Operating Limitations at New York LaGuardia Airport, 54331-54334 [E6-15221]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 178 / Thursday, September 14, 2006 / Notices
SUMMARY: The FAA invites public
comments about our intention to request
the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) to aprove a current information
collection. Title 49 U.S.C. 44720
authorizes the appointment of
appropriately qualified persons to be
representatives of the Administrator to
allow those persons to examine, text
and certify other persons for the
purpose of issuing them pilot and
instructor certificates.
DATES: Please submit comments by
November 13, 2006.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Carla Mauney on (202) 267–9895, or by
e-mail at: Carla.Mauney@faa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with NOTICES
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)
Title: Representative of the
Administrator.
Type of Request: Revision of an
approved collection.
OMB Control Number: 2120–0033.
Forms(s): 8110–14, 8110–28, 8710–6,
8710–9.
Affected Public: A total of 4,874
Respondents.
Frequency: The information is
collected on occasion.
Estimated Average Burden Per
Response: Approximately 1.413 hour
per response.
Estimated Annual Burden Hours: An
estimated 6,886 hours annually.
Abstract: Title 49 U.S.C. 44720
authorizes the appointment of
appropriately qualified persons to be
representatives of the Administrator to
allow those persons to examine, text
and certify other persons for the
purpose of issuing them pilot and
instructor certificates.
ADDRESSES: Send comments to the FAA
at the following address: Mrs. Carla
Mauney, Room 1033, Federal Aviation
Administration, Information Systems
and Technology Services Staff, ABA–20,
800 Independence Ave., SW.,
Washington, DC 20591.
Comments are invited on: Whether
the proposed collection of information
is necessary for the proper performance
of the functions of the Department,
including whether the information will
have practical utility; the accuracy of
the Department’s estimates of the
burden of the proposed information
collection; ways to enhance the quality,
utility and clarity of the information to
be collected; and ways to minimize the
burden of the collection of information
on respondents, including the use of
automated collection techniques or
other forms of information technology.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
20:23 Sep 13, 2006
Jkt 208001
Issued in Washington, DC, on September 7,
2006.
Carla Mauney,
FAA Information Collection Clearance
Officer, Information Systems and Technology
Services Staff, ABA–20.
[FR Doc. 06–7640 Filed 9–13–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–M
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
[Docket No. FAA–2006–25755]
Operating Limitations at New York
LaGuardia Airport
Proposed Order and request for
comments.
ACTION:
The Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA) has tentatively
determined that it will be necessary to
place temporary limitations on flight
operations at New York’s LaGuardia
Airport (LaGuardia), as described in this
proposed order. The period during
which the FAA anticipates that these
limitations will remain in effect is
January 2, 2007, through September 30,
2007.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Komal Jain, Regulations Division, Office
of the Chief Counsel; Telephone: (202)
267–3073; E-mail: komal.jain@faa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
SUMMARY:
Proposed Order and Request for
Comments
The Federal Aviation Administration
(FAA) has tentatively determined that it
will be necessary to place temporary
limitations on flight operations at New
York’s LaGuardia Airport (LaGuardia),
as described in this proposed order. The
period during which the FAA
anticipates that these limitations will
remain in effect is January 2, 2007,
through September 30, 2007. The FAA
invites air carriers and other interested
persons to submit written comments on
this proposal in Docket FAA–2006–
25755. After reviewing and evaluating
the comments, the FAA expects to issue
a final order on this proposal.
In the absence of the operational
limitations proposed in this order, the
FAA anticipates a return of the
congestion-related delays that the
traveling public experienced in 2000.
These delays were not limited to
LaGuardia, but spread to other airports
throughout the National Airspace
System (NAS). In a separate docket, the
FAA is soliciting public comments on a
proposed rule that would limit the
number of scheduled and unscheduled
operations at LaGuardia (2006
PO 00000
Frm 00069
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
54331
LaGuardia NPRM).1 The FAA expects
that the expiration of the operational
limitations under this proposed order
would coincide with the effective date
of any final rule that the FAA adopts in
the related rulemaking proceeding.
