Minimum Slot Usage Requirement, 57350-57351 [05-19600]
Download as PDF
57350
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 189 / Friday, September 30, 2005 / Notices
reconsideration of the ineligibility
determination. A request for
reconsideration must be submitted in
writing within 30 days after a person
has been informed of the adverse
decision, in accordance with 22 CFR
127.7(d) and 128.13(a).
This notice is provided for purposes
of making the public aware that the
persons listed above are prohibited from
participating directly or indirectly in
any brokering activities and in any
export from or temporary import into
the United States of defense articles,
related technical data, or defense
services in all situations covered by the
ITAR. Specific case information may be
obtained from the Office of the Clerk for
the U.S. District Courts mentioned
above and by citing the court case
number where provided.
This notice involves a foreign affairs
function of the United States
encompassed within the meaning of the
military and foreign affairs exclusion of
the Administrative Procedure Act.
Because the exercise of this foreign
affairs function is discretionary, it is
excluded from review under the
Administrative Procedure Act.
Dated: September 22, 2005.
Rose M. Likins,
Acting Assistant Secretary for PoliticalMilitary Affairs, Department of State.
[FR Doc. 05–19642 Filed 9–29–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710–25–P
DEPARTMENT OF STATE
[Public Notice 5167]
Meeting of Advisory Committee on
International Communications and
Information Policy
The Department of State announces
the next meeting of its Advisory
Committee on International
Communications and Information
Policy (ACICIP) to be held on Thursday,
October 20, 2005, from 2 p.m. to 4:30
p.m., in the Loy Henderson Auditorium
of the Harry S. Truman Building of the
U.S. Department of State. The Truman
Building is located at 2201 C Street,
NW., Washington, DC 20520.
The committee provides a formal
channel for regular consultation and
coordination on major economic, social
and legal issues and problems in
international communications and
information policy, especially as these
issues and problems involve users of
information and communications
services, providers of such services,
technology research and development,
foreign industrial and regulatory policy,
the activities of international
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:14 Sep 29, 2005
Jkt 205001
organizations with regard to
communications and information, and
developing country issues.
The meeting will be led by ACICIP
Vice Chair Mr. Rhett Dawson of the
Information Technology Industry
Council. Ambassador David A. Gross,
Deputy Assistant Secretary and U.S.
Coordinator for International
Communications and Information
Policy, and other senior State
Department and U.S. Government
officials will also address the meeting.
The main focus of the event will be to
discuss U.S.-India relations, with an
emphasis on industry input for the first
meeting of the newly-formed U.S.-India
Information and Communications
Technologies Working Group. State
Department officials will also present a
status report on preparations for the
second phase of the World Summit on
the Information Society, which will take
place in Tunis, Tunisia from November
16–18, 2005.
Members of the public may attend
these meetings up to the seating
capacity of the room. While the meeting
is open to the public, admittance to the
Department of State building is only by
means of a pre-arranged clearance list.
In order to be placed on the preclearance list, please provide your
name, title, organization, social security
number, date of birth, and citizenship to
Robert M. Watts at wattsrm@state.gov no
later than 5 p.m. on Tuesday, October
18, 2005. All attendees for this meeting
must use the 23rd Street entrance. One
of the following valid ID’s will be
required for admittance: Any U.S.
driver’s license with photo, a passport,
or a U.S. Government agency ID. NonU.S. Government attendees must be
escorted by Department of State
personnel at all times when in the
building.
For further information, please
contact Robert M. Watts, Executive
Secretary of the Committee, at 202–647–
5820 or by e-mail at wattsrm@state.gov.
Dated: September 23, 2005.
Robert M. Watts,
Executive Secretary, ACICIP, Department of
State.
[FR Doc. 05–19641 Filed 9–29–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710–07–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
Minimum Slot Usage Requirement
Notice of denial of request for
waiver of the minimum slot usage
requirement.
ACTION:
PO 00000
Frm 00103
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
SUMMARY: The FAA recently issued a
letter responding to a request from the
Regional Airlines Association (RAA) for
a blanket waiver of the minimum slot
usage requirement for all slots at the
three High Density Traffic Airports. The
text of that letter is set forth in this
notice.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Lorelei Peter, Senior Attorney, Office of
the Chief Counsel, Federal Aviation
Administration, 800 Independence
Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591;
telephone (202) 267–3073.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Deborah
C. McElroy, President, Regional Airline
Association, 2025 M Street, NW., Suite
800, Washington, DC 20036–3309.
