Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 16, 2008 / Rules and Regulations 76195

Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, the States, or on the distribution of Authority for This Rulemaking DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–4687. power and responsibilities among the The FAA Administrator has broad SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: EDA various levels of government.’’ It has authority to regulate the safe and published an interim final rule (‘‘IFR’’) been determined that this document efficient use of the navigable airspace in the Federal Register (73 FR 62858) on does not contain policies that have (Title 49 United States Code (U.S.C.) October 22, 2008. In March 2007, the federalism implications. 40103). The Administrator is also Office of the Inspector General Dated: December 10, 2008. obligated to issue air traffic rules and published a report titled Aggressive EDA Otto Barry Bird, regulations to govern the flight of Leadership and Oversight Needed to Chief Counsel, Economic Development aircraft, the navigation, protection and Correct Persistent Problems in the RLF Administration. identification of aircraft for the Program. In the time since the [FR Doc. E8–29708 Filed 12–15–08; 8:45 am] protection of persons and property on publication of this report, EDA has BILLING CODE 3510–24–P the ground, and for the efficient use of made significant improvements in the the navigable airspace. The management and oversight of its Administrator is likewise authorized revolving loan fund (‘‘RLF’’) program, and obligated to issue regulations or DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION including the issuance of written orders assigning the use of the airspace guidance that provides EDA staff with Federal Aviation Administration to ensure the safety of aircraft as well as reasonable steps to help better ensure the efficient use of the airspace. grantee compliance with RLF 14 CFR Parts 1 and 93 Additionally, the Administrator is requirements. EDA published the authorized and obligated to prescribe air interim final rule to synchronize the [Docket No. FAA–2004–17005; Amdt. Nos. traffic regulations for the flight of RLF regulations with that guidance. 1–63 and 93–90] aircraft, to include mandating safe Additionally, EDA published the IFR to RIN 2120–AI17 altitudes, for navigating, protecting, and make changes to certain definitions in identifying aircraft; protecting the Trade Adjustment Assistance for Washington, DC Metropolitan Area individuals and property on the ground; Firms Program regulations set out in 13 Special Flight Rules Area using the navigable airspace efficiently; CFR part 315. The IFR also provided and preventing collision of aircraft with notice of other substantive and non- AGENCY: Federal Aviation other airborne objects, land or water substantive revisions made to the EDA Administration (FAA), DOT. vehicles, or other aircraft. regulations. ACTION: Final rule. The Administrator is authorized and This document extends the deadline obligated to establish security for submitting public comments on the SUMMARY: This action codifies special provisions governing use of and access entire interim final rule from 5 p.m. flight rules and airspace and flight to the navigable airspace by civil (EST) on December 22, 2008 until 5 p.m. restrictions for certain aircraft aircraft, balancing the needs of national (EST) on January 22, 2009. The operations in the Washington, DC security and national defense with the procedure for submitting public Metropolitan Area. The FAA takes this mandate to allow and encourage comments is set forth in the interim action in the interest of national maximum use of the navigable airspace final rule and is not changed by this security. This action is necessary to by civil aircraft. Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. document. The extension of the public enable the Department of Homeland 40103(b)(3)(A), the Administrator is comment period is necessary to provide Security (DHS) and the Department of authorized as well as obligated to additional time for the submission of Defense (DOD) to effectively execute establish areas in the airspace if the public comments and to allow for EDA’s their respective constitutional and Administrator, after consulting with the additional consideration of matters Congressionally-mandated duties to Secretary of Defense, determines doing pertaining to the effective secure, protect, and defend the United so is necessary in the interest of national implementation of the interim final rule. States. security. Since the Department of DATES: Effective February 17, 2009. Executive Order No. 12866 Homeland Security was established in FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 2002 after the enactment of the statute It has been determined that this final technical questions concerning this final referred to above, the Administrator’s rule is not significant for purposes of rule, contact Ellen Crum, Airspace and need and responsibility to consult with Executive Order 12866. Rules Group, Office of System the Secretary of Homeland Security in Congressional Review Act Operations Airspace and AIM, Federal addition to the Secretary of Defense is consistent with the intent and purpose This document is not ‘‘major’’ under Aviation Administration, 800 of the statute. the Congressional Review Act (5 U.S.C. Independence Ave., SW., Washington, 801 et seq.). DC 20591; telephone (202) 267–8783. List of Abbreviations and Terms For legal questions concerning this Frequently Used in This Document Executive Order No. 13132 final rule, contact C.L. Hattrup, Office of Executive Order 13132 requires the Chief Counsel, Federal Aviation ADIZ—Air Defense Identification Zone Administration, Washington, DC 20591; AOPA—Aircraft Owners and Pilots agencies to develop an accountable Association process to ensure ‘‘meaningful and telephone (202) 385–6124. Questions ATC–Air Traffic Control timely input by State and local officials relating to national security DASSP—DCA Access Standard Security in the development of regulatory determinations relevant to the Program policies that have federalism enactment of this rule, or any matter DCA VOR/DME—Washington, DC VHF implications.’’ ‘‘Policies that have falling under the purview of other U.S. omni-directional range/distance measuring federalism implications’’ is defined in government agencies, will be referred to equipment DHS—Department of Homeland Security Executive Order 13132 to include the Department of Homeland Security, Department of Defense, Department of DOD—Department of Defense regulations that have ‘‘substantial direct FRZ—Flight Restricted Zone effects on the States, on the relationship Justice, or other agency, as appropriate. HSAS—Homeland Security Advisory System between the national government and SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: IFR—Instrument flight rules

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:59 Dec 15, 2008 Jkt 217001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\16DER1.SGM 16DER1 mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES_2 76196 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 16, 2008 / Rules and Regulations

Maryland Three Airports—College Park 9. Alternatives considered prior to permitted to enter the prohibited areas Airport, Potomac Airfield, and Washington implementation of the DC SFRA already designated under 14 CFR part Executive/Hyde Field 10. Threat analysis for the Washington, DC 73 for portions of the District of NCR—National Capital Region area Columbia, including the White House, NCRCC—National Capital Region 11. Treating unintentional airspace the U.S. Capitol building, and the U.S. Coordination Center incursions as security threats NM—Nautical mile B. Safety and Operational Issues Naval Observatory. NOTAM—Notice to Airmen 1. Frequencies are congested, and B. DC Area Airspace Operations After NPRM—Notice of Proposed Rulemaking controllers are overburdened and September 11, 2001 ODNI—Office of the Director of National distracted Intelligence 2. Too many aircraft congregate around the In immediate response to the PCT—Potomac Terminal Radar Approach same fixes while awaiting assignment of September 11, 2001 attacks, the FAA Control (Potomac TRACON) a discrete transponder code implemented numerous temporary SFRA—Special Flight Rules Area 3. The DC SFRA forces pilots to fly over flight restrictions (TFRs) across the TFR—Temporary flight restriction water and mountainous areas TSA—Transportation Security United States in the interest of national 4. Pilots are afraid to engage in training/ security under 49 U.S.C. 40103(b)(3). Administration proficiency flying activities around the VFR—Visual flight rules Civilian airports in the NCR were closed DC SFRA to commercial and general aviation Table of Contents 5. Safety is compromised because the DC SFRA requires more complex skills operations while defense and law I. Overview enforcement agencies assessed the risk A. DC Area Airspace Operations Before 6. Delays in obtaining authorization to re- enter the DC SFRA cause safety problems of further terrorist activity. In addition, September 11, 2001 a 25-nautical-mile-radius (NM) TFR B. DC Area Airspace Operations After 7. DC SFRA procedures are a distraction to September 11, 2001 pilots, who should be focused on area, extending from the surface to C. National Security Initiatives scanning for other aircraft 18,000 feet around Washington, DC, was D. The FAA’s Role 8. The configuration of the DC SFRA is established. Eventually, commercial E. The 2003 NOTAM difficult for pilots to navigate flight activities were allowed to resume F. The 2005 Proposed Rule 9. Reduced airport services reduce options in graduated stages, and in December G. Public Comments In Response to the available to pilots 2001, the 25-NM-radius TFR around 2005 Proposed Rule C. Administrative and Regulatory Issues 1. The FAA has not met statutory Washington, DC was reduced to an H. The 2007 NOTAM approximately 15-NM radius centered I. Rationale for Adopting This Final Rule requirements to report to Congress the J. Use of Force justification for keeping the DC SFRA on the Washington, DC very high II. Management of Airspace for National 2. The DC SFRA was intended to be frequency omni-directional range/ Security Purposes temporary, and was put in place hastily, distance measuring equipment (DCA III. Summary of the Final Rule without public input VOR/DME). A. Differences Between the Proposed Rule 3. Suggestions from commenters for After 2001, as part of its homeland and the Final Rule alternatives to the DC SFRA defense mission, the North American 1. Regulatory text proposed as subpart B 4. The DC SFRA amounts to a ‘‘taking’’ (a Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD) adopted as subpart V, with modification seizure of private property without due was directed to expand its air defense 2. Dimensions of the DC SFRA process) 5. The FAA allowed other Federal agencies mission to include combat air patrols 3. Fringe airports throughout the United States, focusing 4. Opening/closing flight plans to direct its decision making 5. Part 91 Operations at Ronald Reagan V. Paperwork Reduction Act primarily on major cities and major Washington National Airport (DCA VI. International Compatibility airports. This expanded U.S-Canada bi- Access Standard Security Program VII. Regulatory Impact Analysis, Regulatory national domestic defense mission is (DASSP)) Flexibility Determination and Analysis, known as Operation Noble Eagle (ONE). 6. Addition of definition of ‘‘national International Trade Impact Assessment In 2003, as part of the nation’s defense airspace’’ in 14 CFR part 1 and Unfunded Mandates Assessment preparation for the war in Iraq, DHS 7. Change ‘‘aeromedical operations’’ A. Regulatory Impact Analysis initiated an operation called Operation B. Final Regulatory Flexibility references to ‘‘lifeguard or air ambulance Liberty Shield to enhance homeland operations under an FAA/TSA airspace Determination authorization’’ C. Regulatory Flexibility Analysis security. In support of that initiative, the B. Differences Between the August 30, D. International Trade Impact Assessment FAA, in consultation with the 2007 NOTAM and the Final Rule E. Unfunded Mandates Assessment Department of Homeland Security C. Related Regulatory Activity VIII. Executive Order 13132, Federalism (DHS), the Department of Defense 1. 14 CFR parts 61 and 91 IX. Environmental Analysis (DOD), and other Federal agencies, 2. 49 CFR part 1562 X. Regulations That Significantly Affect implemented TFRs around Washington, 3. 49 CFR parts 1520, 1540, and 1562 Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use DC New York City, and Chicago. The IV. Discussion of Public Comments XI. Availability of Rulemaking Documents restrictions around New York City and A. Security Issues XII. Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 1. Restrictions on freedom are not justified Fairness Act Chicago were later rescinded when 2. General aviation aircraft pose no threat Homeland Security Advisory System 3. General aviation pilots pose no threat I. Overview (HSAS) threat levels declined. 4. Aviation, especially general aviation, is A. DC Area Airspace Operations Before Restrictions around Washington, DC, being unfairly regulated instead of other September 11, 2001 were retained for reasons of national modes of transportation security, as discussed in more detail 5. An SFRA was established for Before the attacks of September 11, below. Washington, DC, but not for other cities 2001, aircraft operators in the 6. The DC SFRA is not necessary now that Washington, DC National Capital Region C. National Security Initiatives other security measures are in place (NCR) were subject to the General As part of a renewed focus on 7. Factors determining the dimensions of the DC FRZ and the DC SFRA Operating and Flight Rules contained in national security and national defense 8. The FAA needs the flexibility to change 14 CFR part 91, including rules for after September 11, 2001, the Federal these requirements in response to a operations in Class B airspace. government implemented numerous verified threat Additionally, aircraft operators were not policy changes and initiatives as part of

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:59 Dec 15, 2008 Jkt 217001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\16DER1.SGM 16DER1 mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES_2 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 16, 2008 / Rules and Regulations 76197

a coordinated, layered effort to identify, around the country, facilitate the the issuance of a Flight Data Center prevent, eliminate or minimize the appropriate level and scope of any (FDC) NOTAM. The NOTAM also vulnerabilities exploited by terrorists. response, and ensure that potentially identified the previously established 15- For example, on June 20, 2006, the significant information is elevated NM restriction centered on the DCA President issued National Security immediately under existing reporting or VOR/DME as the Washington, DC Presidential Directive-47/Homeland emergency notification procedures. Metropolitan Area Flight Restricted Security Presidential Directive-16, The FAA is responsible for acting as Zone (FRZ). The NOTAM prescribed Aviation Security Policy, which led to the liaison with the DHS Office of radio communication, transponder, and the National Strategy for Aviation National Capital Region Coordination flight plan requirements for pilots to Security (NSAS). The NSAS Supporting (ONCRC). In creating the ONCRC, follow while operating under visual Plans, which were issued on March 26, Congress recognized the unique and flight rules (VFR) within the ADIZ. The 2007, include such things as aviation complex challenges that exist in the DC ADIZ was put in place to provide a transportation system security, aviation National Capital Region that is home to means for law enforcement and security transportation system recovery, aviation 12 local jurisdictions, two states, the communities to track aircraft operating operational threat response, air domain District of Columbia, and all three in the vicinity of the nation’s capital. surveillance and intelligence branches of the Federal government. Some types of operations, such as U.S. integration, domestic outreach, and Actions taken by DHS, DOJ, DOT, DOD, military, law enforcement, and lifeguard international outreach. The NSAS links DOS, DOE, ODNI, and the Office of the or air ambulance operations under an all agencies with responsibilities across Director of the National FAA/TSA airspace authorization, were the spectrum of protecting and securing Counterterrorism Center (NCTC) to excluded from the requirements. the aviation domain. Primary agencies effectively discharge their NOTAMs, however, are intended to be include DHS, DOD, the Departments of complementary responsibilities include, short-term measures to address Transportation (DOT), Justice (DOJ), but are not necessarily limited to— temporary or unanticipated situations State (DOS), and Energy (DOE), and the • Creation of the Regional Incident until the appropriate modifications can Office of the Director of National Communication and Coordination be made to procedures, publications, or Intelligence (ODNI). System (RICCS), implemented through regulations. Considering the continued Another initiative after September 11, Memorandum of Understanding of NCR significance of the NCR as a potential 2001, was the creation of the agencies; target, the FAA determined that it was Transportation Security Administration • Improvement to the Domestic necessary to issue permanent (TSA) under DOT for aviation security. Emergency Management System; and restrictions for operating in the In November 2002, DHS was created, • Establishment of the National Washington, DC Metropolitan Area. and TSA was transferred to that Capital Region Coordination Center Department. The FAA did not and does (NCRCC), the Freedom Center, and the F. The 2005 Proposed Rule not have the responsibility, authority or National Intelligence Center (NIC) to On August 4, 2005, the FAA ability to independently identify and facilitate better real-time published a Notice of Proposed assess threats to national security. These communication sharing among all the Rulemaking (NPRM) proposing to codify functions are performed by other responsible agencies. flight restrictions that were Executive Branch departments and One of the primary goals of the implemented by various NOTAMs in agencies with authority to do so. NCRCC was to enable all agencies to effect at that time for certain aircraft effectively carry out their respective operations in the Washington, DC D. The FAA’s Role roles and responsibilities, which are Metropolitan Area (70 FR 45250; Aug. 4, The FAA Administrator has fully outlined in the NSAS Aviation 2005). The NPRM proposed to retain the responsibility for the management of the Operational Threat Response Plan. The two-way radio communication, nation’s airspace and Air Traffic Control Secretary of Transportation is transponder, and flight plan (ATC) system. Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. responsible for coordinating and requirements found in the NOTAMs. In 40103(b)(1) and (b)(2), the FAA managing the national airspace system, addition, although the Washington, DC Administrator has broad authority to which includes, but is not limited to, airspace was referred to as an ADIZ in regulate and manage national airspace supporting AOTR by expediting and the NOTAMs, the NPRM proposed to in the interest of safety and efficiency. deconflicting clearance and routing of rename the airspace as a Special Flight The FAA Administrator also has DOD and DHS interdiction assets and Rules Area (SFRA). Note that, except in separate statutory authority under providing air contact information to contexts in which use of the term ‘‘DC 40103(b)(3) to regulate and manage enhance airborne AOTR. The FAA also ADIZ’’ or ‘‘ADIZ’’ is necessary, the term airspace solely for reasons of national supports AOTR efforts and steady-state ‘‘DC SFRA’’ is used in the remainder of security. That paragraph states the FAA defense, security and other airborne law this document, even though most public Administrator, ‘‘in consultation with the enforcement and crisis response comments and historical documents Secretary of Defense’’ shall—‘‘(A) missions through the planning and contain the term ‘‘ADIZ.’’ The term ‘‘DC establish areas in the airspace the execution of a broad spectrum of airport SFRA’’ includes both the airspace Administrator decides are necessary in and air traffic management related configuration in existence at the time of the interest of national defense; and (B) measures. These actions, including the NPRM and the re-configured by regulation or order, restrict or establishment of the DC SFRA, are taken airspace reflected in an August 30, 2007 prohibit flight of civil aircraft that the by the FAA as the United States’ civil NOTAM (discussed under ‘‘I.H. The Administrator cannot identify, locate, aviation authority. 2007 NOTAM’’). and control with available facilities in those areas.’’ The FAA works closely E. The 2003 NOTAM G. Public Comments in Response to the with the Secretary of Defense as well as In February 2003, under 14 CFR 99.7, 2005 Proposed Rule the U.S. Northern Command Special Security Instructions, the FAA The comment period on the NPRM (NORTHCOM), NORAD, DHS, and DOJ established the Washington, DC closed on November 2, 2005. However, to identify and evaluate aviation- or Metropolitan Area Air Defense in response to requests from Members of airport-related threats or incidents from Identification Zone (DC ADIZ) through Congress, industry associations, and