The FAA’s authority to limit the
number of flight operations at
LaGuardia is an essential component of
the FAA’s statutory responsibilities. The
FAA holds broad authority under 49
U.S.C. 40103(b) to regulate the use of
the navigable airspace of the United
States. This provision authorizes the
FAA to develop plans and policy for the
use of navigable airspace and, by order
or rule, to regulate the use of the
airspace as necessary to ensure its
efficient use.
I. Background
As a result of LaGuardia’s history of
congestion-related delays, the FAA, over
the course of nearly forty years, applied
increasingly detailed rules to govern the
allocation and use of limited capacity at
the airport.2 These regulations,
collectively known as the High Density
Rule and the Buy-Sell Rule (slot rules),
were effective at controlling congestion
at LaGuardia. In 2000, however, out of
concern with the collateral effects of the
slot rules at LaGuardia on airport access
and competition, Congress elected to
phase out the slot regulations at the
airport under the Wendell H. Ford
Aviation Investment and Reform Act for
the 21st Century (AIR–21).3 Congress
simultaneously directed the U.S.
Department of Transportation, effective
immediately, to grant all applications
for exemptions from the slot rules for
specific types of flight, i.e., flights
operated by new entrant carriers and
flights that would serve small hub and
non-hub airports with aircraft with less
than 71 seats operations.4 By statute, the
slot rules will expire at LaGuardia after
January 1, 2007.5
As carriers began using the slot
exemptions permitted under AIR–21,
the number of scheduled flight
operations at LaGuardia began to far
exceed the airport’s capacity even under
optimal operating conditions.6 With no
new airport infrastructure or air traffic
control procedures, overall airport
capacity remained the same while the
1 Docket
FAA–2006–25709; 71 FR 51360.
33 FR 17,896, 17,898 (Dec. 3, 1968); 34 FR
2603 (Feb. 26, 1969); cf. 14 CFR 93.121–93.133,
93.211–93.227 (2006)
3 Public Law No. 106–181, § 231, 114 Stat. 61,
106–10 (2000) (codified at 49 U.S.C. 41714–16).
4 49 U.S.C. 41716.
5 49 U.S.C. 41715(a)(2).
6 The increase in scheduled operations at
LaGuardia is described more fully at 66 FR 31,731,
31,732–34 (June 12, 2001).
2 See
E:\FR\FM\14SEN1.SGM
14SEN1
54332
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 178 / Thursday, September 14, 2006 / Notices
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with NOTICES
number of aircraft operations and delays
soared. The average minutes of delay for
all arriving flights at LaGuardia
increased 144% from 15.52 minutes in
March 2000 (the months before AIR–21
was enacted) to 37.86 minutes in
September 2000.7 The increase in delay
was not limited to delays at LaGuardia.
Flights that arrived and departed late at
LaGuardia affected flights at other
airports and in adjacent airspace as
well; by September 2000, flight delays at
LaGuardia accounted for 25 percent of
the nation’s delays, compared to 10
percent for the previous year.8
In order to quell the growing
congestion at LaGuardia, the FAA
intervened in November 2000. The FAA
reduced the number of daily exemptions
from the High Density Rule at
LaGuardia to 159 during peak operating
hours and distributed the exemptions
via lottery.9 The 159 daily operations
reflected an increase of almost eleven
hourly operations above the limits in
place before the statutory amendments.
Despite the FAA’s partial rollback of the
number of exemption flights, LaGuardia
is now operating at its peak, optimal
weather capacity during weekday
daytime and evening hours and during
Sunday afternoon and evening hours,
and LaGuardia continues to have a
relatively serious delay problem.