Dear Ms. McElroy: This is in response
to your September 9 letter, submitted on
behalf of the Regional Airline
Association’s (RAA) membership,
requesting a waiver of the ‘‘use or lose’’
requirements for slots and slot
exemptions held by RAA members at
John F. Kennedy International (JFK),
LaGuardia (LGA) and Ronald Reagan
Washington National Airports (DCA) for
the period August 29, 2005 through
March 29, 2006.
Section 93.227, subsection (j) of Title
14 of the Code of Federal Regulations
provides that the Chief Counsel of the
FAA may waive the usage requirements
of paragraph (a) of that section in the
case of ‘‘a highly unusual and
unpredictable condition which is
beyond the control of the slot-holder
and which exists for a period of 9 or
more days.’’ As an example, of such a
condition, subsection 93.227(j) gives,
‘‘weather conditions which request in
the restricted operation of an airport for
an extended period of time.’’
RRA points to factors beyond the
carriers’ control—including record fuel
costs, potential disruptions in fuel
supplies, airport closing and major
changes in travel patterns—that are
creating economic difficulties for
airlines of the like that have not been
experienced since the aftermath of
September 11 or the Gulf War. Your
petition further states that the carriers’
inability to raise fares to recoup higher
fuel costs will necessitate schedule
changes, which will result in either
utilization of slots below the 80%
minimum specified in our regulations or
the operation of flights solely to
preserve slot holdings. Additionally,
you note that recent challenges to fuel
supplies and further increases in fuel
costs due to the impact of Hurricane
Katrina have critically exacerbated the
situation.
Your association requests a waiver on
behalf of its members for usage
E:\FR\FM\30SEN1.SGM
30SEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 189 / Friday, September 30, 2005 / Notices
requirements on all slots and slot
exemptions at JFK, LGA, and DCA
beginning with the initial period
following the hurricane through the
winter scheduling season.
This office received comments on
your petition from JetBlue Airways
Corp. and US Airways, Inc. JetBlue
opposes the requested waiver
principally on the ground that the
request is ‘‘overly broad’’ because the
proposed waiver would affect slots
beyond those needed to serve airports
directly impacted by Hurricane Katrina,
such as New Orleans (MSY). JetBlue
would support a more limited waiver
concerning flights between such
airports, and the slot-controlled airports.
According to JetBlue, RAA has not make
and adequate demonstration of need for
a broader wavier, given the existing
demand by JetBlue and others for scarce
take-off and landing rights at DCA and
LGA. JetBlue argues that underutilized
slots should be returned to the FAA for
redistribution under Part 93.
US Airways supports the RAA
petition and requests its own (identical)
relief, specifically, a waiver of the slot
usage requirements for all operable slots
and slot exemptions at DCA and LGA
through March 2006. US Airways recites
many of the same facts described in the
RAA petition, emphasizing actual and
potential disruptions in the nation’s
refining capacity, which drive up fuel
costs. US Airways states that a waiver
would give it ‘‘scheduling and
operational flexibility * * * to
rationalize its services as much as
possible’’ in light of Katrina and related
events. The carrier also points out that
a variety of other federal agencies (such
as EPA, the Department of Energy, and
IRS) have waived various regulatory
requirements to facilitate hurricane
relief and recovery efforts.
On September 19, 2005 we granted a
request from American Airlines, Inc. to
waive the slot usage requirements with
respect to four specifically identified
slots that the carrier was scheduled to
use from September 1 through
December 31, 2005 for flights from LGA
to MSY. We noted that this requested
waiver satisfied the criteria listed in
section 93.227(j).
We are receptive to specific requests
for short-term waivers from the slot
usage requirements, i.e., with respect to
service from any slot-controlled airport
to/from airports affected by the recent
hurricanes. We recognize that slot
holders may well have difficulty
meeting the rule’s usage requirements
when the extraordinary and devastating
effects of the hurricane have interfered
with their ability to sustain service in
that region.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:14 Sep 29, 2005
Jkt 205001
The FAA stands ready to work with
the affected carriers and their trade
associations to address such situations.
(Of course, if carriers are expecting to
cancel operations for some or all of the
winter season, please advise our slot
program office as soon as possible since
other carriers might be interested in
utilizing the slots on a temporary basis,
thus avoiding their potential withdrawal
under the ‘‘use or lose’’ rule.)
Because, however, many of the
circumstances cited in your petition go
to longstanding and fundamental
obstacles to airline profitability, and are
not specific to Katrina, I do not find that
the criteria in section 93.227(j) have
been satisfied. Therefore, I am denying
your petition but without prejudice to
your renewing your request on a more
specific, limited basis.
