at EWR, the FAA has
determined that EWR does not warrant a Level 3 designation. The FAA’s analysis demonstrates that runway capacity exists for additional operations. However, under a Level 3 designation, the FAA must deny requests from carriers to add or retime operations
based on allocated slots rather than scheduled and actual operations, provided the carrier satisfies the minimum slot usage requirements. Further, the FAA simply cannot increase the scheduling limits tocompensate for slots that are underscheduled but meet the minimum usage rules, as this would require the FAA to determine that additional capacity exists for operations above the current scheduling limits.

The FAA also considered whether EWR should be re-designated as a Level 1 airport since EWR operated for many years without scheduling limits while nearby JFK and LGA were slot controlled. During this time, EWR provided access to the New York City area and, while delays were high compared to other airports, overall demand was generally consistent with runway capacity. However, there are practical limitations to the number of additional flights that EWR can accept from a runway and airport facilities perspective. Moreover, we expect there will be significant demand for access to EWR, given its location and that the JFKand LGA airports will remain slotcontrolled airports. Thus, the FAA has
determined that the Level 2 schedule facilitation process and its related principles of voluntary cooperation will best balance the anticipated demand with the practical limitations on the number of additional flights possible at EWR. Following the effective date of the Level 2 designation, the FAA will
continue to review whether Level 2 is appropriate or whether other action might be needed. The FAA does not expect to make any airport level changes
based on short-term airline schedule plans or resulting delays.

Consistent with existing FAA practice
for schedule facilitation at Level 2 airports, under the Level 2 designation at EWR, the FAA will request and
review airline schedules for the 6 a.m. to 10:59 p.m. period and either approve the request or work with carriers to achieve schedule adjustments as needed to avoid exceeding the airport’s capacity. The success of Level 2 schedule facilitation procedures depends upon a number of factors
delineated in the WSG. The FAA will apply the priorities for schedule
facilitation outlined in the WSG. In particular, priority will be given to carriers based on actual approved schedules and operations conducted in the previous corresponding season over new demand for the same timings.

Additionally, although there is some runway capacity available at EWR, approval of new or retimed operations must avoid significant scheduled peaking and allow for recovery to avoid causing a consistent level of unacceptable delay, which could
necessitate a return to Level 3. The FAA intends, if necessary, to deny schedule
submissions that exceed the declared airport runway capacity and to offer
alternative times to carriers. The WSG recognizes that some carriers might operate at times without approval from the airport’s schedule facilitator. Consistent with the WSG, carriers
would not receive historic status for such flights if the airport level changes
from Level 2 to Level 3.

Finally, while the FAA is responsible for managing the airport’s runway capacity, there are terminal, gate, and other operational factors that may require schedule adjustments. The FAA recognizes that the entry at EWR has been limited by runway slot availability for the last 8 years and new entry and growth by incumbent carriers is expected. The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey (Port Authority) currently reviews schedules for


### 19863 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 66 / Wednesday, April 6, 2016 / Rules and Regulations

international passenger flights operating at Terminal B. A carrier must separately obtain approval from the Port Authority for Terminal B flights and request runway slots from the FAA under the current Level 3 designation Order. After
the effective date for the Level 2 designation, carriers would continue to work with the Port Authority to synchronize with the relevant terminals and gates at EWR to the extent practicable. Under existing practice, the FAA regularly works with the Port Authority and carriers to reconcile
differences between available terminal/ gate and runway times. The FAA expects this process to continue under the Level 2 designation based on impacts to the availability of facilities. This necessary de-conflicting of carriers’ requested terminal/gate and runway schedules is likely to be most significant
in the initial transition from Level 3 to
Level 2 in the Winter 2016 and Summer

2017 seasons.

Environmental Considerations

The FAA conducted an environmental screening for potential impacts to noise and air emissions relative to the change of the EWR designation from Level 3 to Level 2. Based on the screening, the FAA has determined that this action may be categorically excluded from further environmental analysis according to FAA Order 1050.1, ‘‘Environmental Impacts: Policies and Procedures,’’ paragraph 5–6.6.f. Specifically, paragraph 5–6.6.f states that ‘‘Regulations, standards, and exemptions (excluding those which if implemented may cause a significant impact on the human environment)’’ are categorically excluded from further
environmental review.

