Source: https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2019/08/19/2019-17494/security-threat-disqualification-update
Timestamp: 2019-09-19 17:17:28
Document Index: 246153665

Matched Legal Cases: ['§\u200961', 'art 3', '§\u200961', '§\u200944903', '§\u200946111', 'art 3', '§\u20093', '§\u200946111', '§\u200946111', '§\u200946111', '§\u200946111']

Effective October 18, 2019.
Amendment Nos. 3-2, 61-143, 63-42, and 65-59
FAA-2018-0656
B. Summary of the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
https://www.federalregister.gov/d/2019-17494 https://www.federalregister.gov/d/2019-17494
The FAA's authority to issue rules on aviation safety is found in Title 49 of the United States Code (49 U.S.C). Subtitle I, Section 106, describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's authority.
Additionally, this rulemaking is promulgated pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 44903(j)(2)(D)(i), which requires that TSA coordinate with the Administrator of the FAA to ensure that individuals are screened before being certificated by the FAA. Thus, the FAA will not issue a certificate to a screened individual identified by TSA as a security threat.
This rulemaking amends the current FAA security threat disqualification regulations in title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) §§ 61.18, 63.14, and 65.14 and consolidates them into part 3 of 14 CFR. Those regulations provide, in sum, that no person is eligible to hold a certificate, rating, or authorization issued under each corresponding or respective part when the TSA notifies the FAA in writing of an adverse security threat determination.
Since 2004, the FAA has not applied these regulations to United States (U.S.) citizens or resident aliens, instead relying on the statutory authority in 49 U.S.C. 46111, Public Law 108-176 (December 12, 2003), and 49 U.S.C. 44903(j)(2)(D)(i), Public Law 108-458 (December 17, 2004), enacted after the FAA issued its security threat disqualification regulations. Section 46111 directs the FAA to take action against “any part of a certificate” issued under Title 49 in response to a security threat determination by the TSA and also provides a hearing and appeal Start Printed Page 42800process for U.S. citizens. Section 44903(j)(2)(D)(i) provides that individuals will be screened against the consolidated and integrated terrorist watchlist maintained by the federal government prior to being certificated by the FAA. This final rule is necessary to conform the previously-cited FAA regulations to 49 U.S.C. 46111 and 44903(j)(2)(D)(i) and to clarify the FAA's process for preventing the issuance of certificates to applicants that the TSA finds to be security threats.
Consistent with 49 U.S.C. 46111 and 44903(j)(2)(D)(i), the security threat regulations in this final rule describe the actions the FAA will take on a certificate or certificate application when it receives notification from the TSA that an individual is a security threat. The FAA will not issue a certificate or any part of a certificate when the TSA has notified the FAA in writing that the individual poses, or is suspected of posing, a risk of air piracy or terrorism or a threat to airline or passenger safety. For certificates already issued, the FAA will amend, modify, suspend, or revoke any FAA-issued certificate or part of such certificate upon written notification from the TSA that the certificate holder poses, or is suspected of posing, a risk of air piracy or terrorism or a threat to airline or passenger safety.[1]
The final rule provides similar requirements found in the existing security threat disqualification regulations. Thus, the final rule will not impose any new costs to the industry.
In response to the attack on the U.S. on September 11, 2001, the FAA issued the current security threat disqualification regulations to prevent a possible imminent hazard to aircraft, persons, and property within the United States. Specifically, in 2003, the FAA, in consultation with the TSA, determined that security threat disqualification regulations were necessary to minimize security threats and potential security vulnerabilities to the fullest extent possible. The FAA, the TSA, and other federal security agencies were concerned about the potential use of aircraft to carry out further terrorist acts in the United States. Accordingly, the FAA issued a final rule, Ineligibility for an Airman Certificate Based on Security Grounds, 68 FR 3772 (January 24, 2003). This 2003 final rule provides that an individual determined by the TSA to be a security threat is ineligible for airman certification and thus cannot hold an FAA-issued airman certificate. The FAA took this action because a person who poses a security threat should not be in a position that could be used to take actions that are contrary to civil aviation security and, therefore, safety in air commerce. These security threat disqualification regulations are found in current §§ 61.18, 63.14, and 65.14.