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:59 Dec 15, 2008 Jkt 217001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\16DER1.SGM 16DER1 mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES_2 76198 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 16, 2008 / Rules and Regulations

individual commenters, it was reopened FAA, in consultation with defense, I. Rationale for Adopting This Final until February 6, 2006 by notice security, and law enforcement agencies, Rule published on November 7, 2005 (70 FR evaluated the comments to the 2005 The FAA is taking this final action to 67388; Nov. 7, 2005). In addition, the NPRM and determined that some of the enhance security in Washington, DC, FAA held 4 public meetings on January objections and concerns raised by the the nation’s capital. As the nation’s 12 and 18, 2006, in Columbia, MD, and public had merit. The FAA and those capital, it has a unique symbolic, Dulles, VA, respectively. agencies then considered the overall historic, and political status. The FAA received over 21,000 written operational impact of the NCR airspace Washington, DC is the seat of all three comments in addition to the oral restrictions, HSAS threat levels, as well branches of the United States comments submitted during the public as the positive effects of additional government, and is the home of the meetings (contained in transcripts controller support, pilot awareness President (who serves as the placed in the docket for this training, security-related initiatives, and Commander in Chief of the Armed rulemaking). Commenters included individual pilots, airport owners, better information sharing and response Forces) and the Vice President. professional associations, aviation- coordination among responsible Likewise, it is the home of the U.S. related business owners, and search and agencies. Based upon the above Congress and the U.S. Supreme Court, rescue and aeromedical operators. The considerations, the FAA and the other and thus is the residence and office FAA notes that each comment was agencies determined that national location for the officials in the individually written, not a form letter or security, safety of flight, and safety of Constitutional order of succession. In pre-printed postcard. Many comments people on the ground would not be addition, World Bank offices, foreign contained a high level of detail. The compromised with a reduced DC SFRA embassies, and the sovereign residences FAA read all comments and meeting perimeter. of foreign ambassadors credentialed to transcripts in the development of this the United States are located in H. The 2007 NOTAM final rule. The agency appreciates the Washington, DC. The FAA, in consultation with the input of each commenter. Due to the In response to public comments, the large number of comments, however, Secretaries of Defense and Homeland FAA modified the size and shape of the Security, has determined that the FAA is not able to respond in detail DC SFRA and its associated procedures to each issue raised. Rather, the FAA implementation of this rule is necessary through FDC NOTAMs 07/0206 and 07/ to enable those officials in carrying out has identified overall themes for 0211, which became effective August discussion under ‘‘IV. Discussion of their responsibilities to lawfully 30, 2007. In addition, the FAA added 3 identify, counter, prevent, deter, or, as Public Comments.’’ sectors at Potomac Terminal Radar Many commenters acknowledged that a last resort, disable with non-lethal or some type of special security is Approach Control (Potomac TRACON) lethal force, any airborne object that necessary to protect the nation’s capital; (PCT) to track aircraft in the DC SFRA poses a threat to national security. The however, essentially all of the and took steps to improve functions rule will assist air traffic controllers and commenters objected to the proposed such as flight plan processing. These NCRCC officials in monitoring air traffic rule. Many asserted that the FAA was modifications are reflected in this final by identifying, distinguishing, and, allowing other Federal agencies to force rule. more importantly, responding the FAA to make airspace decisions the In the August 30, 2007 NOTAMs, the appropriately when an aircraft is off FAA would not otherwise implement. dimensions of the DC FRZ remained course or is not complying with ATC The FAA disagrees. As discussed above, essentially the same, except that the instructions. In addition, the FAA is the FAA Administrator has a western boundary was moved slightly permanently codifying restrictions responsibility to consult with the eastward, while the size of the DC SFRA previously implemented via the Secretary of Defense in the interest of was reduced from the wide-ranging NOTAM system. This action will reduce national security. In addition, the FAA outer boundary of the Washington Tri- confusion regarding operations within participates in government-wide Area Class B Airspace Area to a much the DC SFRA and DC FRZ. initiatives concerning the protection of smaller 30-NM radius from the DCA J. Use of Force the NCR. Many commenters also stated VOR/DME. As a result, the number of The authority and obligation to use that the DC SFRA covered too large an airports affected by the restrictions was area, and the specific measures any type of armed force, deadly or reduced, and more navigable airspace implemented by NOTAM were otherwise, by the U.S. military is was made available to pilots conducting unworkable. Commenters, therefore, explained in Chairman of the Joint operations in the area. The requirement were opposed to those measures being Chiefs of Staff Instruction (CJCSI), made permanent. for pilots to establish two-way ‘‘Standing Rules of Engagement (SROE) The NPRM proposed a larger DC communication with ATC, be equipped for Armed Forces of the United States’’ SFRA with different operating with an operating transponder with 3121.01B, June 15, 2005. The procedures than currently exist. One of altitude-reporting capability, and file a introductory portion of the SROE is the many factors taken into account for flight plan remained the same. However, unclassified, and outlines the basic establishing the original, larger, and the revised NOTAMs also added a premise and basic guidance for any more restrictive area, now known as the ‘‘maneuvering area’’ for Leesburg decision by the President or subordinate DC SFRA, was to enable sufficient time Executive Airport, and imposed an military commander or member of the and space for NORAD, as well as other indicated airspeed restriction of 180 armed forces to use force, deadly or agencies or law enforcement officials knots or less (if capable) for all VFR otherwise, in individual self-defense or with authority to use armed force to operations within the DC SFRA/DC collective self-defense of the nation. The counter threats to national security or to FRZ. For VFR aircraft operations NSAS Aviation Operational Threat protect national security assets, to conducted between 30– and 60–NM Response Plan further reinforces that interdict, or intercept an aircraft. With from the DCA VOR/DME, aircraft were conducting air defense of the United the benefit of experience gained since restricted to an indicated airspeed of States and U.S. interests, including the September 11, 2001 attacks, the 230 knots or less (if capable). operations to interdict and, when

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:59 Dec 15, 2008 Jkt 217001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\16DER1.SGM 16DER1 mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES_2 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 16, 2008 / Rules and Regulations 76199

necessary, defeat airborne threats, as U.S.C. 40103 grants the Administrator A. Differences Between the Proposed part of the active, layered defense of the broad authority to regulate the nation’s Rule and the Final Rule United States is a responsibility of the airspace to ensure its safe and efficient Secretary of Defense. Through its use. Certain regulations currently issued Since the proposed rule was Combatant Commands and NORAD, as by the Administrator control, designate, published in 2005, the dimensions of appropriate, DOD directs the necessary or assign airspace for national security the DC SFRA were reduced and supporting measures to implement and/or national defense purposes. These procedures amended for aircraft Emergency Security Control of Air regulations include, but are not limited operating within the DC SFRA. These Traffic procedures in extreme to, part 73, subpart C Prohibited Areas, modifications, largely relieving in circumstances. Through NORAD and and part 99, Security Control of Air nature, are reflected in this final rule. the Combatant Commands, DOD is the Traffic. Part 73, subpart C provides for Consequently, there are some only department authorized to direct the designation of prohibited areas for differences between the NPRM and this engagement using deadly force against national security purposes wherein no final rule. The significant differences are airborne civilian aircraft presenting an person may operate an aircraft without discussed below. imminent threat to the United States or authorization from the agency, 1. Regulatory text proposed as subpart U.S. interests, unless the President organization or military command that B adopted as subpart V, with directs otherwise. Rules for the Use of established the requirements for the Force (RUF) for those engaged in law modification: At the time the 2005 prohibited area. (See 14 CFR 73.85, proposed rule was published, the FAA enforcement or security duties also exist Using agency.) Part 99 states in part that intended to adopt the proposed for military or civilian law enforcement any airspace of the contiguous United regulatory text as 14 CFR part 93, officers authorized to use force, deadly States that is not an ADIZ, in which the subpart B, which was reserved at the or otherwise, to protect certain high control of aircraft is required for reasons time. In the intervening time, however, priority national security assets, and to of national security, is a ‘‘defense area.’’ otherwise perform their law (See 14 CFR 99.3.) Part 99 further the agency adopted another rulemaking enforcement or security related duties. provides that each person operating an action as subpart B. In the final rule, The FAA is including information aircraft in a defense area or ADIZ must therefore, regulations proposed as regarding the possible use of force in its comply with special security subpart B are adopted as subpart V, mandatory online training course for instructions issued by the Administrator proposed sections designated as pilots who fly within a 60 NM radius of in the interest of national security. (See §§ 93.31 through 93.49 are redesignated the DCA VOR/DME so that pilots are 14 CFR 99.7.) as §§ 93.331 through 93.345 in the final aware of the potential risk. rule, and proposed §§ 93.45 and 93.49 III. Summary of the Final Rule II. Management of Airspace for are removed from the final rule. Provisions proposed in those sections National Security Purposes This final rule establishes and defines are removed from the final rule because the DC SFRA, which includes the DC This final rule does not create any they have become unnecessary due to FRZ. It also defines dimensions, new class, type, or category of airspace. modifications implemented since the procedures and required equipment for However, the Washington, DC SFRA is publication date of the NPRM. considered ‘‘national defense airspace’’ operating in the DC SFRA. These as referenced in 49 U.S.C. 46307, which procedures include establishing two- In addition, some proposed section states that a person who knowingly or way radio communication, filing flight headings are modified in the final rule. willfully violates regulations or orders plans, and using discrete transponder In the NPRM, certain section headings issued under 49 U.S.C. 40103(b)(3) may codes. In addition, the rule provides for were in question format, while others be subject to criminal prosecution. The traffic pattern operations at towered and were in caption format. In this final Department of Justice is responsible for non-towered airports within the DC rule, section headings are in caption determining if such action is warranted. SFRA, and provides relief from certain format. The following table provides a As discussed in the ‘‘Authority for procedures for airports located near the comparison between the NPRM and the This Rulemaking’’ section above, 49 boundary of the DC SFRA. final rule.

NPRM Final rule

Subpart B—Washington, DC, Metropolitan Area Special Flight Rules Subpart V—Washington, DC, Metropolitan Area Special Flight Rules Area. Area. § 93.31 What is the purpose of this subpart and who would be af- § 93.331 Purpose and applicability of this subpart. fected? § 93.33 What could happen if you fail to comply with the rules of this § 93.333 Failure to comply with this subpart. subpart? § 93.35 Definitions ...... § 93.335 Definitions. § 93.37 General requirements for operating in the Washington, DC, § 93.337 Requirements for operating in the DC SFRA. Metropolitan Area SFRA. § 93.39 Specific requirements for operating in the Washington, DC, § 93.339 Requirements for operating in the DC SFRA, including the Metropolitan Area SFRA, including the FRZ. DC FRZ. § 93.41 Aircraft operations prohibited ...... § 93.341 Aircraft operations in the DC FRZ. § 93.43 Requirements for aircraft operations to or from College Park; § 93.343 Requirements for aircraft operations to or from College Park Potomac Airfield; or Washington Executive/Hyde Field Airports. Airport; Potomac Airfield; or Washington Executive/Hyde Field Air- port. § 93.45 Special ingress/egress procedures for Bay Bridge and Withdrawn. Referenced airports are no longer fringe airports. Kentmorr Airports. § 93.47 Special egress procedures for fringe airports ...... § 93.345 VFR outbound procedures for fringe airports.

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:59 Dec 15, 2008 Jkt 217001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\16DER1.SGM 16DER1 mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES_2 76200 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 16, 2008 / Rules and Regulations

NPRM Final rule

§ 93.49 Airport security procedures ...... Withdrawn. Section no longer necessary subsequent to issuance of TSA final rule implementing ground security requirements and proce- dures at College Park Airport, Potomac Airfield and Washington Ex- ecutive/Hyde Field (70 FR 7150; Feb. 10, 2005).