The FAA conducted noise screening of the proposed action using Area Equivalent Method and determined that the action does not have the potential to cause a significant impact on noise
levels of noise sensitive areas. In addition, the FAA conducted an analysis of air emissions using Aviation Environmental Design Tool and
determined that the action does not have the potential to cause a significant impact on air quality or a violation of Federal, state, tribal, or local air quality standards under the Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 7401–7671q. Therefore, implementation of the airport level change is not expected to result in significant adverse impacts to the
human environment. The implementation of this action is not expected to result in any extraordinary
circumstances in accordance with FAA Order 1050.1. A copy of the categorical exclusion has been placed in the docket
associated with this action.

Future Operational Demand and
Performance Reviews

The FAA will continue to regularly review and monitor performance at EWR, as well as carrier compliance with FAA-approved schedules. The FAA will
continue to review data on actual operations, including the number of hourly and daily air traffic operations, runway capacity and utilization, aircraft fleet mix, scheduled and unscheduled demand, on-time performance relative to schedule, the number and duration of flight arrival and departure delays, airfield or other capacity changes, and air traffic control procedures. The FAA will publish a notice in April, 2016 announcing the schedule submission deadline and the declared runway capacity limits for the Winter 2016 scheduling season.

The FAA expects that delays at EWR
will increase over current levels as flights are added, but an incremental increase in delays would not necessarily
mean the FAA would revert to Level 3. The FAA’s objective while working with carriers under the Level 2 process is to appropriately balance and maximize the use of the available runway capacity at EWR while maintaining an acceptable level of delay.

Issued in Washington, DC on April 1, 2016. Daniel E. Smiley, Acting Vice President, System Operations

Services.

[FR Doc. 2016–07910 Filed 4–1–16; 4:15 pm]

**BILLING CODE 4910–13–P**

**DEPARTMENT OF STATE**

**22 CFR Part 171**

**RIN 1400–AD44**

**[Public Notice: 9510]**

**Public Access to Information**

**AGENCY :**  Department of State.

**ACTION :**  Final rule.

**SUMMARY :**  The Department of State (the Department) finalizes its revisions to its regulations implementing the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) and the Privacy Act. The final rule reflects changes in FOIA and other statutes and consequent changes in the Department’s procedures since the last revision of the Department’s regulations on this subject.

**DATES :**  This rule is effective on May 6,

2016.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  Alice Kottmyer, Office of the Legal Adviser, Office of Management, U.S. Department of State, kottmyeram@ state.gov, (202) 647–2318.

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :**  On July 28, 2015, the Department published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to update its FOIA and Privacy Act rules contained in 22 CFR part 171. See 80 FR 44898, and the discussion therein.

This rulemaking responds to public
comments and finalizes the rule. The rule is finalized as published in the NPRM, except for minor format edits; modifications, as indicated below, in response to public comments; and the addition of one clause to § 171.24(a), which codifies a longstanding provision of the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. 552a(c)(3)), and which was inadvertently omitted from the NPRM. Since § 171.24(a) is substantially the same as 5 U.S.C. 552a(c)(3) in the Privacy Act itself, it need not be published for comment.

Response to Public Comments

The Department would like to thank the members of the public who invested time in reviewing the proposed changes to the FOIA and Privacy Act regulations, and for providing very useful feedback.

First Public Comment

The first commenter expressed concern about the proposal for the Department to charge a fee of 15 cents per page of duplication. The commenter pointed out that present day photocopying and scanning is relatively cheap, and expressed a belief that the Department’s lease arrangements reflect a significantly lesser per page cost than 15 cents; in addition, he stated that other agencies’ costs vary and might be lower, and no evidence was provided on how the Department formulated the fee. He stated that some other agencies have lowered duplication costs in their regulations in the last two years to be in
line with actual direct costs.

Department Response

The fee charged for photocopying at the Department is 15 cents per page, which is charged at a standard rate throughout the Department for copying services. This charge is based on the costs calculated by examining paper costs, machinery, and services provided to produce a photocopy. Other agencies and departments charge FOIA duplication fees that range from five cents to twenty cents per page. The Department’s duplication fee of fifteen cents per page is in line with what other agencies and departments charge for duplication. For this reason, the Department declines to change the duplication fee as suggested.