Subsequent to the issuance of the current FAA security threat disqualification regulations, the President signed into law 49 U.S.C. 46111 [2] and 49 U.S.C. 44903(j)(2)(D)(i).[3] Section 46111 requires the FAA to amend, modify, suspend, or revoke certificates or any part of a certificate issued under Title 49, when the TSA informs the FAA that the holder “poses, or is suspected of posing, a risk of air piracy or terrorism or a threat to airline or passenger safety.” Under § 44903(j)(2)(D)(i), the TSA and the FAA must work together to “ensure that individuals are screened before being certificated by the [FAA].”
After the enactment of these statutory provisions, the FAA did not update its regulations. However, the FAA did publish in the Federal Register its disposition of comments to the 2003 final rule.[4] In the comment disposition, the FAA noted that, if additional rulemaking was necessary to reflect the statutory requirements of § 46111, the FAA would utilize notice and comment rulemaking. In addition, the FAA summarized two D.C. Circuit cases from 2004 that sought judicial review of the FAA and the TSA security threat disqualification regulations. In one of those cases, Coalition of Airline Pilots Associations v. FAA, 370 F.3d 1184 (D.C. Cir. 2004), the FAA, the TSA, and the Department of Justice pledged that they would not apply existing regulations to U.S. citizens or resident aliens. This case is further addressed in the Discussion of Final Rule section of this preamble.[5]
The FAA published the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) on July 23, 2018.[6] Generally, the proposal would establish in regulation the security threat disqualification requirement mandated in 49 U.S.C. 46111 and 44903(j)(2)(D)(i). In the NPRM, the FAA proposed to establish in regulation the FAA's process for amending, modifying, suspending, and revoking FAA-issued certificates and any part of such certificates issued to individuals under Title 49 based on the TSA's written notification that a certificate holder poses a security threat. The FAA also proposed to clarify the FAA's process for denying or holding in abeyance applications for certificates and any parts of such certificates when the TSA notifies the FAA that an applicant poses a security threat.
The FAA received one comment on the NPRM, and it was not within the scope of the proposal.
The final rule codifies, in 14 CFR, the FAA's authority to amend, modify, suspend, and revoke FAA-issued certificates and any part of such certificates issued to individuals under Title 49 of the United States Code based on the TSA's written notification that a certificate holder poses a security threat. The final rule also clarifies the FAA's authority to deny or hold in abeyance applications for certificates and any parts of such certificates when the TSA notifies the FAA that an applicant poses a security threat. The final rule also codifies the security threat disqualification requirement mandated in 49 U.S.C. 46111 and 44903(j)(2)(D)(i).
Both 49 U.S.C. 46111 and 44903(j)(2)(D)(i), on which this rule relies, refer to certificate holders and applicants in terms of individuals, rather than entities.[7] Accordingly, this Start Printed Page 42801final rule addresses only individuals who hold or are applying for certificates issued under Title 49. There is separate statutory authority for FAA certificate action against entities based on TSA security threat determinations.[8]
While 49 U.S.C. 46111 sets out a mechanism by which the FAA handles the amendment, modification, suspension, or revocation of an individual's certificate, it is silent as to how the FAA should handle security threat determinations at the certificate application stage. This final rule codifies the FAA's current process for preventing the issuance of any certificate to an individual at the application stage when the TSA finds the individual to be a security threat. The FAA's authority to deny or hold in abeyance an individual's certificate application based on the TSA's written notification that an individual poses a security threat is necessary to implement 49 U.S.C. 44903(j)(2)(D)(i), which requires the FAA to coordinate with the TSA to ensure that certificate applicants are screened against all appropriate records in the consolidated and integrated terrorist watchlist maintained by the Federal Government before being certificated by the FAA.
The FAA must not issue certificates to any individual who the TSA finds to be a security threat. This final rule provides that, upon notification from the TSA, the FAA would hold in abeyance the individual's application(s) during an appeal to the TSA of its security threat determination. The FAA will deny an application only upon the TSA's notification of a final security threat determination. Alternatively, if the TSA notifies the FAA that it has withdrawn its security threat determination, the FAA will continue processing the application.