2. Dimensions of the DC SFRA: In the an interim final rule to restore access to operator that has been issued operations final rule, the dimensions of the DC Ronald Reagan Washington National specifications to perform air ambulance SFRA are reduced to a 30–NM radius Airport for certain operations under the operations in either an airplane or a around the DCA VOR/DME. The NPRM DCA Access Standard Security Program helicopter. ‘‘Lifeguard’’ is the call sign proposed that the dimensions of the DC (DASSP). In this final rule, § 93.341 used by air ambulance operators whose SFRA mirror those designated in the (proposed as § 93.41) is modified to mission is of an urgent medical nature. NOTAM in effect at that time. Those permit aircraft operations under the A lifeguard call sign is used only for dimensions, with some exceptions, were DASSP. that portion of the flight requiring based on the outer boundary of the 6. Addition of definition of ‘‘national expeditious handling. Washington Tri-Area Class B Airspace defense airspace’’ in 14 CFR part 1: In Area, and included an area of 4,029 the preamble to the NPRM, the FAA B. Differences Between the August 30, square miles. Since the NPRM was stated that the DC SFRA would be 2007 NOTAM and the Final Rule published, the FAA, along with other classified as ‘‘national defense airspace’’ The August 30, 2007, NOTAM Federal agencies, has determined that (NDA). It further stated that persons contains information that is not the NCR can be protected with a who knowingly or willfully violate the included in this final rule. Information reduced restricted airspace area of 2,837 rules concerning operations in national likely to change (such as telephone square miles. defense airspace would be subject to numbers and individuals’ names) is not 3. Fringe airports: Fringe airports are criminal penalties as described in 49 included in this rule. Other pertinent those airports located within just a few U.S.C. 46307. information for DC SFRA operations miles of the DC SFRA boundary National defense airspace is any will continue to apply through NOTAM, established in this final rule. The FAA airspace established by regulation or including warnings concerning grants relief from certain DC SFRA order issued under 49 U.S.C. potential consequences of violations. procedures to pilots operating at fringe 40103(b)(3). An order or regulation This information includes, but is not airports because departing aircraft issued under 49 U.S.C. 40103(b)(3) is limited to— penetrate the DC SFRA airspace for only appropriate when the Administrator, in • Requirement for any pilot flying a brief time. At the time of the NPRM, consultation with the Secretary of under VFR within a 60–NM radius of fringe airports included Airlie, VA, Defense, has determined that it is the DCA VOR/DME to complete free Albrecht, MD, Harris, VA, Martin, MD, necessary in the interest of national online training provided by the FAA; Martin State, MD, Meadows, VA, and defense to restrict or prohibit flight of • The requirement for aircraft to Mylander, MD, Stewart, MD, St. John, civil aircraft that cannot be identified, operate at altitudes that ensure MD, Tilghman Whipp, MD, Upperville, located, or controlled. The FAA realizes acceptable radar coverage; VA, and Wolf, MD. With the reduction that most pilots consult FAA manuals • Waiver procedures; in the dimensions of the DC SFRA, and regulations for definitions of • Action in the event of a transponder those fringe airports are no longer airspace terms, rather than Title 49 of failure; within the DC SFRA; therefore, relief the United States Code. In the final rule, • Speed restrictions; from DC SFRA procedures at those therefore, the FAA is adding a definition • Resource information; airports is no longer necessary. of ‘‘national defense airspace’’ to § 1.1 • The definition and requirement for However, since implementation of the General Definitions. operations within the Leesburg August 30, 2007 NOTAM, different The FAA notes that, by adding this Maneuvering Area; and airports (specifically, Barnes (MD47), definition to 14 CFR part 1, the agency • Explanation of DC SFRA Flying M Farms (MD77), Mountain Road is not creating a new category of transponder and flight plan (MD43), Robinson (MD14), and Skyview airspace, nor is it creating any new requirements. procedures or requirements. The FAA is (51VA)) are now located just inside the C. Related Regulatory Activity boundary of the DC SFRA. These simply clarifying that national defense airports are defined as ‘‘fringe airports’’ airspace exists in those cases where it 1. 14 CFR parts 61 and 91: On August in the final rule. was designated under a regulation or 12, 2008, the FAA issued a final rule 4. Opening/closing flight plans: In the order issued pursuant to 49 U.S.C. entitled ‘‘Special Awareness Training NPRM, the FAA proposed that pilots 40103(b)(3). for the Washington, DC Metropolitan open and close their flight plans by 7. Change ‘‘aeromedical operations’’ Area’’ (73 FR 46797; Aug. 12, 2008). The contacting an Automated Flight Service references to ‘‘lifeguard or air final rule, intended to reduce the Station (AFSS). In response to public ambulance operations under an FAA/ number of unauthorized flights into the comments, the August 30, 2007 NOTAM TSA airspace authorization:’’ Washington, DC SFRA and DC FRZ modified this procedure. As reflected in References to ‘‘aeromedical flight through education of the pilot this final rule, the flight plan is now operations’’ and ‘‘aeromedical services’’ community, focuses primarily on opened when a pilot receives a discrete are changed to ‘‘lifeguard or air training pilots on the procedures for transponder code, and closed upon ambulance operations under an FAA/ flying in and around the DC SFRA and landing or exiting the DC SFRA. TSA airspace authorization.’’ This DC FRZ. It requires any pilot who flies 5. Part 91 Operations at Ronald language is consistent with current under VFR within a 60–NM radius of Reagan Washington National Airport terminology, and is used in the FAA’s the DCA VOR/DME to complete free (DCA Access Standard Security Program ‘‘Aeronautical Information Manual.’’ An online training provided by the FAA on (DASSP)): On July 19, 2005, TSA issued air ambulance flight is performed by an its http://www.FAASafety.gov Web site

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:59 Dec 15, 2008 Jkt 217001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\16DER1.SGM 16DER1 mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES_2 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 16, 2008 / Rules and Regulations 76201

and retain a completion certificate. This the NPRM and made them less the NCR. In addition, American training will also inform pilots of restrictive. symbolic and historical sites (such as potential adverse consequences arising Commenters raised security, safety monuments and museums) are located from violation of the airspace. More and operational, administrative, and in the NCR. World Bank offices, all than 7,000 pilots have completed the regulatory concerns in response to the foreign embassies, and the residences of online training course. NPRM. These comments and the FAA’s foreign ambassadors to the United States 2. 49 CFR part 1562: On February 10, responses are discussed below. are also located in the vicinity. The FAA 2005, the TSA issued an interim final (Comments raised regarding the FAA’s notes that the United States has an rule implementing ground security economic analysis are discussed in the obligation to protect other nations’ requirements and procedures at three full regulatory evaluation in the docket sovereign spaces. Maryland airports (the ‘‘Maryland Three for this rulemaking.) Establishing the DC SFRA was one of many steps that were taken to ensure Airports’’—College Park Airport, A. Security Issues Potomac Airfield and Washington the security of the nation’s capital. The 1. Restrictions on freedom are not Executive/Hyde Field) located within FAA acknowledges that no single justified: Numerous commenters said the Washington, DC Metropolitan Area procedure or requirement is fail-safe; that the FAA did not provide sufficient Flight Restricted Zone (70 FR 7150; Feb. however, the FAA believes that this rule justification for the existence of the DC 10, 2005). That interim final rule adds a layer of additional security to SFRA itself. They felt that the established security rules for all pilots minimize actual threats that may require government had, in effect, ‘‘let the operating aircraft to or from any of the a graduated response by other U.S. terrorists win’’ as citizens’ freedoms had Maryland Three Airports as regulated by government agencies. been taken away in the name of 49 CFR Part 1562, Subpart A. The 2. General aviation aircraft pose no security. threat: Many commenters said that interim final rule replaced the Special The FAA acknowledges that actions general aviation aircraft do not pose a Federal Aviation Regulation (SFAR) No. taken immediately following September threat because their kinetic energy is 94 previously issued by the FAA (67 FR 11, 2001, imposed new and significant low, their speeds are slow, and their 7538; Feb. 19, 2002). limits on access to the Washington, DC cargo capacity is small. 3. 49 CFR parts 1520, 1540, and 1562: airspace. Initially airspace restrictions The FAA understands the On July 19, 2005, TSA issued an interim were greater than those that currently commenters’ concerns; however, the final rule establishing the DASSP to exist. The FAA has since reduced Federal government is concerned that restore access to Ronald Reagan restrictions for the Maryland Three an aircraft, regardless of size, could be Washington National Airport for certain Airports, has worked with DHS to used to transport individuals with aircraft operations while maintaining provide waivers to the NOTAM for criminal intentions or dangerous the security of critical Federal aircraft operators, and has amended materials that could do significant harm government and other assets in the procedures and reduced the size of the to the NCR. Washington, DC Metropolitan Area (70 DC SFRA. Though there are more An example of an incident that could FR 41586; July 19, 2005). The interim procedures and restrictions in place for have been avoided under this rule is final rule applies to all passenger operating in the DC SFRA than there are that of the stolen Cessna 150, which on aircraft operations into or out of DCA, for the Washington Tri-Area Class B September 12, 1994, was deliberately except U.S. air carrier operations Airspace Area, access to the airspace is crashed into the White House by a operating under a full security program available to pilots who comply with suicidal pilot. The plane had relatively required by 49 CFR part 1544 and appropriate procedures. The FAA little fuel on board and no explosive, foreign air carrier operations operating believes it has provided a balance radiological, biological, or chemical under 49 CFR 1546.101(a) or (b). The between security needs and the public’s agents. Some commenters pointed to interim final rule establishes security right of transit through the navigable this 1994 incident as evidence that procedures for aircraft operators and airspace as provided in 49 U.S.C. 40103. general aviation aircraft pose no real gateway airport and fixed-base As discussed elsewhere in this threat. However, had the aircraft been operators, and security requirements preamble, the FAA took this action in larger, or the pilot been carrying an relating to crewmembers, passengers, consideration of the fact that explosive device or chemical/ and armed security officers onboard Washington, DC is unique as a symbolic radiological/ biological agent, the aircraft operating into or out of DCA as military and political target. impact could have resulted in the loss regulated by 49 CFR part 1562, subpart Historically, in times of war, a nation’s of life on the ground, or long term B. seat of government provides an inviting denial of access to the affected area. Intelligence information gathered after IV. Discussion of Public Comments target for enemy attacks because of its great political, economic and September 11, 2001, while not The vast majority of commenters, psychological value. specifying an imminent threat of attack while acknowledging that the FAA Washington, DC is the seat of all three in the NCR, suggests that some implemented the DC SFRA to enhance branches of the United States extremists have considered using small security in the Washington, DC Government. The White House, the U.S. aircraft for terrorist activities. The FAA Metropolitan Area, believed that the Capitol, the Supreme Court and other estimates that there are approximately measures were overly burdensome to Federal court buildings are located in 200,000 airplanes based at over 19,000 the aviation community and Washington, DC, as well other landing facilities within the United unnecessary. In addition, commenters Executive-Legislative-, and Judicial- States. These facilities include both repeatedly stated that the FAA had not Branch buildings and the headquarters public- and private-use facilities, and, adequately justified the airspace and operations facilities for the nation’s unlike air carrier operators, most are not restrictions and procedures. As domestic and international security subject to Federal security regulations. discussed in ‘‘I. Overview,’’ in response apparatus. The nation’s leaders (the The government, therefore, remains to these comments, the FAA modified, President, the Vice President, Members concerned that terrorists launching via NOTAM, the airspace restrictions of Congress, Cabinet members, and attacks using stolen or hijacked planes and procedures that were proposed in Supreme Court justices) are located in remains a viable option.

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:59 Dec 15, 2008 Jkt 217001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\16DER1.SGM 16DER1 mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES_2 76202 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 16, 2008 / Rules and Regulations

3. General aviation pilots pose no instead of other modes of responsibility for security of the threat: Commenters asked why the transportation: Commenters believed National Airspace System closely government believes that general the airspace restrictions were unfairly monitor the threat to the nation’s cities, aviation pilots are a threat when no DC directed at aviation operations (most including the unique security SFRA or DC FRZ incursion to date had notably general aviation) while motor environments of cities such as been terrorism-related. The commenters vehicles and rail traffic can still pass Washington, DC, New York City, pointed out that the attacks of close to government buildings without Chicago, and others. When developing September 11, 2001, were carried out by much restriction. risk mitigation plans, TSA considers individuals flying large aircraft. The FAA does not have jurisdiction threats, vulnerabilities, the criticality of The FAA notes that there is concern over modes of transportation other than a location or transportation system, and that terrorists may turn to general aviation. The agency points out, the potential consequence of an attack aviation as an alternative method for however, that the modes of on that location or system. Risk conducting operations, especially since transportation mentioned above are in mitigation plans are intended to ensure the implementation of security fact restricted in some manner from the security of the location or enhancements for commercial aircraft getting too close to the White House and transportation system while allowing and airports. the U.S. Capitol. For example, at the the nation’s transportation system to In addition, the Federal government White House, barriers such as fences, continue operating. Sustainability is a considers it an unacceptable risk to checkpoints, gates, bollards, and other primary concern when developing and allow aircraft in the vicinity of screening systems are designed so that implementing a risk mitigation plan. Washington, DC without knowing the if a detonation does occur, the blast will As previously discussed, Washington, pilot’s intentions. The requirements to not result in the destruction of the DC is a high-value symbolic military file a flight plan before operating in the building or serious harm to protected and political target. The requirements of DC SFRA and squawk a discrete persons. Vehicular traffic is prohibited the DC SFRA allow ATC and law transponder code provide the FAA and on Pennsylvania Ave and E Street enforcement agencies to identify and other Federal agencies with critical between 15th and 17th Streets. track aircraft operating in the information (i.e., direction of flight, type Additionally, trucks are not allowed on Washington, DC area and to focus on and color of aircraft, and airspeed) 17th Street, NW., between Constitution those targets of interest that may pose a regarding aircraft operating within the Ave and Pennsylvania Ave. Likewise, hazard to the Washington, DC area. DC SFRA. there are vehicular restrictions near and The Transportation Security Commenters also stated that the around the U.S. Capitol. While motor Administration continually reviews and requirements for operating in the DC vehicles must follow roads, and trains refines risk assessments and mitigation SFRA, such as filing a flight plan, must stay on tracks, airplanes can plans in order to address the threat from squawking a discrete transponder code, maneuver without such restraints and terrorist groups. The FAA maintains a and maintaining two-way are not constrained by ground-based continuous dialogue with appropriate communications with ATC do nothing barriers and restrictions. agencies regarding threat and security to ensure that a pilot entering the DC In addition, though many general issues that may pertain to aircraft SFRA is not a terrorist. aviation operators are impacted by these operations. In consultation with these The FAA acknowledges that these airspace restrictions, the rule itself is agencies, the FAA may implement measures do not ensure that a pilot or not specifically directed at general additional measures, not only in the a passenger is not a terrorist. However, aviation operations. General aviation Washington, DC area, but in other the measures provide ATC and law operators can and do operate under IFR, locations, as needed, based on specific, enforcement/security officials with and IFR requirements have not been credible intelligence. For example, on additional information that may be changed. Rather, the rule requires March 17, 2003, the national HSAS useful in identifying a compliant pilot additional procedures for VFR threat level was raised to Orange (high). versus a non-compliant pilot. A flight operators, who would otherwise not be In response, the FAA took a number of plan provides ATC with pilot required to make their intentions known actions including the issuance of flight information and the pilot’s intended to ATC. restrictions over New York City and route of flight. Further, the use of a 5. An SFRA was established for Chicago, and cancelled all waivers for discrete transponder code enables ATC Washington, DC, but not for other cities: operations at the Maryland Three to observe and monitor the aircraft Many commenters asked why only Airports and for sporting events. On while in the airspace. In addition, Washington, DC has permanent airspace April 17, 2003, the HSAS threat level maintaining two-way radio restrictions. In addition, they pointed was lowered to Yellow (elevated), and communication allows officials to out that airspace restrictions around the above-mentioned restrictions were communicate with the pilot, and when other places, such as New York City, cancelled. It should be noted that the necessary, determine whether the pilot have been discontinued since HSAS threat level for the airline sector is experiencing an emergency or aircraft September 11, 2001, and said that those in the United States is currently at equipment failure, or whether the pilot around Washington, DC also should be Orange (high). has simply committed a navigation discontinued. Many commenters who 6. The DC SFRA is not necessary now error. Should there be any aircraft lived outside the Washington, DC that other security measures are in operator in the DC SFRA who has not vicinity expressed concern that SFRAs place: Several commenters agreed that filed a flight plan or has deviated from would be put in place over their locales. the DC FRZ is necessary, but objected to the intended route of flight, steps can be The FAA has received requests from the existence of the DC SFRA. They taken to get the aircraft back on course various officials to impose SFRA-type believed that, with the introduction of and enable those with response or restrictions or prohibitions at locations new security measures since 2003 (such security duties to determine if a threat including New York City and Chicago. as ground-based missiles, better air exists and the appropriate course of The FAA has evaluated these requests, interdiction capability, new technology action (including use of deadly force). in consultation with other agencies, and to identify aircraft, laser warning 4. Aviation, especially general concluded that restrictions were not systems, regulations that make it less aviation, is unfairly being regulated required. Federal agencies that share likely that terrorists can go undetected,