If you have further questions on this
matter, please contact Lorelei Peter on
my staff at 202–267–3134.
Sincerely,
Andrew B. Steinberg,
Chief Counsel.
Issued in Washington, DC, on September
23, 2005.
Gary A. Michel,
Acting Assistant Chief Counsel for
Regulations.
[FR Doc. 05–19600 Filed 9–29–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–M
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
Noise Exposure Map Notice, Laredo
International Airport, Laredo, TX
Federal Aviation
Administration, DOT.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA) announces its
determination that the noise exposure
maps submitted by the City of Laredo
for Laredo International Airport under
the provisions of 49 U.S.C. 47501 et.
seq. (Aviation Safety and Noise
Abatement Act) and 14 CFR part 150 are
in compliance with applicable
requirements.
The effective date of the
FAA’s determination on the noise
exposure maps is September 22, 2005.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul
Blackford, Federal Aviation
Administration, Airports Division, 2601
Meacham Blvd., Fort Worth, Texas
76137–4298, telephone (817) 222–5607.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This
notice announces that the FAA finds
that the noise exposure maps submitted
EFFECTIVE DATE:
PO 00000
Frm 00104
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
57351
by the City of Laredo, Texas for Laredo
International Airport are in compliance
with applicable requirements of Part
150, effective September 22, 2005.
Under 49 U.S.C. 47503 of the Aviation
Safety and Noise Abatement Act
(hereinafter referred to as ‘‘the Act’’), an
airport operator may submit to the FAA
noise exposure maps which meet
applicable regulations and which depict
non-compatible land uses as of the date
of submission of such maps, a
description of projected aircraft
operations, and the ways in which such
operations will affect such maps. The
Act requires such maps to be developed
in consultation with interested and
affected parties in the local community,
government agencies, and persons using
the airport. An airport operator who has
submitted noise exposure maps that are
found by FAA to be in compliance with
the requirements of Federal Aviation
Regulations (FAR) part 150,
promulgated pursuant to the Act, may
submit a noise compatibility program
for FAA approval which sets forth the
measures the operator has taken or
proposes to take to reduce existing noncompatible uses and prevent the
introduction of additional noncompatible uses.
The FAA has completed its review of
the noise exposure maps and
accompanying documentation
submitted by the City of Laredo. The
documentation that constitutes the
‘‘noise exposure maps’’ as defined in
section 150.7 of Part 150 includes the
following from the August 2005, FAR
Part 150 Noise Compatibility Study:
Exhibit 4.5, Year 2005 Existing
Condition Noise Exposure Map; Exhibit
5.2, Year 2010 Future Condition Noise
Exposure Map; Appendix J maps
consisting of Touch And Go/Overflight
Flight Tracks Map, Departure Flight
Tracks Map, and Arrival Flight Tracks
Map; Table 4.4, 2005 Existing Condition
Noise Exposure Estimates; Table 5.2,
2010 Future Condition-Case 1 Noise
Exposure Estimates. There are no
Historic Resources within the DNL 65
contour. The FAA has determined that
these noise exposure maps and
accompanying documentation are in
compliance with applicable
requirements. This determination is
effective on September 22, 2005.
FAA’s determination on an airport
operator’s noise exposure maps is
limited to a finding that the maps were
developed in accordance with the
procedures contained in appendix A of
FAR part 150. Such determination does
not constitute approval of the
applicant’s data, information or plans,
or a commitment to approve a noise
compatibility program or to fund the
E:\FR\FM\30SEN1.SGM
30SEN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 189 (Friday, September 30, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Pages 57350-57351]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-19600]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
Minimum Slot Usage Requirement
ACTION: Notice of denial of request for waiver of the minimum slot
usage requirement.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The FAA recently issued a letter responding to a request from
the Regional Airlines Association (RAA) for a blanket waiver of the
minimum slot usage requirement for all slots at the three High Density
Traffic Airports. The text of that letter is set forth in this notice.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lorelei Peter, Senior Attorney, Office
of the Chief Counsel, Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence
Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591; telephone (202) 267-3073.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Deborah C. McElroy, President, Regional
Airline Association, 2025 M Street, NW., Suite 800, Washington, DC
20036-3309.