Although LaGuardia lacks the
capacity to handle additional flight
operations beyond the current peak
hour limits, the legislative expiration of
the High Density Rule at LaGuardia after
January 1, 2007, will eliminate the
scheduling and reservation mechanisms
that currently sustain the airport’s
operational balance.10 Accordingly, the
FAA has proposed a new rule to
maintain the number of operations at
LaGuardia’s current hourly limits. The
2006 LaGuardia NPRM has only
recently been published for public
comment, and a final rule cannot be
issued before the expiration of the High
Density Rule. An order that temporarily
maintains LaGuardia’s current
operational limits during the interval
between the High Density Rule’s
expiration and the effective date of the
proposed replacement rule appears
necessary, because we need to avoid any
increase in the number of operations or
7 Source: FAA’s Aviation System Performance
Metrics (ASPM).
8 Calculated from FAA’s Air Traffic Operations
Network Database (OPSNET).
9 65 FR 69,126, 69,127–28 (Nov. 15, 2000). This
was extended through December 31, 2006. 70 FR
36998 (June 27, 2005).
10 The FAA maintains safe operations through the
use of air traffic control procedures. Traffic
management initiatives would be applied as needed
but would result in significant aircraft and
passenger delays.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
20:23 Sep 13, 2006
Jkt 208001
a significant rescheduling of existing
flights at LaGuardia.
Based on past experience, the FAA
expects that the termination of the slot
rules at LaGuardia will lead to a
significant increase in flights, seriously
worsening delays at LaGuardia and
elsewhere in the NAS. The FAA
believes that airline demand for flights
into and out of LaGuardia substantially
exceeds the number of flights currently
permitted at the airport. Six years ago
the statutory change that required the
Department to grant all slot exemption
applications for specified types of
service created an unacceptable level of
delay at LaGuardia even though
established carriers could not obtain slot
exemptions for service to larger
communities or for flights operated with
larger aircraft. If the FAA does not adopt
temporary limits on LaGuardia flights,
the termination of the slot rules would
eliminate all legal restrictions on the
airlines’ addition of flights to larger
communities and flights operated with
larger aircraft.11
The FAA has tentatively determined
not to propose several aspects of the
current slot and slot exemption rules in
this proposed order. In addition to
reducing the days and hours covered by
the slot rules, the FAA is not proposing
limitations based on the number of
passenger seats on the aircraft or the
community served. While there may be
legitimate policy objectives for such
limits, such as those under
consideration in the 2006 LaGuardia
NPRM, they are not essential to control
congestion in the interim.
In order to promote the use of scarce
resources, carriers would be permitted
to temporarily transfer operating
authorizations to other carriers.
The FAA proposes to include a
minimum usage requirement for the
flight operations assigned under the
order. These flight operations are a
scarce resource and we desire that they
are efficiently utilized during the
effective period of the order. Our
experience with the August 2004
Scheduling Reduction Order at
Chicago’s O’Hare International Airport,
which capped scheduled arrivals during
peak hours and allocated arrival
authorizations without a minimum
usage requirement, was that some
carriers did not utilize their authorities
and thereby the airport, the traveling
public at O’Hare and the aviation
system in general suffered unused
capacity. We propose a minimum usage
11 Several years after Congress’ decision in 2000
to abolish the High Density and Buy-Sell Rules at
O’Hare, the increasing congestion and delay
problems at O’Hare forced the FAA to limit flights
at that airport. See 70 FR 15521 (March 25, 2005).
PO 00000
Frm 00070
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
requirement for the operating
authorizations, as we have adopted in
the final rule reducing congestion and
delay at O’Hare. 14 CFR part 93, subpart
B (71 FR 51382–51404, August 29,
2006.). Carriers would be required to
use their authorizations at least 80
percent of the time over any two month
reporting period in order to retain the
authorization. The Administrator could
decide to waive the 80 percent usage
requirement under highly unusual
conditions that are beyond the carrier’s
control and that last for at least 5
consecutive days.