The FAA will apply the security threat disqualification regulations to all individuals, including U.S. citizens and resident aliens, who hold FAA-issued certificates or are applying for these certificates. This approach will conform the security threat disqualification regulations with 49 U.S.C. 46111 and 44903(j)(2)(D)(i). It will also close a gap in the FAA's security threat disqualification regulations which are currently not applied to U.S. citizens and resident aliens pursuant to a pledge made by the FAA and the TSA as a result of Coalition of Airline Pilots Associations v. FAA, 370 F.3d 1184 (D.C. Cir. 2004). In Coalition of Airline Pilots Associations, unions representing aviation workers raised various challenges to the current TSA and the FAA security threat disqualification regulations. The D.C. Circuit never reached the merits of the unions' claims. Instead, the Court dismissed the unions' petition for review, finding that intervening events had mooted their claims, specifically the new laws enacted by Congress. Both the TSA and the FAA pledged that the existing security threat regulations would no longer be applied to U.S. citizens or resident aliens as a result of the enactment of 49 U.S.C. 46111, which provides a different mechanism for TSA security threat determinations and appeal procedures for U.S. citizens.[9] The agencies also noted that, when they issued new security threat disqualification regulations, they would do so pursuant to notice and comment rulemaking. Another D.C. Circuit decision, decided on the same day as Coalition of Airline Pilots Associations, upheld the application of the same FAA security threat disqualification regulations to non-resident aliens because the regulations provide sufficient due process for non-resident aliens. Jifry v. FAA, 370 F.3d 1174 (D.C. Cir. 2004).
This final rule establishes regulations that apply equally to all certificate holders and applicants.
In the case of a security threat disqualification, the certificate action or application denial will be based solely on the TSA's applicant vetting and security threat determinations, as mandated under 49 U.S.C. 46111 and 44903(j)(2)(D)(i). TSA's vetting and security threat determination authority is provided for in the Aviation and Transportation Security Act, Public Law 107-71 (115 stat. 597, November 19, 2001). The FAA relies on TSA to make these security threat determinations and is not privy to the evidentiary basis for them. Therefore, the FAA's certificate actions and application denials are based solely on written notification by the TSA of a security threat determination against an individual. Accordingly, appeals of the security threat determinations made by the TSA are made through the TSA's administrative appeal process.[10]
The FAA's certificate denials are generally covered under 49 U.S.C. 44703 and, therefore, are appealable to the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB). In cases of security threat disqualifications, if the certificate action is appealable to the NTSB, the FAA does not anticipate that the scope of these appeals will extend beyond an examination of the procedural ground for the certificate action or application denial because an affected individual will be provided the opportunity to challenge the substance of TSA's security threat determination under TSA's appeal process.[11]
Changes to Federal regulations must undergo several economic analyses. First, Executive Order 12866 and Executive Order 13563 direct that each Federal agency shall propose or adopt a regulation only upon a reasoned determination that the benefits of the intended regulation justify its costs. Second, the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (Pub. L. 96-354) requires agencies to analyze the economic impact of regulatory changes on small entities. Third, the Trade Agreements Act (Pub. L. 96-39) prohibits agencies from setting standards that create unnecessary obstacles to the foreign commerce of the United States. In developing U.S. standards, the Trade 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. Start Printed Page 42802104-4) 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.
The existing security threat disqualification regulations in 14 CFR 61.18, 63.14, and 65.14 disqualify any person who the TSA has found to be a security threat from obtaining an FAA certificate. These regulations went into effect on January 24, 2003. A year later, the authority in 49 U.S.C. 46111 and 49 U.S.C. 44903(j)(2)(D)(i) became law. Section 46111 directs the FAA to take action against the holder of any part of a certificate in response to a security threat determination by the TSA and also provides an appeal process for U.S. citizens. Section 44903(j)(2)(D)(i) directs TSA to coordinate with the FAA to ensure that individuals are screened against a consolidated and integrated terrorist watchlist maintained by the Federal Government prior to being certificated by the FAA. The existing regulations and the statutory authority are virtually identical, and the FAA has been relying on the statutory authority, not the existing regulations, to prevent individuals who are security threats from obtaining or holding a certificate. The FAA has not updated its regulations since the enactment of statutory authority 49 U.S.C. 46111 and 49 U.S.C. 44903(j)(2)(D)(i). Since there are no new requirements in the final rule, the expected outcome will be a minimal cost, if any.
The FAA has, therefore, determined that this final rule is not a “significant regulatory action” as defined in section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866.
The final rule provides requirements based on the existing statutory authority located at 49 U.S.C. 46111 and 49 U.S.C. 44903(j)(2)(D)(i). Thus, the final rule will not impose any new costs to the industry. The expected outcome would be a minimal economic impact on any small entity affected by this rulemaking action.