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:59 Dec 15, 2008 Jkt 217001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\16DER1.SGM 16DER1 mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES_2 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 16, 2008 / Rules and Regulations 76203

and improved security around general Maryland Three Airports, those who capability to adjust the restrictions as aviation airports), the DC SFRA was no apply for waivers to operate within the necessary. The DC SFRA was instituted longer necessary. DC FRZ, and crewmembers with an in 2003 by NOTAM, in lieu of Commenters are correct that there are approved DCA Access Standard rulemaking, because of the urgent need layers of security for aviation operations Security Program are vetted through to implement security measures in the in addition to the DC SFRA. Other various databases; however, this is a NCR. A NOTAM can be issued quickly, measures include vetting the FAA small percentage of pilots who fly in while issuing a codified regulation can Airmen Certification Database, the joint and through the DC SFRA. take years. However, as stated in 49 TSA/industry Airport Watch Program, The FAA also acknowledges and U.S.C. 40103(b)(3), ‘‘* * * the general aviation airport security appreciates the improved security Administrator, in consultation with the guidelines, and mandatory flight school programs in effect at some general Secretary of Defense, shall—* * * by security awareness training, as well as aviation airports. For example, in 2003, regulation or order, restrict or prohibit regulatory programs for certain types of the Aircraft Owners and Pilots flight of civil aircraft that the general aviation aircraft operators. Association (AOPA) partnered with Administrator cannot identify, locate, These measures, when implemented TSA to deploy a national security and control with available facilities in together, provide improved protection enhancement program called ‘‘The those areas.’’ Therefore, the appropriate of the airspace. In addition, the agency Airport Watch Program.’’ That program method to implement permanent notes that heightened security measures is patterned after the ‘‘Neighborhood airspace restrictions is through the for all aviation operations, not just Watch’’ anti-crime program, and calls rulemaking process. When it became general aviation, have been on members of the general aviation apparent that this airspace designation implemented. community to observe and report any would be in effect indefinitely, the FAA The FAA acknowledges that new suspicious activities at airports. The initiated rulemaking action. aircraft tracking technology, Automatic Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association The FAA notes that only certain Detection and Processing Terminal has funded and distributed a wide range elements of the 2007 NOTAM are being (ADAPT), has been developed since of educational materials, while TSA has adopted as regulations. Some 2005; however, that system supplies provided a national, toll-free hotline (1– procedural details for SFRA operations, information only regarding the aircraft, 866–GA–SECURE). Programs like these as well as warnings concerning not the pilot operating it. The protection add value to overall security efforts. potential consequences of violations, of this airspace requires the FAA and However, they are voluntary and have will continue to be addressed through other government personnel to identify not been implemented at all airports. NOTAM. The agency also retains the and track those operating in the DC 7. Factors determining the dimensions ability to issue additional special SFRA. Requiring pilots to file flight of the DC FRZ and the DC SFRA: Some security instructions by NOTAM action plans is the least intrusive method of commenters stated that they did not under 14 CFR part 99 if security or identifying who is operating an aircraft, understand what factors were threat conditions warrant. Airspace and enables the FAA and law considered when determining the radii restrictions or control measures can be enforcement and security agencies to of the DC FRZ and the DC SFRA. adjusted in accordance with HSAS more quickly identify anomalous flight The purpose of the DC SFRA is to threat levels and specific intelligence. behavior, which may indicate a identify and track aircraft that may pose The Department of Homeland Security potential threat to the NCR. a threat to the NCR. Security agencies will continue to coordinate with other Some commenters asserted that there need enough time to take appropriate Federal agencies to establish are better air defense capabilities, such action if it is determined that a pilot appropriate measures in response to as air interception and use of ground- may have harmful intentions. The FAA, specific threats. based missiles, than restricting the DHS, and DOD determined the lateral 9. Alternatives considered prior to airspace. The FAA notes that these limits based on a number of factors, implementation of the DC SFRA: measures are intended to be used only such as launch response time and speed Numerous commenters wanted to know as a last resort. The airspace from 15- to of intercept aircraft, and geographic if the government considered any 30-NM from the DCA VOR/DME dispersion of airfields, in addition to the alternatives to the restrictions prior to provides a buffer area, which allows locations of other critical infrastructure establishing the SFRA in 2003. ATC and law enforcement/security within the NCR. Because of the need to protect the officials to be aware of a non-compliant The FAA notes that the agency, in airspace around the Washington, DC aircraft before it penetrates the consultation with military and law Metropolitan Area quickly, the FAA did boundary of the DC FRZ. By the time an enforcement agencies, has made every not publish alternatives for public aircraft is at the edge of the DC FRZ, it effort to keep the dimensions of the DC notice and comment. However, the FAA is only minutes away from targets in the FRZ and the DC SFRA as small as and military and law enforcement nation’s capital. Relying solely on air possible to reduce the impact on the agencies did discuss several alternatives defense capabilities could lead to air aviation community while meeting before deciding on the requirements interception or use of lethal measures security and safety requirements. implemented in 2003. Those that could result in the loss of innocent 8. The FAA needs the flexibility to alternatives included establishing a 55– lives in instances where pilots made change these requirements in response NM outer ring with a 15–NM inner ring, inadvertent navigation errors or to a verified threat: Many commenters expanding the P–56 prohibited area experienced equipment failures. Also, expressed concern that, by codifying the above parts of Washington, DC to a the buffer provided by the DC SFRA substance of NOTAMs, the FAA would radius of 30–NM, and establishing outer provides additional warning time for not be able to relax or tighten the rings as large as 75 NM or 110 NM. In law enforcement officials to take Washington, DC Metropolitan Area each case, factors such as numbers of appropriate emergency actions on the airspace restrictions in response to airports impacted and air traffic ground. changing HSAS threat levels. procedures were considered. The FAA Some pilots who operate in the The FAA understands the and Federal law enforcement and Washington, DC Metropolitan Area, commenters’ concerns and assures the security agencies have determined that such as those who operate out of the public that the agency retains the the DC SFRA provides the minimal

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:59 Dec 15, 2008 Jkt 217001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\16DER1.SGM 16DER1 mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES_2 76204 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 16, 2008 / Rules and Regulations

spatial buffer consistent with the DC SFRA rules, procedures, or information concerning that flight. requirement to respond to aviation instructions of an air traffic controller or When operating under VFR, the pilot in threats in the NCR. official while in flight. Unlike a willful command selects a destination, and In addition, prior to the August 2007 violation of other airspace, knowing or makes a personal choice as to the course modifications, the FAA, in consultation willful violations of national defense that will be flown. If the pilot desires to with the law enforcement and security airspace may subject the pilot to fly through the DC SFRA, he or she agencies, did consider several criminal liability under Federal criminal should always be prepared with an alternatives, which were discussed in law. See 49 U.S.C. 46307. The exercise alternate flight plan in the event that detail in the ‘‘Regulatory Flexibility’’ of any prosecutorial decision to file ATC cannot accommodate his or her section in the preamble to the NPRM. criminal charges for a knowing or request, much as he or she would do in 10. Threat analysis for the willful violation is a decision that will order to fly through other controlled Washington, DC area: Several be made by appropriate Federal airspace areas. commenters inquired whether a threat prosecutors or law enforcement To enhance safety, the FAA has taken analysis had been done for the officials. numerous actions to disseminate Washington, DC area, and whether such In addition, commenters expressed information about the DC SFRA analysis was available to the public. concern about the use of force by dimensions and operating requirements. The Department of Homeland military or law enforcement personnel. These include the development of a free Security, in coordination with ODNI, The fact that a pilot is flying without online course entitled ‘‘Navigating the has analyzed the threat, vulnerabilities, permission into airspace designated for New DC ADIZ’’ (available at http:// and consequences of an airborne attack national security or without following www.FAASafety.gov), which includes against the NCR. They have concluded the proper procedures may be one factor several downloadable procedures that the DC SFRA is a critical layer in those officials take into account in guides. Since July 2007, over 7,000 the security and defense of the NCR. determining the nature of the threat and pilots have completed this course. These analyses are classified and not what to do about it. As with any breach Additionally, the FAA has depicted available to the public. of a security perimeter, military or law DC SFRA dimensions and 11. Treating unintentional airspace enforcement officials with authority to communications frequencies on VFR incursions as security threats: defend the country may use lawful and sectional charts. The agency has also Numerous commenters objected to the appropriate force to do so. In the case worked closely with pilot and aviation FAA’s ‘‘zero tolerance’’ approach to of an aircraft incursion, interception, associations to inform the flying unintentional incursions. Many said diversion, or other necessary means, community. Since 2004, the Potomac that they had no violations on their force, up to and including deadly force, Terminal Radar Approach Control records until they accidentally violated could be employed if an aircraft or (TRACON) (PCT) has hosted a DC SFRA the DC SFRA or DC FRZ. Some asked airborne object is deemed to be an seminar and Operation Raincheck for an ‘‘amnesty’’ program to allow imminent or actual threat to national briefings twice a year, with nearly 250 pilots to clear their names of inadvertent security. That determination will be pilots attending each time. PCT or minor violations. made by appropriate military or personnel go out into the general The purpose of this rule is to provide command authority only on a case-by- aviation community to provide pilot security to the Washington, DC case basis, specific to the situation. An briefings, typically conducting about 6 Metropolitan Area. Incursions into this incursion or violation of the DC SFRA, briefings a year with approximately 50 airspace, whether intentional or not, or or any other airspace regulation, pilots attending each briefing. PCT violations of any other procedures or regardless of whether the airspace in personnel have staffed booths and rules applicable to this airspace, are question is ‘‘national defense airspace,’’ conducted DC SFRA seminars at the taken very seriously, and may be does not by itself authorize the use of AOPA annual open house at the enforced in accordance with the FAA’s force. It is however, one of the factors Frederick Airport, MD with enforcement authority. The focus, that should and will be considered approximately 150 pilots in attendance. emphasis, or level of penalties imposed along with all other relevant facts in The FAA works closely with AOPA to by the FAA may vary, depending on the existence at the time, in determining disseminate the latest NOTAM threat posture or HSAS threat levels in whether an aircraft or airborne object information to its members. AOPA effect. The FAA’s enforcement action poses an imminent threat to national includes information pertaining to flight does not mean that violations or security. operations in the DC SFRA on its Web violators will be categorized as site. In addition, AOPA sent out posters ‘‘national security threats.’’ The FAA B. Safety and Operational Issues that warn of the DC SFRA airspace, as does not have authority to make such a Many commenters expressed concern well as distributed hundreds of letters to determination or impose such a label on that operating within the DC SFRA and pilots advising of the DC SFRA and any violator. the DC FRZ was unsafe for a number of recommending they familiarize Because airspace established under 49 reasons, which are discussed below. themselves with the procedures and U.S.C. 40103(b)(3) is, however, With the modifications adopted in the airspace dimensions. The FAA ‘‘national defense airspace,’’ that term 2007 NOTAMs, the FAA has addressed continues to meet with AOPA on a will be used in connection with FAA a number of these concerns. In addition, regular basis to discuss operations enforcement actions, regardless of however, the FAA notes that in within the DC SFRA. whether an incursion or violation was accordance with 14 CFR 91.3, 1. Frequencies are congested, and inadvertent or willful. No additional Responsibility and Authority of the Pilot controllers are overburdened and penalty imposed by the FAA will result in Command, the pilot in command is distracted: Because a greater number of from the status of the DC SFRA as directly responsible for, and is the final pilots must now establish two-way radio ‘‘national defense airspace.’’ The status authority on operation of the aircraft. communications with ATC, some as ‘‘national defense airspace,’’ Additionally, 14 CFR 91.103, Preflight commenters said that frequencies were however, is important and relevant to action, requires that the pilot in congested and that controllers were the extent a pilot knowingly or willfully command, before beginning a flight, overburdened and distracted from their enters the DC SFRA in violation of the become familiar with all available primary air traffic separation duties. In

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:59 Dec 15, 2008 Jkt 217001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\16DER1.SGM 16DER1 mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES_2 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 16, 2008 / Rules and Regulations 76205