Dear Ms. McElroy: This is in response to your September 9 letter,
submitted on behalf of the Regional Airline Association's (RAA)
membership, requesting a waiver of the ``use or lose'' requirements for
slots and slot exemptions held by RAA members at John F. Kennedy
International (JFK), LaGuardia (LGA) and Ronald Reagan Washington
National Airports (DCA) for the period August 29, 2005 through March
29, 2006.
Section 93.227, subsection (j) of Title 14 of the Code of Federal
Regulations provides that the Chief Counsel of the FAA may waive the
usage requirements of paragraph (a) of that section in the case of ``a
highly unusual and unpredictable condition which is beyond the control
of the slot-holder and which exists for a period of 9 or more days.''
As an example, of such a condition, subsection 93.227(j) gives,
``weather conditions which request in the restricted operation of an
airport for an extended period of time.''
RRA points to factors beyond the carriers' control--including
record fuel costs, potential disruptions in fuel supplies, airport
closing and major changes in travel patterns--that are creating
economic difficulties for airlines of the like that have not been
experienced since the aftermath of September 11 or the Gulf War. Your
petition further states that the carriers' inability to raise fares to
recoup higher fuel costs will necessitate schedule changes, which will
result in either utilization of slots below the 80% minimum specified
in our regulations or the operation of flights solely to preserve slot
holdings. Additionally, you note that recent challenges to fuel
supplies and further increases in fuel costs due to the impact of
Hurricane Katrina have critically exacerbated the situation.
Your association requests a waiver on behalf of its members for
usage
[[Page 57351]]
requirements on all slots and slot exemptions at JFK, LGA, and DCA
beginning with the initial period following the hurricane through the
winter scheduling season.
This office received comments on your petition from JetBlue Airways
Corp. and US Airways, Inc. JetBlue opposes the requested waiver
principally on the ground that the request is ``overly broad'' because
the proposed waiver would affect slots beyond those needed to serve
airports directly impacted by Hurricane Katrina, such as New Orleans
(MSY). JetBlue would support a more limited waiver concerning flights
between such airports, and the slot-controlled airports. According to
JetBlue, RAA has not make and adequate demonstration of need for a
broader wavier, given the existing demand by JetBlue and others for
scarce take-off and landing rights at DCA and LGA. JetBlue argues that
underutilized slots should be returned to the FAA for redistribution
under Part 93.
US Airways supports the RAA petition and requests its own
(identical) relief, specifically, a waiver of the slot usage
requirements for all operable slots and slot exemptions at DCA and LGA
through March 2006. US Airways recites many of the same facts described
in the RAA petition, emphasizing actual and potential disruptions in
the nation's refining capacity, which drive up fuel costs. US Airways
states that a waiver would give it ``scheduling and operational
flexibility * * * to rationalize its services as much as possible'' in
light of Katrina and related events. The carrier also points out that a
variety of other federal agencies (such as EPA, the Department of
Energy, and IRS) have waived various regulatory requirements to
facilitate hurricane relief and recovery efforts.
On September 19, 2005 we granted a request from American Airlines,
Inc. to waive the slot usage requirements with respect to four
specifically identified slots that the carrier was scheduled to use
from September 1 through December 31, 2005 for flights from LGA to MSY.
We noted that this requested waiver satisfied the criteria listed in
section 93.227(j).
We are receptive to specific requests for short-term waivers from
the slot usage requirements, i.e., with respect to service from any
slot-controlled airport to/from airports affected by the recent
hurricanes. We recognize that slot holders may well have difficulty
meeting the rule's usage requirements when the extraordinary and
devastating effects of the hurricane have interfered with their ability
to sustain service in that region.
The FAA stands ready to work with the affected carriers and their
trade associations to address such situations. (Of course, if carriers
are expecting to cancel operations for some or all of the winter
season, please advise our slot program office as soon as possible since
other carriers might be interested in utilizing the slots on a
temporary basis, thus avoiding their potential withdrawal under the
``use or lose'' rule.)
Because, however, many of the circumstances cited in your petition
go to longstanding and fundamental obstacles to airline profitability,
and are not specific to Katrina, I do not find that the criteria in
section 93.227(j) have been satisfied. Therefore, I am denying your
petition but without prejudice to your renewing your request on a more
specific, limited basis.
If you have further questions on this matter, please contact
Lorelei Peter on my staff at 202-267-3134.
Sincerely,
Andrew B. Steinberg,
Chief Counsel.
Issued in Washington, DC, on September 23, 2005.
Gary A. Michel,
Acting Assistant Chief Counsel for Regulations.
[FR Doc. 05-19600 Filed 9-29-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-M