The Trade Agreements Act of 1979 (Pub. L. 96-39), as amended by the Uruguay Round Agreements Act (Pub. L. 103-465), prohibits Federal agencies from establishing standards or engaging in related activities that create unnecessary obstacles to the foreign commerce of the United States. Pursuant to these Acts, the establishment of standards is not considered an unnecessary obstacle to the foreign commerce of the U.S., 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 the objective of the rule is for the safety of the American public and is therefore not considered an unnecessary obstacle to the foreign commerce of the United States.
In keeping with U.S. obligations under the Convention on International Civil Aviation, it is FAA policy to conform to International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) Standards and Recommended Practices to the maximum extent practicable. The FAA has determined that there are no ICAO Standards and Recommended Practices that correspond to this final rule.
Pursuant to the Congressional Review Act (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.), the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs designated this rule as not a `major rule', as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).Start Printed Page 42803
2. Add a new subpart A to part 3 to read as follows:
3. Redesignate §§ 3.1 and 3.5 to subpart A.
Effect of Transportation Security Administration notification on a certificate or any part of a certificate held by an individual.
Effect of Transportation Security Administration notification on applications by individuals for a certificate or any part of a certificate.
(b) When the TSA notifies the FAA that the TSA has made a final security threat determination regarding an individual, the FAA will deny all the individual's certificate applications. Alternatively, if the TSA notifies the FAA that it has withdrawn its security threat determination, the FAA will Start Printed Page 42804continue processing the individual's applications.
Issued, under the authority provided by 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 46111, and 44903(j) in Washington, DC, on August 1, 2019.
1. The TSA directs the specific action the FAA should take on the certificate and includes that information in the letter notifying the FAA of the security threat determination.
6. 83 FR 34795 (July 23, 2018)
7. See, e.g., 49 U.S.C. 46111(b) (allowing “individuals” who are U.S. citizens to have a hearing on the record); § 46111(f) (“An individual who commences an appeal”); § 46111(g)(3) (“upon request of the individual adversely affected by an order of the [FAA] Administrator”); 49 U.S.C. 44903(j)(2)(D)(i) (requiring screening of “individuals”); Cf. Transportation Security Administration (TSA) Vetting of Airmen Certificates and General Aviation Airport Access and Security Procedures, DHS OIG (July 2011), https://www.oig.dhs.gov/​assets/​Mgmt/​OIG_​11-96_​Jul11.pdf;​ Memorandum To The Dockets, TSA Rulemaking Dockets Nos. TSA-2002-13732 and TSA-2002-13733, Transportation Security Administration, U.S. Department of Homeland Security (Mar. 16, 2004).
8. For example, 49 U.S.C. 44924, provides for FAA suspension or revocation of a repair station's certificate based on a TSA determination regarding the repair station's security measures and security risk.
9. Memorandum to the Dockets, TSA Rulemaking Dockets Nos. TSA-2002-13732 and TSA-2002-13733, Transportation Security Administration, U.S. Department of Homeland Security (Mar. 16, 2004).
10. See 49 U.S.C. 46111. TSA currently is using interim redress procedures for U.S. citizens, U.S. non-citizen nationals, and lawful permanent resident certificate holders. While § 46111 does not require that TSA provide review by an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) to U.S. non-citizen nationals and lawful permanent residents, TSA has chosen to do so in its interim procedures. TSA also provides U.S. non-citizen nationals and lawful permanent residents with review by the TSA Final Decision Maker if those individuals choose to appeal an ALJ's decision.
11. The appropriate venue for appealing a certificate action based on a security threat determination was also discussed substantially in Jifry v. FAA, 370 F.3d 1174 (D.C. Cir. 2004). The court stated that “Section 46111 makes no provision for NTSB review even for citizens, and the Conference Report states that non-resident aliens `have the right to the appeal procedures that [TSA] has already provided for them.' H.R. Conf. Rpt. 108-334 at 152 (2003). In addition, § 46111(a) requires the FAA to respond automatically to TSA threat assessments . . . if these pilots retain any right to NTSB review at all, it is no broader than the review for procedural regularity that they have received . . .” Jifry at 1180.
[FR Doc. 2019-17494 Filed 8-16-19; 8:45 am]