response to commenters’ concerns about In response to these concerns, and in the airspace. For example, most of the frequency congestion and air traffic connection with the DC SFRA DC SFRA is contained within the controller workload, the FAA dimensional changes implemented in Washington Tri-Area Class B Airspace established several new procedures in the August 30, 2007 NOTAM, the FAA Area. In accordance with 14 CFR connection with the August 30, 2007 made changes to the DC SFRA entry/ 91.131, Operations in Class B Airspace, NOTAM. First, the agency established exit points for flight plan filing no person may operate an aircraft three sectors (called ‘‘ADIZ West,’’ purposes. Specifically, the agency within Class B airspace without a ‘‘ADIZ South,’’ and ‘‘ADIZ East’’ in the established eight ‘‘gates’’ around the clearance from ATC, and the aircraft NOTAM) at PCT. Second, the FAA circumference of the DC SFRA. Pilots must be equipped with a two-way radio established a communications list the appropriate gate name on the DC and an altitude-reporting transponder. frequency dedicated to DC SFRA SFRA flight plan, and enter or exit the In addition, student pilots must meet communications for each of PCT’s three DC SFRA at any point within the specific training provisions of 14 CFR DC SFRA sectors. During periods of boundaries of that gate. The gate names part 61 prior to operating in a Class B high workload, including weekends and and boundaries are now depicted on airspace area. If a pilot intends to transit other times when general aviation pilots appropriate VFR charts. The FAA has Class B airspace, the pilot must be able are likely to be conducting VFR also provided the online DC SFRA to meet the above conditions. In operations in and around the DC SFRA, training course and its associated addition, a pilot must be prepared to PCT can staff the three DC SFRA sectors guidance materials and works with circumnavigate the airspace if ATC is with PCT personnel whose sole industry associations to educate pilots unable to provide a clearance into the responsibility is to handle DC SFRA about these gates and boundaries. airspace. In this area, this may mean a traffic. These steps have served to—(1) While the FAA recognizes that any pilot would need to over fly the Blue Mitigate PCT controller workload navigational fix tends to be a high-traffic Ridge Mountains or the Chesapeake associated with DC SFRA traffic; (2) area, the agency reminds pilots that Bay, and should always be prepared to separate DC SFRA security when operating under VFR, the pilot in do so. Implementation of the DC SFRA identification and tracking functions command is responsible to see and did not change this fact. from air traffic control separation duties, avoid other aircraft. Before the The FAA believes that the August 30, and (3) reduce delays for pilots seeking implementation of the DC SFRA, the 2007 reduction in DC SFRA dimensions, to operate to, from, or through this Washington Tri-Area Class B Airspace along with the establishment of airspace area. Area was among the most congested in associated new frequencies, gates, and the nation, and extreme vigilance for procedures, has created more navigable The FAA also notes that the reduced other aircraft has been required. The DC airspace, thus providing more routes for dimensions of the DC SFRA, as defined SFRA has increased the number of pilots to transit the area. That action in the August 30, 2007 NOTAM, along pilots using air traffic services; however, reduces the likelihood of pilots having with establishment of a Leesburg the actual number of VFR aircraft to fly over mountainous terrain or water. Maneuvering Area with streamlined operations has not changed 4. Pilots are afraid to engage in communications procedures, have significantly. What has changed is more training/proficiency flying activities served to reduce air traffic controller awareness of aircraft in the area, which around the DC SFRA: Many commenters workload, frequency congestion, and prior to the DC SFRA did not use ATC stated that flight training and routine delays for pilots. In addition, the FAA services; thus most pilots were not proficiency flying was reduced because has further worked to reduce workload aware of the large number of VFR of the fear of enforcement actions, and frequency congestion by clarifying operations conducted. thereby making it difficult to maintain to both pilots and controllers that, 3. The DC SFRA forces pilots to fly the skills necessary to fly safely. unless specifically requested by a pilot over water and mountainous areas: The FAA is aware that there have and approved by ATC, radar services Commenters noted that the DC SFRA been some cases in which pilots have (e.g., traffic advisories, flight following) restricts available airspace. Therefore, not complied with the DC SFRA are not provided in association with DC when pilots were unable to obtain an requirements, and consequently have SFRA security-related identification and authorization to fly in the DC SFRA, been escorted by military aircraft and/or tracking. they were forced to fly over been met by law enforcement personnel 2. Too many aircraft congregate mountainous areas to the west or over on the ground. The agency understands around the same fixes while awaiting water of the Chesapeake Bay to the east. that such events can be intimidating and assignment of a discrete transponder Commenters claimed that flight over that some pilots may opt to cease or code: Numerous commenters expressed mountains and water was unsafe. reduce their flying activities rather than concerns about the potential safety Flight over water or mountainous risk making an error. The FAA hazard created when large numbers of terrain is not inherently unsafe. The acknowledges that the existence of the aircraft operate in the vicinity of the FAA acknowledges that when over DC SFRA may create more of a same fixes while awaiting assignment of mountains or water certain precautions challenging environment for pilots not a discrete transponder code to enter the should be taken in the event of an accustomed to communicating with DC SFRA. Commenters noted that when emergency, such as an engine failure. ATC and regrets that some pilots may filing a DC SFRA flight plan, pilots had Carrying more fuel, identifying choose not to fly. However, the agency to state a fix (exit or entry point) on emergency landing locations, encourages pilots to use the many their flight plans. Even though there is maintaining a higher altitude or carrying resources available to learn about DC no requirement for pilots to operate flotation devices are some steps a SFRA operations, including completing directly to, from, or over these fixes prudent pilot may take to mitigate any the FAA’s mandatory Special while establishing two-way radio flight risk. Awareness Training. communications with ATC and When flying VFR, a pilot must 5. Safety is compromised because the obtaining a discrete transponder code, consider the class of airspace and DC SFRA requires more complex skills: commenters stated that many pilots are special use airspace along the route, and Commenters asserted that because more nevertheless congregating in the vicinity the associated procedures or complex skills are required to operate of these fixes. requirements that must be met to transit within the DC SFRA, pilots have been

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:59 Dec 15, 2008 Jkt 217001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\16DER1.SGM 16DER1 mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES_2 76206 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 16, 2008 / Rules and Regulations

challenged beyond their capabilities, she must obtain a thorough pre-flight AOPA and some individual commenters which has placed them in an unsafe briefing in accordance with 14 CFR said the FAA had not been sending situation. 91.103. During the pre-flight briefing regular reports to Congress, as mandated The airspace in which an aircraft process, the pilot should resolve any by the Vision 100—Century of Aviation operates dictates the equipment and questions or concerns so that when Reauthorization Act (section 602). communication requirements for those airborne, that pilot can concentrate on Paragraph (a) of that legislation stated who operate within the designated flying the aircraft, and scanning for that every 60 days the Administrator airspace. Most of the DC SFRA lies other aircraft. The FAA also notes that must transmit to the Committee on within the boundaries of the in most cases, ATC radio transmissions Transportation and Infrastructure of the Washington, DC Tri-Area Class B to aircraft operating within the DC House of Representatives and to the Airspace Area and as such, pilots have SFRA are minimal. Committee on Commerce, Science, and always been required to possess 8. The configuration of the DC SFRA Transportation of the Senate, a report appropriate communication and is difficult for pilots to navigate: AOPA (in classified form) containing an navigation skills (see 14 CFR 91.131). If asserted that the configuration of the DC explanation of the need for the DC ADIZ a pilot chooses to operate in the DC SFRA, which includes many irregular (now called the ‘‘DC SFRA’’). SFRA, it is imperative that he or she boundaries, makes it difficult for pilots The commenters are correct that the comply with § 91.103, Preflight action, to navigate. FAA did not submit reports to Congress which, in part, requires that each pilot The FAA acknowledges that the explaining the need for the DC SFRA. in command become familiar with all initial boundaries of the DC SFRA, During the reorganization of agency available information concerning that which were also proposed in the NPRM functions after September 11, 2001, flight. As stated previously, information as dimensions for the DC SFRA, were aviation intelligence responsibilities pertaining to the DC SFRA is readily not ideal. In response to these shifted from the FAA to DHS. The available, and should be reviewed by all comments, in August 2007 the FAA Secretary of DHS, therefore, briefed pilots who operate in the area. reduced and reconfigured the DC SFRA Congress on the need for the DC SFRA. 6. Delays in obtaining authorization to to a 30–NM circle centered on the DCA In addition, in 2007, the Congressional re-enter the DC SFRA cause safety VOR/DME. The FAA has also depicted Research Service performed its own problems: Commenters stated that they these new boundaries on appropriate research on the aviation security needs often encountered delays in obtaining navigational charts. The agency believes in the Washington, DC Metropolitan authorization to re-enter the DC SFRA that these steps have made it Area. and noted that one pilot actually ran out significantly easier for pilots to navigate Paragraph (c) of the Vision 100 of fuel while waiting. in the NCR. legislation called upon the FAA to When the DC SFRA was initially 9. Reduced airport services reduce transmit a report to Congress every 60 implemented, both pilots and options available to pilots: Some days describing changes in procedures controllers had to adapt to the new commenters asserted that a DC SFRA- or requirements that could improve requirements and develop workable DC related reduction in general aviation operational efficiency or minimize SFRA operational procedures that could flights resulted in reduced airport operational impacts on pilots and be clearly understood by all concerned. services (e.g., maintenance and repair, controllers. The FAA has met this The FAA acknowledges and regrets that avionics services, flight instruction, requirement and submits reports many pilots encountered delays when etc.). They alleged that this describing the changes to improve the entering and exiting the DC SFRA development had led to even greater operational efficiency or minimize during that time. Since then, pilots and reductions in general aviation flights as operational impacts to the Committee controllers have become more familiar well as potential compromise of safety on Transportation and Infrastructure of with the DC SFRA and its operating because pilots do not have as many the House of Representatives and to the requirements, and ATC has developed options if they need emergency services. Committee on Commerce, Science, and procedures to accommodate the increase The FAA acknowledges that the Transportation of the Senate. in operations. The agency believes that existence and operating requirements of 2. The DC SFRA was intended to be the reduced DC SFRA dimensions and the DC SFRA have in some cases temporary and was put in place hastily, new procedures, dedicated frequencies, resulted in less traffic to some local without public input: When the DC and gates have significantly reduced the airports, thus reducing revenue and SFRA was established via the NOTAM kind of delays pilots may have services. The FAA has analyzed the system, it was not known how long the encountered when the DC SFRA was impacts on local airports and flight restrictions would be in place. In initially established. businesses; this analysis is discussed in the first few months of its 7. DC SFRA procedures are a section ‘‘VII. Regulatory Impact implementation, the DC SFRA and its distraction to pilots, who should be Analysis.’’ The reduced size of the DC procedures were changed several times focused on scanning for other aircraft: SFRA impacts fewer airports, so the in response to changes in the HSAS AOPA expressed concern that DC SFRA FAA expects operations at those airports threat levels. For example, a cut-out was procedures were a distraction to pilots now located outside the DC SFRA to made around Freeway Airport, engaged in other important operational increase. The FAA has also established Mitchellville, MD; certain airports activities, such as scanning for other a maneuvering area to ease traffic flow (known as gateway airports) were aircraft. in and out of the Leesburg Airport. In identified and used as locations where Although flight operations to, from, addition, three airports within the DC aircraft and crew could be vetted and within the DC SFRA may increase FRZ were provided some financial through various databases prior to a pilot’s workload by requiring assistance from the Department of entering the DC SFRA; and ingress/ additional attention to communication Transportation. egress procedures were instituted for and navigation, the FAA does not Bay Bridge and Kentmorr Airports, Kent believe that this in itself is a significant C. Administrative and Regulatory Issues Island, MD. Security, law enforcement distraction to pilots. Well before any 1. The FAA has not met statutory and FAA officials have met regularly to pilot who opts to operate within or requirements to report to Congress the discuss and assess the security needs of adjacent to the DC SFRA departs, he or justification for keeping the DC SFRA: the Washington, DC Metropolitan Area.

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:59 Dec 15, 2008 Jkt 217001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\16DER1.SGM 16DER1 mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES_2 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 16, 2008 / Rules and Regulations 76207

In August 2007, the dimensions of the the FAA notes that ADS–B has been authority to other Federal entities. The DC SFRA were reduced, and procedures selected as the preferred next generation commenters believed that the FAA had were amended, which has opened up technology for surveillance and allowed security and law enforcement more airspace to the aviation broadcast services. It has been agencies to direct civilian airspace community and simplified procedures successfully deployed in Alaska and policy. for pilots operating within the DC several other locations. On October 5, As discussed in ‘‘I. Overview,’’ the SFRA. The need to protect the nation’s 2007, the FAA published in the Federal FAA Administrator has statutory capital continues, and the FAA has Register an NPRM, which proposed in authority to manage the nation’s determined that the most appropriate part, requirements for aircraft operating airspace in the interest of national way to implement this special flight in Class B and C airspace areas to be security. In carrying out this rules area is through the rulemaking equipped with ADS–B technology (72 responsibility, the FAA consults with process. The FAA also notes that prior FR 56947; Oct. 5, 2007). As part of that the Secretary of Defense and works to making this DC SFRA permanent, the rulemaking effort, the FAA established closely with other Federal agencies to agency published an NPRM requesting an Aviation Rulemaking Committee ensure the safety of civil aviation and to comments from the public. In response, (ARC) under Order 1110.147. That protect persons and property on the the agency received over 21,000 committee was chartered to deliver a ground. comments, in addition to comments report on how to optimize operational V. Paperwork Reduction Act received at four public meetings. benefits of the ADS–B system and to 3. Suggestions from commenters for provide recommendations to the FAA As required by the Paperwork alternatives to the DC SFRA: The on the development of a final rule. Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association 4. The DC SFRA amounts to a 3507(d)), the FAA submitted a copy of submitted alternatives to the proposal, ‘‘taking’’ (a seizure of private property the new information collection and recommended retaining the FRZ but without due process): Some commenters requirement(s) in this final rule to the only for larger, faster aircraft. AOPA’s believed that the government is, in Office of Management and Budget for its plan would have excepted aircraft that effect, practicing condemnation/seizure review. OMB approved the collection of weigh 6,000 pounds or less and that of private property without due process. this information and assigned OMB limit their speed to 160 knots or less Commenters alleged that the airspace Control Number 2120–0706. from the DC SFRA requirements. restrictions have triggered a regulatory In the preamble to the 2005 NPRM, in The Experimental Aircraft taking and, therefore, they deserve the ‘‘Paperwork Reduction Act’’ Association (EAA) also submitted compensation. The commenters discussion, the FAA solicited comments numerous recommendations, including bolstered their argument by asserting on the information collection but not limited to reducing the FRZ that the decision to prohibit or restrict requirement for pilots operating under from a 15–NM radius to a 10–NM radius airspace indirectly results in a loss of VFR to file flight plans. The FAA from the DCA VOR/DME and reducing business to airports or aviation-related received numerous comments opposing the DC SFRA to a 20–NM radius of the businesses on the ground. the requirement. These comments, and DCA VOR/DME. In addition, EAA Airspace is not private property; the FAA’s responses, are discussed suggested using a larger TFR when therefore, it is not property that can be elsewhere in this preamble. HSAS threat levels are elevated. owned by any person, as the term Number of respondents: The FAA Many individual commenters ‘‘private property’’ is used within the does not know exactly how many pilots suggested retaining the FRZ and meaning of the U.S. Constitution’s Fifth will file flight plans to access the DC eliminating the SFRA. The FAA Amendment. While the FAA’s SFRA and DC FRZ on an annual basis. appreciates these and other suggestions. regulations or restriction imposed on To calculate the number of respondents, The agency considered the any navigable, public airspace may the FAA has divided 256,461 estimated recommendations but, in consultation interfere with, limit, or even prohibit annual number of operations by 15 with the Interagency Airspace the right of an individual to use that operations per pilot annually, which Protection Working Group, determined airspace, the restrictions do not equals 17,097. that reducing the sizes of the FRZ and constitute a taking of private property Cost: The FAA estimates the annual the SFRA to the degree the commenters without due process or just cost to comply with the information suggested would not provide adequate compensation. The FAA acknowledges collection requirement of this final rule warning time for law enforcement that establishing the DC SFRA will have to be $1,831, 098 ($477,017 cost to officials to take appropriate emergency an indirect impact on aviation-related activate a flight plan plus $1,354,081 actions on the ground. The FAA notes, businesses that may have an adverse cost to file a flight plan). The ten-year however, that the size of the DC SFRA economic effect due to a reduction of cost will be $18,310,980. was reduced in August 2007. access to, or need for, their services. The cost to activate a flight plan As to the suggestion that smaller However, that indirect economic cost ($477,017) was calculated as follows. 17,097—Respondents. aircraft flying at slower speeds be and personal inconvenience is not an 15—Number of flight plans filed by exempted from meeting DC SFRA impact unique to the general aviation each respondent annually. requirements, the FAA believes that community or the Washington, DC area. 256,461—Annual number of flight such a measure would not allow the Rather, it is an impact experienced by plans. FAA to meet its objective of tracking all many individuals and businesses in all 0.05 hour—Time needed to activate a aircraft in the National Capital Region. areas of commerce as a result of the flight plan. Several commenters suggested that variety and scope of new security $37.20/hour—Value of pilot’s time. aircraft operating in the DC SFRA be measures imposed by various levels of The cost to file a flight plan equipped with new technology, such as government after the September 11, ($1,354,081) was calculated as follows. Automatic Dependent Surveillance- 2001 attacks. 17,097—Respondents. Broadcast technology (ADS–B), for 5. The FAA allowed other Federal 256,461—Annual number of flight monitoring. Use of such technology was agencies to direct its decision making: plans. not proposed and is therefore outside Numerous commenters asserted that the 0.137 hour—Time (including wait the scope of this rulemaking. However, FAA ‘‘abdicated’’ its rulemaking time) needed to file a flight plan.

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:59 Dec 15, 2008 Jkt 217001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\16DER1.SGM 16DER1 mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES_2 76208 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 16, 2008 / Rules and Regulations

$37.20/hour—Value of pilot’s time. suggest readers seeking greater detail ($3.82 billion, discounted at 3 percent, 3.6%—Percent of pilots needing to read the full regulatory impact analysis, and $2.85 billion, discounted at 7 refile a DC SFRA flight plan. a copy of which we have placed in the percent). Hours: The FAA estimates the rule docket for this rulemaking. 1. Costs will require 49,223.07 hours (12,823.5 In conducting these analyses, the FAA hours to activate a flight plan plus has determined that this final rule: (1) There are two major sets of cost 36,400.02 hours to file a flight plan). Has benefits that justify its costs; (2) is components—public sector and private The number of hours over 10 years will an economically ‘‘significant regulatory sector. be 492,230.70. action’’ as defined in section 3(f) of a. Public Sector: (1) A key component An agency may not collect or sponsor Executive Order 12866; (3) is in defending the DC SFRA against the collection of information, nor may it ‘‘significant’’ as defined in DOT’s attackers is the airplanes based at impose an information collection Regulatory Policies and Procedures; (4) Andrews Air Force Base. Under most of requirement unless it displays a will have a significant economic impact the alternatives, given a 30–NM DC currently valid Office of Management on a substantial number of small SFRA, the program depends on F–15s, and Budget (OMB) control number. entities; (5) will not create unnecessary F–16s, and helicopters to be ready to obstacles to the foreign commerce of the VI. International Compatibility scramble to defend the DC SFRA; a United States; and (6) will not impose scramble can range from pilots In keeping with U.S. obligations an unfunded mandate on state, local, or proceeding to battle stations, runway under the Convention on International tribal governments, or on the private alerts, sending a helicopter to alert the Civil Aviation, it is FAA policy to sector by exceeding the threshold errant aircraft, or sending out military comply with International Civil identified above. These analyses are aircraft to intercept the aircraft. The Aviation Organization (ICAO) Standards summarized below. total cost of scrambles, including both and Recommended Practices to the The FAA has analyzed the expected F–15/F–16 and helicopter, is $324.64 maximum extent practicable. The FAA costs of this regulation for a 10-year million over ten years. Given a 20–NM has determined that there are no ICAO period, from 2009 through 2018. As DC SFRA, the program would depend Standards and Recommended Practices required by the Office of Management on a fighter combat air patrol, 24 hours and Budget (OMB), the present value of that correspond to these regulations. a day, 7 days a week (24/7 fighter CAP) this cost stream was calculated using instead; this CAP uses F–15s and F–16s VII. Regulatory Impact Analysis, discount factors of 7 and 3 percent. All as well as KC–135 tankers to refuel Regulatory Flexibility Determination costs in this analysis are expressed in these aircraft; these costs sum to $356 and Analysis, International Trade 2007 dollars. million annually. When DOD assets are Impact Assessment, and Unfunded The FAA costed out four alternatives deployed, air traffic control suspends Mandates Assessment for this evaluation: • operations and there is a delay cost. The A. Regulatory Impact Analysis Alternative 1 is what was contained in the NPRM, which mirrors the total cost of suspending operations is Changes to Federal regulations must Washington Tri-Area Class B airspace $1.93 million over ten years. This undergo several economic analyses. area, with certain minor modifications. estimate only takes local delays into First, Executive Order 12866 directs that It also has a 15–NM FRZ. Its cost is consideration, and does not account for each Federal agency shall propose or $1.34 billion over ten years ($1.15 secondary delays and ripple effects that adopt a regulation only upon a reasoned billion, discounted at 3 percent, and may be imposed on the aviation system. determination that the benefits of the $942.26 million discounted at 7 (2) The FAA installed additional radar intended regulation justify its costs. percent). facilities for support of the DC SFRA at Second, the Regulatory Flexibility Act • Alternative 2 is the final rule, with Washington Dulles International Airport of 1980 (Pub. L. 96–354) requires a 30–NM DC SFRA, 15–NM DC FRZ. Its (IAD), Ronald Reagan Washington agencies to analyze the economic cost is $1.04 billion over ten years National Airport (DCA), Baltimore/ impact of regulatory changes on small ($886.34 million, discounted at 3 Washington International Thurgood entities. Third, the Trade Agreements percent, and $756.98 million, Marshall Airport (BWI), and PTC. Since Act (Pub. L. 96–39) prohibits agencies discounted at 7 percent). these costs are ‘‘sunk’’, they are not from setting standards that create • Alternative 3 is the NPRM with considered to be an incremental cost of unnecessary obstacles to the foreign enhanced procedures, such as ADS–B- the rule. However, there are recurring commerce of the United States. In equipped aircraft being exempt from the annual costs summing to $375,000. developing U.S. standards, this Trade flight plan requirement and establishing (3) This rule requires additional Act requires agencies to consider two-way communication requirement, controllers and flight service station international standards and, where given certain conditions. Its cost is specialists, as well as the cost of filing appropriate, that they be the basis of $1.30 billion over ten years ($1.11 and activating DC SFRA-related flight U.S. standards. Fourth, the Unfunded billion, discounted at 3 percent, and plans. The FAA has dedicated 6 Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. $919.31 million, discounted at 7 additional controller positions for 3 104–4) requires agencies to prepare a percent). specific regions of the DC SFRA as a written assessment of the costs, benefits, • Alternative 4 contains a 15–NM DC result of this rule. Over a ten-year and other effects of proposed or final FRZ, with the DC SFRA being period, the total cost of the additional rules that include a Federal mandate determined by threat and air defense controllers is $15.50 million. On likely to result in the expenditure by requirements, and established by average, about 4 full time equivalent State, local, or tribal governments, in the NOTAM. For costing purposes, this positions are dedicated to filing flight aggregate, or by the private sector, of alternative examined two scenarios, a plans at flight service stations; over a $100 million or more annually (adjusted 55–NM DC SFRA and a 20–NM DC ten-year period, the total cost of the for inflation with base year of 1995). SFRA. Its costs range from $3.29 billion additional FSS specialists will be $6.45 This portion of the preamble over ten years ($2.80 billion, discounted million. The additional cost of filing summarizes the FAA’s analysis of the at 3 percent, and $2.13 billion, and activating flight plans, over 10 economic impacts of this final rule. We discounted at 7 percent) to $4.47 billion years, sums to $59.33 million.

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:59 Dec 15, 2008 Jkt 217001 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\16DER1.SGM 16DER1 mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES_2 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 16, 2008 / Rules and Regulations 76209

Total public-sector costs, over the 10- Aviation-related businesses include regulation.’’ To achieve that principle, year period, sum to $411.60 million. fixed-base operators (FBOs), passenger the RFA requires agencies to solicit and b. Private Sector: The DC SFRA or freight charter operators, aerial consider flexible regulatory proposals impacts aircraft operators, airports, and photography and mapmaking and to explain the rationale for their aviation-related businesses in the businesses, aircraft maintenance and actions. The RFA covers a wide-range of Washington, DC region. DC SFRA repair facilities, flight schools, small entities, including small requirements have created delays and restaurants and transportation services businesses, not-for-profit organizations other costs to operators and have caused located at airports, and other businesses and small governmental jurisdictions. some operators to reduce the number of dependent on aviation activity. A Agencies must perform a review to flights they take, shift operations to decrease in the number of operations determine whether a proposed or final airspace and airports outside of the DC and active aircraft directly results in a rule will have a significant economic SFRA, and even to cease operations decrease in revenue at these businesses. impact on a substantial number of small altogether. DC SFRA-related delays Other aviation-related businesses incur entities. If the determination is that it impose costs on operators and aviation- additional costs as a consequence of DC will, the agency must prepare a related businesses. The reduced number SFRA requirements. Over ten years, the regulatory flexibility analysis as of operations has reduced revenue at affected businesses have revenue losses described in the RFA. However, if an airports and aviation-related businesses. of $246.86 million. agency determines that a proposed or (1) Operating Restrictions—The DC Total private sector costs, over ten final rule is not expected to have a SFRA has created many delays to years, sum to $628.00 million. Total significant economic impact on a operators, including ground, flight, public and private sector costs substantial number of small entities, circumnavigation, and re-routing delays. combined, over ten years, sum to $1.04 section 605(b) of the 1980 act provides VFR operators in the DC SFRA are billion. that the head of the agency may so required to file a DC SFRA flight plan certify and a regulatory flexibility and communicate with ATC, creating 2. Benefits and Cost-Benefit Comparison analysis is not required. The flight, ground, and re-routing delays. In The FAA looked at five scenarios, and certification must include a statement an effort to avoid these delays, some computed the estimated mean providing the factual basis for this pilots circumnavigate the DC SFRA, consequence resulting if each scenario determination, and the reasoning should although this also imposes an additional were to occur once in a 10-year period. be clear. cost. Over ten years, the cost of The estimated means ranged from $0.12 operating restrictions is $355.80 million. billion ($0.09 billion, discounted) to The FAA gathered data for airports (2) Airports—The DC SFRA impacts $9.81 billion ($6.89 billion, discounted). and other aviation-related businesses many airports in the Washington, DC These were compared to the cost of the that are located 60NM from the DCA region, including airports located rule, which is $1.04 billion ($756.98 VOR/DME. The U.S. Small Business outside of the DC SFRA boundaries. The million, discounted). For three of these Administration (SBA) classifies DC SFRA affects the behavior of aircraft five scenarios, the required risk businesses as small based on size operators in the region and results in reduction could be less than 100 standards, typically expressed as annual decreased levels of aviation activity at percent, and the rule would be cost revenue or number of employees. SBA some airports. However, the DC SFRA beneficial. publishes a table of small business size will also cause aviation activity at some standards matched to North American airports in the region to increase. Much B. Final Regulatory Flexibility Industry Classification System (NAICS) of the negative economic impact at some Determination codes. The SBA defines privately owned airports will be offset by gains at other The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 airports as a small entity if annual airports. Over ten years, the affected (RFA) establishes ‘‘as a principle of revenue is less than $6.5 million. airports have net revenue losses of regulatory issuance that agencies shall Publicly owned airports are defined as $25.35 million. endeavor, consistent with the objective a small entity if annual revenue is less (3) Aviation-related business—The DC of the rule and of applicable statutes, to than $5 million. As Table 1 shows, all SFRA impacts aviation-related fit regulatory and informational impacted airports (with the exception of businesses in the Washington, DC requirements to the scale of the BWI, DCA and IAD) are well below region because it causes some aircraft business, organizations, and these annual revenue thresholds. operators to alter their behavior. governmental jurisdictions subject to Revenue data is for 2007.

TABLE 1—AIRPORT REVENUE

Facility 2007 Revenue Facility 2007 Revenue

Essex Skypark ...... $47,440 Lee ...... $347,758 Freeway ...... 103,000 Harford County...... 378,192 Shoestring Aviation Airfield ...... 110,482 Winchester Regional ...... 386,365 Hanover ...... 116,019 Hagerstown Regional...... 439,083 Maryland ...... 119,100 Ridgely Airpark...... 493,240 College Park ...... 122,590 Stafford Regional ...... 500,000 Davis ...... 140,188 Bay Bridge...... 501,740 Potomac Airfield ...... 142,000 St. Mary’s County Regional ...... 510,932 Front Royal-Warren County ...... 151,280 Culpeper Regional ...... 536,485 Fallston ...... 172,171 Warrenton-Fauquier ...... 802,200 Clearview Airpark ...... 219,968 Leesburg Executive ...... 805,068 Tipton ...... 250,000 Frederick Municipal...... 867,082 Suburban ...... 259,859 Montgomery County Airpark ...... 920,103 Orange County ...... 272,530 Manassas Regional ...... 1,192,389 Shannon ...... 297,402 Martin State...... 1,260,000

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:59 Dec 15, 2008 Jkt 217001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\16DER1.SGM 16DER1 mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES_2 76210 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 16, 2008 / Rules and Regulations

TABLE 1—AIRPORT REVENUE—Continued

Facility 2007 Revenue Facility 2007 Revenue

Washington Executive/Hyde Field ...... 300,670 Carroll County Regional ...... 1,302,400 Cambridge-Dorchester ...... 301,297 Easton/Newnam Field...... 1,621,671

The SBA size standards for aviation- prepared a regulatory flexibility matter of policy, maintaining and related businesses at airports are listed analysis, as described below. enhancing safety and security in air in Table 2. The size standard for flight commerce as its highest priorities (49 C. Regulatory Flexibility Analysis schools is annual revenue less than U.S.C. 40101 (d)). $23.5 million, for aircraft sales Under section 603(b) of the RFA (as 3. The kind and number of small businesses it is annual revenue less than amended), each final regulatory entities to which the rule will apply— $9 million, and for other business types flexibility analysis is required to address The FAA identified 34 small airports it is generally annual revenue less than the following points: (1) Reasons the and 395 small aviation-related $6.5 million. The SBA threshold for agency considered the rule, (2) the businesses that the rule will impact. Of charter operators is less than 1,500 objectives and legal basis for the rule, the 34 small airports, 12 are in the DC employees. (3) the kind and number of small SFRA. Of the 395 small aviation-related entities to which the rule will apply, (4) businesses, 274 are in the DC SFRA. TABLE 2—SBA SIZE STANDARDS the reporting, recordkeeping, and other Table 1 above lists the 34 small airports compliance requirements of the rule, and Table 3 below shows the different Annual revenue or and (5) all Federal rules that may types and number of small aviation- Business type employee threshold duplicate, overlap, or conflict with the related businesses to which this rule for small business rule. will apply. 1. Reasons the FAA considered the Aerial Photography ... <$6.5 million. rule—The FAA is taking this final action Aircraft Rental ...... <$6.5 million. TABLE 3—TYPE AND NUMBER OF Aircraft Sales ...... <$9 million. to enhance security in Washington, DC, SMALL AVIATION-RELATED BUSINESS the Nation’s capital. As the Nation’s Charter, sightseeing, <1,500 employees. IMPACTED courier. capital, it has a unique symbolic, Fixed Base Operator <$6.5 million. historic, and political status. Business type Count Flight School ...... <$23.5 million. Washington, DC is the seat of all three Other ...... <$6.5 million. branches of the United States Aerial Photography ...... 16 Repair Station ...... <$6.5 million. government, and is the home of the Aircraft Rental ...... 18 Working (agriculture, <$6.5 million. President and the Vice President. Aircraft Sales ...... 121 helicopter lift, etc.). Likewise, it is the home of the U.S. Charter Operators ...... 21 Congress and the U.S. Supreme Court, Fixed Base Operators ...... 61 The FAA matched each DC SFRA- and thus is the residence and office Flight School ...... 127 impacted aviation-related business to its Repair Stations ...... 9 location for the officials in the Working ...... 7 appropriate NAICS code and compared Constitutional order of succession. Other ...... 15 it to the SBA size standard for that The FAA, in consultation with the NAICS code. The FAA estimates that Secretaries of Defense and Homeland Total ...... 395 the majority of impacted businesses are Security, has determined that considered small under the SBA size implementation of this rule is necessary 4. The reporting, recordkeeping, and standards. to enable those officials in carrying out other compliance requirements of the The FAA found that the impact of the their responsibilities to lawfully rule—As required by the Paperwork DC SFRA on some of these businesses identify, counter, prevent, deter, or, as Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. was positive, while for others, it was a last resort, disable with non-lethal or 3507(d)), the FAA submitted a copy of negative. ‘‘Congress considered the term lethal force, any airborne object that these sections to OMB for its review. ‘significant’ to be neutral with respect to poses a threat to national security. The However, there are no sections of the whether the impact is beneficial or rule will assist air traffic controllers and paperwork package that apply to the harmful to small businesses. Therefore, National Capital Region airports and aviation-related businesses. agencies need to consider both Communications Center officials in All of the economic impact discussed beneficial and adverse impacts in an monitoring air traffic by identifying, below deals with business gained or lost analysis.’’ 1 The FAA estimated the distinguishing, and, more importantly, due to the requirements of the DC annualized revenue impact of the rule responding appropriately when an SFRA. on each of the small entities, and aircraft is off course or is not complying 5. All federal rules that may determined that the rule will have a with ATC instructions. duplicate, overlap, or conflict with the significant economic impact on a 2. The objectives and legal basis for rule—The FAA is unaware of any substantial number of small entities. the rule—The objective of the rule is to Federal rules that duplicate, overlap, or Except for two small entities which codify the airspace restrictions within conflict with the rule. happen to be airports, the actual or the Washington, DC Metropolitan Area. 6. Other considerations— estimated ratio of annualized revenue This effort is to assist DHS and DOD in Affordability analysis—For the purpose impacts to annual revenue was greater their efforts to enhance security of this analysis, the degree to which than 1 percent. Accordingly, the FAA protection of vital national assets small entities can afford the reduction located within the National Capital in revenue resulting from the final rule is predicated on the availability of 1 Small Business Administration, ‘‘A Guide for Region. The legal basis for the rule is Government Agencies—How To Comply With the found in 49 U.S.C. 40103, et seq. The financial resources. Costs can be paid Regulatory Flexibility Act’’, May 2003, page 21. FAA and DHS must consider, as a from existing assets such as cash, by

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:59 Dec 15, 2008 Jkt 217001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\16DER1.SGM 16DER1 mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES_2 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 16, 2008 / Rules and Regulations 76211

borrowing, through the provision of this rule. Column D is the quotient of (VIS), and FAA Form 5010 database. additional equity capital, by accepting Column C and column A, or the ratio of Although there was not enough data for reduced profits, by raising prices, or by annualized revenue change associated the FAA to estimate business-by- finding other ways of offsetting costs. with the rule to the estimated non- business revenue impacts, the agency One means of assessing the NOTAM annualized revenue. was able to estimate aggregate revenue affordability is the ability of each of the This information was used to assess impacts for business within and outside small entities to meet its short-term the significance and affordability of this of the DC SFRA. The aggregate data obligations, such as looking at net rule. Column E shows the airports for show that as a group, DC SFRA income, working capital and financial which the FAA expects this rule would businesses will have trouble affording strength ratios. According to financial have a significant impact, as described this rule, as shown in Table 22 in the literature, a company’s short-run previously. Column F examines full regulatory impact analysis, whereas financial strength is substantially affordability using the alternative non-SFRA businesses will benefit from influenced by its working capital approach described above. The FAA this rule, as shown in Table 23 in the position and its ability to pay short-term considers that an airport would have full regulatory impact analysis. Thus, liabilities, among other things. However, trouble affording the rule if the change from the perspective of affordability, the the FAA was unable to find sufficient in its revenue is negative and exceeds FAA expects that a number of aviation- financial information for the majority of 10 percent of its annualized change in related businesses based at airports affected entities, and so used an revenue as a percentage of non-NOTAM inside the DC SFRA will have trouble alternative way of analyzing revenue. The idea is that if a business affording this rule. (See Table D–1 in affordability. The approach used by the has such a high loss in revenue, Appendix D in the full regulatory FAA was to compare the rule’s impact percentage-wise, it would likely have impact analysis for a list of SFRA and on entity revenues with estimated trouble affording the rule. non-SFRA businesses.) revenues in the absence of the rule. Table 4 summarizes Table 38 in the 7. Liquidity analysis/profitability The FAA was able to estimate the full regulatory impact analysis by analysis—As explained earlier, except annual change in revenue and 2007 showing the number of airports, the for aggregate revenue data, the FAA was revenue for the airports. However, the number of those airports that might unable to find enough financial data for FAA was unable to locate revenue data have trouble affording this rule, and the the impacted small businesses both for the aviation-related businesses. This resultant percentage. inside and outside the DC SFRA to analysis first discusses the airports and perform a liquidity analysis or a TABLE 4—AFFORDABILITY OF SMALL then the aviation-related businesses. profitability analysis. (a) Airports—Table 38 in the full BUSINESS AIRPORTS 8. Disproportionality analysis—The regulatory impact analysis lists the FAA considered whether small entities public use airports within the DC SFRA Total number of small airports im- will be disadvantaged relative to large pacted ...... 34 and between the DC SFRA and 60 Number of small airports for which entities due to disproportionate impacts. nautical miles from the DCA VOR/DME the rule might be non-affordable 12 There was no need for the FAA to that are small entities. Column A lists Percentage ...... 35.29% conduct a disproportionality analysis each airport’s estimated annual revenue for the airports because all airports in the absence of the rule and 2007 (b) Other Aviation-Related affected by this rule are small NOTAM.2 Column B lists each airport’s Businesses—Aviation-related businesses businesses, so none would be estimated revenue in 2007 (with the less than 60nm from DCA were advantaged over any other. For the NOTAM). Column C lists each airport’s identified from Dun & Bradstreet aviation-related businesses, as can be estimated change in revenue as a result reports, comments to the 2005 DC SFRA seen in Table 5, the estimated revenue of the DC SFRA, and was computed by NPRM, airport Web sites, AOPA Pilot impact per aircraft operation is larger for subtracting Column A from Column B. Guide, World Aerospace Directory, FAA the large businesses than for the small A negative change in revenue implies Operating Specification Sub System businesses; thus, there will be no that the airport is worse off because of (OPSS), FAA Vital Information System disproportionate impact.

TABLE 5—DISPROPORTIONALITY ANALYSIS FOR AVIATION-RELATED BUSINESSES

Revenue impact Total revenue Total operations per aircraft operation

Large ...... $8,581,818 237,643 $36.11 Small ...... 531,751 148,519 3.58

9. Competitiveness analysis—For the comes from the three airports within the improve the competitiveness of small airports outside the DC SFRA, the DC FRZ—College Park, Potomac businesses outside the DC SFRA vis-a´- average net increase in revenue as a Airfield, and Washington Executive/ vis those inside the DC SFRA, since the percentage of estimated non-NOTAM Hyde Field; without these three airports, revenue of most aviation-related revenue was 4.9 percent. For those the average net decrease in revenue as businesses is dependent on the number airports inside the DC SFRA, the a percentage of revenue resulting from of aircraft operations taking place at that average net decrease in revenue as a the rule would be about 19.7 percent. airport. percentage of non-NOTAM revenue was The FAA expects that based on the 10. Business closure analysis—It is 44.9 percent. Much of this decrease results of this analysis, this rule will difficult for the FAA to determine the

2 This value is used to ensure that the analysis baseline established in the full regulatory impact examines the rule in accordance with the pre-9/11 analysis.

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:59 Dec 15, 2008 Jkt 217001 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\16DER1.SGM 16DER1 mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES_2 76212 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 16, 2008 / Rules and Regulations

extent to which airports significantly provide immediate relief to these FAA does not consider this to be a impacted by this rule might have to airports and aviation-related businesses significant alternative in accordance cease operations. There are too many by removing security provisions and with 5 U.S.C. 603(d). variables and some of the airports restoring former air traffic control D. International Trade Impact within the DC SFRA are already in procedures and airspace configurations. Assessment serious financial difficulty; the Implementation of this alternative information shown in the affordability would facilitate the return of pilots who, The Trade Agreements Act of 1979 analysis can be indicators of airport for the sake of operating simplicity and (Pub. L. 96–39) prohibits Federal business closures. The FAA has no reduced flying costs, relocated to other agencies from establishing any comparable financial information on the airports. This would be the option with standards or engaging in related aviation-related businesses. To what the least impact. activities that create unnecessary extent the final rule makes the Conclusion: The FAA believes that obstacles to the foreign commerce of the difference in whether these entities the threat of terrorists must be guarded United States. Legitimate domestic remain in business is difficult to against, and this option would not objectives, such as safety, are not answer. The FAA believes that there is adequately achieve that goal. Rescinding considered unnecessary obstacles. The a likelihood of business closure for these actions would increase the statute also requires consideration of some of these businesses as a result of vulnerability and diminish the level of international standards and, where this rule. protection now in place to safeguard appropriate, that they be the basis for vital national assets located within the U.S. standards. The FAA has assessed Alternatives NCR. This alternative is rejected the potential effect of this final rule and The FAA considered alternatives to because it would compromise the determined that it will have only a the rule for both airports and aviation- security of vital national assets and domestic impact and therefore no effect related businesses. A discussion of these increase their vulnerability. Thus, the on international trade. alternatives follows. The third FAA does not consider this to be a alternative is the final rule. For each significant alternative in accordance E. Unfunded Mandates Assessment alternative, the FAA first states the with 5 U.S.C. 603(d). Title II of the Unfunded Mandates alternative, followed by a discussion, Alternative 3—Codify existing flight Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4) and why the FAA believes that the restrictions over the Washington, DC requires each Federal agency to prepare alternative would not enhance security. Metropolitan Area (Final Rule)—Under a written statement assessing the effects Alternative 1—Retain the DC FRZ, this alternative, the government would of any Federal mandate in a proposed or eliminate the rest of the DC SFRA— maintain the present security and air final agency rule that may result in an Under this alternative, airspace in the traffic operational restrictions. The rule expenditure of $100 million or more Washington DC Metropolitan area with enhances security measures in that it (adjusted annually for inflation) in any flight restrictions would be reduced requires any aircraft operating to and one year by State, local, and tribal considerably. The only flight from the affected airports and transiting governments, in the aggregate, or by the restrictions remaining would be within the DC SFRA to be properly identified private sector; such a mandate is approximately 15 NM of the DCA VOR/ and cleared. This alternative would deemed to be a ‘‘significant regulatory DME, restricting all aircraft operations affect all airports and aviation-related action.’’ The FAA currently uses an except part 121 operators, DOD businesses. inflation-adjusted value of $136.1 operations, law enforcement operations Conclusion: This alternative is million in lieu of $100 million. and authorized emergency medical preferred because it balances the This final rule does not contain such services operations. This removes the security concerns against the impact on a mandate. The requirements of Title II requirement for filing flight plans for the airports and aviation-related do not apply. aircraft operators in airspace outside the businesses. DC FRZ, resulting in reduced pilot and Alternative 4—Exempt small, slow VIII. Executive Order 13132, controller workload. This alternative aircraft—This alternative would exempt Federalism would provide relief to those VFR small, piston-driven aircraft. The The FAA has analyzed this final rule operators that will operate in the DC rationale behind this alternative is that under the principles and criteria of SFRA area but not into the DC FRZ. It these aircraft are slower than turbine- Executive Order 13132, Federalism. The would restore former air traffic control driven aircraft and are much less likely FAA has determined that this action procedures and air space configurations to be a threat. Most general aviation will not have a substantial direct effect for some of the area. The FAA estimates aircraft fall into this category, and so on the States, or the relationship that implementation of this alternative most aircraft operators would not be between the national government and would have a positive effect for all of subject to this rule. However, the FAA’s the States, or on the distribution of the impacted airports except for College air traffic controllers cannot distinguish power and responsibilities among the Park, Washington Executive/Hyde Field, between piston-drive and turbine-drive various levels of government, and, and Potomac. aircraft from radar or from transponder therefore, does not have federalism Conclusion: This alternative is not codes, making this alternative difficult implications. preferred because it does not meet the to enforce, thus having the potential to safety and security requirements of compromise security. IX. Environmental Analysis those security agencies responsible for Conclusion: This alternative would FAA Order 1050.1E identifies FAA the safety of the Washington DC increase the vulnerability of and actions that are categorically excluded Metropolitan area. Thus, the FAA does diminish the level of protection now in from preparation of an environmental not consider this to be a significant place to safeguard vital national assets assessment or environmental impact alternative in accordance with 5 U.S.C. located within the National Capital statement under the National 603(d). Region. This alternative is rejected Environmental Policy Act in the Alternative 2—Rescind the FAA’s because it would compromise the absence of extraordinary circumstances. NOTAM and the DC SFRA/DC FRZ security of vital national assets and The FAA has determined this immediately—This alternative would increase their vulnerability. Thus, the rulemaking action qualifies for the

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:59 Dec 15, 2008 Jkt 217001 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\16DER1.SGM 16DER1 mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES_2 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 16, 2008 / Rules and Regulations 76213

categorical exclusion identified in out more about SBREFA on the Internet Subpart V—Washington, DC paragraph 312f and involves no at http://www.faa.gov/ Metropolitan Area Special Flight Rules extraordinary circumstances. regulations_policies/rulemaking/ Area sbre_act/. X. Regulations That Significantly Affect § 93.331 Purpose and applicability of this Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use List of Subjects subpart. The FAA has analyzed this final rule 14 CFR Part 1 This subpart prescribes special air under Executive Order 13211, Actions traffic rules for aircraft operating in the Air transportation. Concerning Regulations That Washington, DC Metropolitan Area. Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 14 CFR Part 93 Because identification and control of Distribution, or Use (May 18, 2001). We Aircraft flight, Airspace, Aviation aircraft is required for reasons of have determined that it is not a safety, Air traffic control, Aircraft, national security, the areas described in ‘‘significant energy action’’ under the Airmen, Airports. this subpart constitute national defense executive order because, while it is a airspace. The purpose of establishing ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under The Amendment this area is to facilitate the tracking of, Executive Order 12866, it is not likely ■ In consideration of the foregoing, the and communication with, aircraft to to have a significant adverse effect on Federal Aviation Administration deter persons who would use an aircraft the supply, distribution, or use of amends parts 1 and 93 of title 14 Code as a weapon, or as a means of delivering energy. of Federal Regulations (14 CFR parts 1 weapons, to conduct an attack on and 93) as follows: persons, property, or buildings in the XI. Availability of Rulemaking area. This subpart applies to pilots Documents PART 1—DEFINITIONS AND conducting any type of flight operations You can get an electronic copy of ABBREVIATIONS in the airspace designated as the rulemaking documents using the Washington, DC Metropolitan Area ■ Internet by— 1. The authority citation for part 1 Special Flight Rules Area (DC SFRA) (as 1. Searching the Federal eRulemaking continues to read as follows: defined in § 93.335), which includes the Portal (http://www.regulations.gov); Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. airspace designated as the Washington, 2. Visiting the FAA’s Regulations and DC Metropolitan Area Flight Restricted ■ 2. Amend § 1.1 by adding the Policies Web page at http:// Zone (DC FRZ) (as defined in § 93.335). www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/; or definition of ‘‘National defense 3. Accessing the Government Printing airspace’’ in alphabetical order to read § 93.333 Failure to comply with this Office’s Web page at http:// as follows: subpart. www.gpoaccess.gov/fr/index.html. § 1.1 General definitions. (a) Any violation. The FAA may take You can also get a copy by sending a civil enforcement action against a pilot request to the Federal Aviation * * * * * for violations, whether inadvertent or National defense airspace means Administration, Office of Rulemaking, intentional, including imposition of airspace established by a regulation ARM–1, 800 Independence Avenue, civil penalties and suspension or prescribed, or an order issued under, 49 SW., Washington, DC 20591, or by revocation of airmen’s certificates. U.S.C. 40103(b)(3). calling (202) 267–9680. Make sure to (b) Knowing or willful violations. The identify the amendment number or * * * * * DC FRZ and DC SFRA were established docket number of this rulemaking. PART 93—SPECIAL AIR TRAFFIC for reasons of national security under Anyone is able to search the RULES the provisions of 49 U.S.C. 40103(b)(3). electronic form of all comments Areas established by the FAA under that received into any of our dockets by the ■ 3. The authority citation for part 93 authority constitute ‘‘national defense name of the individual submitting the continues to read as follows: airspace’’ as that term is used in 49 comment (or signing the comment, if U.S.C. 46307. In addition to being submitted on behalf of an association, Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40103, 40106, 40109, 40113, 44502, 44514, 44701, 44719, subject to the provisions of paragraph business, labor union, etc.). You may 46301. (a) of this section, persons who review DOT’s complete Privacy Act knowingly or willfully violate national statement in the Federal Register ■ 4. Add subpart V, consisting of defense airspace established pursuant to published on April 11, 2000 (Volume §§ 93.331 through 93.345, to read as 49 U.S.C. 40103(b)(3) may be subject to 65, Number 70; Pages 19477–78) or you follows: criminal prosecution. may visit or you may visit http:// Subpart V—Washington, DC Metropolitan § 93.335 Definitions. DocketsInfo.dot.gov. Area Special Flight Rules Area For purposes of this subpart— Sec. XII. Small Business Regulatory DC FRZ flight plan is a flight plan Enforcement Fairness Act 93.331 Purpose and applicability of this subpart. filed for the sole purpose of complying The Small Business Regulatory 93.333 Failure to comply with this subpart. with the requirements for VFR Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA) of 93.335 Definitions. operations into, out of, and through the 1996 requires FAA to comply with 93.337 Requirements for operating in the DC FRZ. This flight plan is separate and small entity requests for information or DC SFRA. distinct from a standard VFR flight plan, advice about compliance with statutes 93.339 Requirements for operating in the and does not include search and rescue and regulations within its jurisdiction. If DC SFRA, including the DC FRZ. services. you are a small entity and you have a 93.341 Aircraft operations in the DC FRZ. DC SFRA flight plan is a flight plan 93.343 Requirements for aircraft operations question regarding this document, you to or from College Park Airport, Potomac filed for the sole purpose of complying may contact your local FAA official, or Airfield, or Washington Executive/Hyde with the requirements for VFR the person listed under the FOR FURTHER Field Airport. operations into, out of, and through the INFORMATION CONTACT heading at the 93.345 VFR outbound procedures for fringe DC SFRA. This flight plan is separate beginning of the preamble. You can find airports. and distinct from a standard VFR flight

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:59 Dec 15, 2008 Jkt 217001 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\16DER1.SGM 16DER1 mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES_2 76214 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 16, 2008 / Rules and Regulations

plan, and does not include search and or any civil aircraft or public aircraft, in (5) When exiting the VFR traffic rescue services. the DC SFRA, including the DC FRZ, pattern, comply with paragraphs (a)(1) Fringe airports are the following unless— through (a)(7) of this section. airports located near the outer boundary (1) The aircraft is equipped with an (d) When operating an aircraft in the of the Washington, DC Metropolitan operable two-way radio capable of VFR traffic pattern at an airport within Area Special Flight Rules Area: Barnes communicating with Air Traffic Control the DC SFRA (but not within the DC (MD47), Flying M Farms (MD77), on appropriate radio frequencies; FRZ) that has an operating airport traffic Mountain Road (MD43), Robinson (2) Before operating an aircraft in the control tower, a pilot must— (MD14), and Skyview (51VA). DC SFRA, including the DC FRZ, the (1) Before departure or before entering Washington, DC Metropolitan Area pilot establishes two-way radio the traffic pattern, request to remain in Flight Restricted Zone (DC FRZ) is an communications with the appropriate the traffic pattern; area bounded by a line beginning at the Air Traffic Control facility and (2) Remain in two-way radio Washington VOR/DME (DCA) 311° maintains such communications while communications with the tower. If the radial at 15 nautical miles (NM) (Lat. operating the aircraft in the DC SFRA, aircraft is suitably equipped, the pilot 38°59′31″ N., Long. 077°18′30″ W.); then including the DC FRZ; must also monitor VHF frequency 121.5 clockwise along the DCA 15 nautical (3) The aircraft is equipped with an or UHF frequency 243.0; mile arc to the DCA 002° radial at 15 operating automatic altitude reporting (3) Continuously operate the aircraft NM (Lat. 39°06′28″ N., Long 077°04′32″ transponder; transponder on code 1234 unless Air W.); then southeast via a line drawn to (4) Before operating an aircraft in the Traffic Control assigns a different code; the DCA 049° radial at 14 NM (Lat. DC SFRA, including the DC FRZ, the and 39°02′18″ N., Long. 076°50′38″ W.); pilot obtains and transmits a discrete (4) Before exiting the traffic pattern, thence south via a line drawn to the transponder code from Air Traffic comply with paragraphs (a)(1) through DCA 064° radial at 13 NM (Lat. Control, and the aircraft’s transponder (a)(7) of this section. 38°59′01″ N., Long. 076°48′32″ W.); continues to transmit the assigned code (e) Pilots must transmit the assigned thence clockwise along the 13 NM arc while operating within the DC SFRA; transponder code. No pilot may use to the DCA 276° radial at 13 NM (5) For VFR operations, the pilot must transponder code 1200 while in the DC (Lat.38°50′53″ N., Long 077°18′48″ W.); file and activate a DC FRZ or DC SFRA SFRA. thence north to the point of beginning, flight plan by obtaining a discrete § 93.341 Aircraft operations in the DC FRZ. excluding the airspace within a one transponder code. The flight plan is (a) Except as provided in paragraph nautical mile radius of the Freeway closed upon landing at an airport within (b) of this section, no pilot may conduct Airport, W00, Mitchellville, MD from the DC SFRA or when the aircraft exits any flight operation under part 91, 101, the surface up to but not including flight the DC SFRA; 103, 105, 125, 133, 135, or 137 of this level (FL) 180. The DC FRZ is within (6) Before operating the aircraft into, chapter in the DC FRZ, unless the and part of the Washington, DC out of, or through the Washington, DC specific flight is operating under an Metropolitan Area SFRA. Tri-Area Class B Airspace Area, the Washington, DC Metropolitan Area FAA/TSA authorization. pilot receives a specific Air Traffic (b) Department of Defense (DOD) Special Flight Rules Area (DC SFRA) is Control clearance to operate in the Class operations, law enforcement operations, an area of airspace over the surface of B airspace area; and and lifeguard or air ambulance the earth where the ready identification, (7) Before operating the aircraft into, operations under an FAA/TSA airspace location, and control of aircraft is out of, or through Class D airspace area authorization are excepted from the required in the interests of national that is within the DC SFRA, the pilot prohibition in paragraph (a) of this security. Specifically, the DC SFRA is complies with § 91.129 of this chapter. section if the pilot is in contact with Air that airspace, from the surface to, but (b) Paragraph (a)(5) of this section Traffic Control and operates the aircraft not including, FL 180, within a 30-mile does not apply to operators of transponder on an Air Traffic Control- radial of Lat. 38°51′34″ N., Long. Department of Defense aircraft, law assigned beacon code. 077°02′11″ W., or the DCA VOR/DME. enforcement operations, or lifeguard or (c) The following aircraft operations The DC SFRA includes the DC FRZ. air ambulance operations under an are permitted in the DC FRZ: § 93.337 Requirements for operating in the FAA/TSA airspace authorization, if the (1) Aircraft operations under the DCA DC SFRA. flight crew is in contact with Air Traffic Access Standard Security Program A pilot conducting any type of flight Control and is transmitting an Air (DASSP) (49 CFR part 1562) with a operation in the DC SFRA must comply Traffic Control-assigned discrete Transportation Security Administration with the restrictions listed in this transponder code. (TSA) flight authorization. subpart and all special instructions (c) When operating an aircraft in the (2) Law enforcement and other U.S. issued by the FAA in the interest of VFR traffic pattern at an airport within Federal aircraft operations with prior national security. Those special the DC SFRA (but not within the DC FAA approval. instructions may be issued in any FRZ) that does not have an airport (3) Foreign-operated military and state manner the FAA considers appropriate, traffic control tower, a pilot must— aircraft operations with a State including a NOTAM. Additionally, a (1) File a DC SFRA flight plan for Department-authorized diplomatic pilot must comply with all of the traffic pattern work; clearance, with State Department applicable requirements of this chapter. (2) Communicate traffic pattern notification to the FAA and TSA. position via the published Common (4) Federal, State, Federal DOD § 93.339 Requirements for operating in the Traffic Advisory Frequency (CTAF); contract, local government agency DC SFRA, including the DC FRZ. (3) Monitor VHF frequency 121.5 or aircraft operations and part 121, 129 or (a) Except as provided in paragraphs UHF frequency 243.0, if the aircraft is 135 air carrier flights with TSA- (b) and (c) of this section and in suitably equipped; approved full aircraft operator standard § 93.345, or unless authorized by Air (4) Obtain and transmit the Air Traffic security programs/procedures, if Traffic Control, no pilot may operate an Control-assigned discrete transponder operating with DOD permission and aircraft, including an ultralight vehicle code; and notification to the FAA and the National

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:59 Dec 15, 2008 Jkt 217001 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\16DER1.SGM 16DER1 mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES_2 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 16, 2008 / Rules and Regulations 76215

Capital Regional Coordination Center (c) If using VFR egress procedures, a ACTION: Final rule. (NCRCC). These flights may land and pilot must— depart Andrews Air Force Base, MD, (1) Depart as instructed by Air Traffic SUMMARY: This action changes the using with prior permission, if required. Control and expect a heading directly agency of Restricted Area 4806W (R– (5) Aircraft operations maintaining out of the DC FRZ until the pilot 4806W), Las Vegas; 4807 (R–4807 A & radio contact with Air Traffic Control establishes two-way radio B), Tonopah; and 4809 (R–4809) and continuously transmitting an Air communication with Potomac Tonopah, NV, from ‘‘U.S. Air Force, Traffic Control-assigned discrete Approach; and Commander, Tactical Fighter Weapons transponder code. The pilot must (2) Operate as assigned by Air Traffic Center, Nellis AFB, NV’’ to ‘‘USAF monitor VHF frequency 121.5 or UHF Control until clear of the DC FRZ, the Warfare Center, Nellis AFB, NV’’. The frequency 243.0. DC SFRA, and the Class B or Class D FAA is taking this action in response to (d) Before departing from an airport airspace area. a request from the United States Air within the DC FRZ, or before entering (d) If using VFR ingress procedures, Force to reflect an administrative the DC FRZ, all aircraft, except DOD, the aircraft must remain outside the DC change of responsibility for the law enforcement, and lifeguard or air SFRA until the pilot establishes restricted area. This action does not ambulance aircraft operating under an communications with Air Traffic change any boundaries, times of FAA/TSA airspace authorization must Control and receives authorization for designation, or activities conducted in file and activate an IFR or a DC FRZ or the aircraft to enter the DC SFRA. the restricted airspace area. a DC SFRA flight plan and transmit a (e) VFR arrivals: DATES: Effective Date: 0901 UTC, March discrete transponder code assigned by (1) If landing at College Park Airport 12, 2009. a pilot may receive routing via the an Air Traffic Control facility. Aircraft FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ken must transmit the discrete transponder vicinity of Freeway Airport; or (2) If landing at Washington McElroy, Airspace and Rules Group, code at all times while in the DC FRZ Office of System Operations Airspace or DC SFRA. Executive/Hyde Field or Potomac Airport, the pilot may receive routing and AIM, Federal Aviation § 93.343 Requirements for aircraft via the vicinity of Maryland Airport or Administration, 800 Independence operations to or from College Park Airport, the Nottingham VORTAC. Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591; Potomac Airfield, or Washington Executive/ telephone: (202) 267–8783. Hyde Field Airport. § 93.345 VFR outbound procedures for SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: fringe airports. (a) A pilot may not operate an aircraft The Rule to or from College Park Airport, MD, (a) A pilot may depart from a fringe Potomac Airfield, MD, or Washington airport as defined in § 93.335 without This action amends Title 14 Code of Executive/Hyde Field Airport, MD filing a flight plan or communicating Federal Regulations (14 CFR) part 73 by unless— with Air Traffic Control, unless changing the using agency for R–4806W, (1) The aircraft and its crew and requested, provided: R–4807A & B, and R–4809 currently passengers comply with security rules (1) The aircraft’s transponder shown as, ‘‘U.S. Air Force, Commander, issued by the TSA in 49 CFR part 1562, transmits code 1205; Tactical Fighter Weapons Center, Nellis subpart A; (2) The pilot exits the DC SFRA by the AFB, NV’’ to ‘‘USAF Warfare Center, (2) Before departing, the pilot files an most direct route before proceeding on Nellis AFB, NV’’. This is an IFR or DC FRZ or DC SFRA flight plan course; and administrative change and does not with the Washington Hub Flight Service (3) The pilot monitors VHF frequency affect the boundaries, designated Station (FSS) for each departure and 121.5 or UHF frequency 243.0. altitudes, or activities conducted within (b) No pilot may operate an aircraft arrival from/to College Park, Potomac the restricted areas. Therefore, notice arriving at a fringe airport or transit the Airfield, and Washington Executive/ and public procedures under 5 U.S.C. DC SFRA unless that pilot complies Hyde Field airports, whether or not the 553(b) is unnecessary. with the DC SFRA operating procedures aircraft makes an intermediate stop; The FAA has determined that this in this subpart. (3) When filing a flight plan with the regulation only involves an established Washington Hub FSS, the pilot Issued in Washington, DC, on December 9, body of technical regulations for which identifies himself or herself by 2008. frequent and routine amendments are providing the assigned pilot Robert A. Sturgell, necessary to keep them operationally identification code. The Washington Acting Administrator. current. Therefore, this regulation: (1) Is Hub FSS will accept the flight plan only [FR Doc. E8–29711 Filed 12–15–08; 8:45 am] not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ after verifying the code; and BILLING CODE 4910–13–P under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not (4) The pilot complies with the a ‘‘significant rule’’ under Department of applicable IFR or VFR egress procedures Transportation (DOT) Regulatory in paragraph (b), (c) or (d) of this DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; section. February 26, 1979); and (3) does not (b) If using IFR procedures, a pilot Federal Aviation Administration warrant preparation of a regulatory must— evaluation as the anticipated impact is (1) Obtain an Air Traffic Control 14 CFR Part 73 so minimal. Since this is a routine clearance from the Potomac TRACON; [Docket No. FAA–2008–1252; Airspace matter that will only affect air traffic and Docket No. 08–AWP–12] procedures and air navigation, it is (2) Comply with Air Traffic Control certified that this rule, when departure instructions from Washington RIN 2120–AA66 promulgated, will not have a significant Executive/Hyde Field, Potomac Airport, Revision of Restricted Areas 4806W, economic impact on a substantial or College Park Airport. The pilot must 4807A&B, and 4809; Nevada number of small entities under the then proceed on the Air Traffic Control- criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. assigned course and remain clear of the AGENCY: Federal Aviation The FAA’s authority to issue rules DC FRZ. Administration (FAA), DOT. regarding aviation safety is found in

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:59 Dec 15, 2008 Jkt 217001 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\16DER1.SGM 16DER1 mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES_2