In addition, this proposed order
contains a lottery provision to reallocate
withdrawn, surrendered, or unallocated
operating authorizations. We propose to
follow the lottery procedures set forth in
14 CFR 93.225. The reallocation of
operating authorizations by lottery
under this proposed order would be
temporary. The limits on flights and the
allocation of any operations created by
the FAA’s final decision in the
rulemaking proceeding will control
LaGuardia operations after any new rule
takes effect.
After reviewing the comments
received on the following proposed
measures, the FAA expects to issue a
final order that temporarily governs
flight operations at LaGuardia. Because
the airport has unused capacity in the
terminal facilities, a final decision
limiting the number of flights
presumably would not discourage
airlines from using their rights in a way
that increased passenger traffic at
LaGuardia.
The FAA has determined that it has
the statutory authority to adopt this
proposal. The FAA has broad authority
under 49 U.S.C. 40103 to regulate the
use of the navigable airspace of the
United States. Section 40103 authorizes
the FAA to develop plans and policy for
the use of navigable airspace and to
assign the use that the FAA deems
necessary for its safe and efficient
utilization. It further directs the FAA to
prescribe air traffic rules and regulations
governing the efficient utilization of the
navigable airspace. The FAA interprets
its broad statutory authority to ensure
the efficient use of the navigable
airspace to encompass management of
the nationwide system of air commerce
and air traffic control. While Congress
determined to phase out the longstanding slot rules at LaGuardia,
Congress did not strip the FAA of its
authority to place operating limitations
on air carriers or other operators to
preserve the efficient utilization of the
national airspace. Indeed, the FAA has
used that authority to restrict the
number of slot exemptions since 2001,
E:\FR\FM\14SEN1.SGM
14SEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 178 / Thursday, September 14, 2006 / Notices
with general support from the impacted
operators.
II. Proposed Interim Measures
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with NOTICES
A. Scheduled Operations
The FAA proposes to adopt the
following measures with respect to
scheduled operations at LaGuardia:
1. The final order would govern
scheduled arrivals and departures at
LaGuardia from 6:30 a.m. through 9:59
p.m., Eastern Time, Monday through
Friday and from 12 noon through 9:59
p.m., Eastern Time, Sunday.
2. The final order would take effect on
January 2, 2007, and would expire at
9:59 p.m., Eastern Time, on September
30, 2007.
3. The final order would assign
operating authority to conduct an arrival
or a departure at LaGuardia during the
affected hours to the air carrier that
holds equivalent slot or slot exemption
authority (or the air carrier that operates
it if a non-air carrier holds such
authority) under the High Density Rule
or FAA slot exemption rules as of
January 1, 2007. The FAA would not
assign operating authority under the
final order to any person or entity other
than a certificated U.S. or foreign air
carrier with appropriate economic
authority to conduct scheduled
passenger service and FAA operating
authority under 14 CFR part 121, 129,
or 135.
4. For administrative tracking
purposes only, the FAA would assign an
identification number to each operating
authorization.
5. An air carrier could transfer an
operating authorization to another
carrier, not to exceed the duration of the
final order. An air carrier also could
trade an operating authorization to
another air carrier on a one-for-one
basis, not to exceed the duration of the
final order. Notice of transfer or a trade
under this paragraph would be
submitted in writing to the FAA Slot
Administration Office, facsimile (202)
267–7277 or e-mail 7-AWASlotadmin@faa.gov, and must come
from a designated representative of each
air carrier. The air carriers would be
required to receive written confirmation
from the FAA prior to operating under
the traded operating authority.
6. An air carrier could not buy, sell,
trade, or transfer an operating
authorization, except as described in
paragraph 5.
7. Every air carrier holding an
operating authorization would forward
in writing to the FAA Slot
Administration Office a list of all
operating authorizations held by the
carrier along with a listing of the
VerDate Aug<31>2005
20:23 Sep 13, 2006
Jkt 208001
operating authorizations actually
operated for each day of the 2-month
reporting period within 14 days after the
last day of the 2-month reporting period
beginning January 2 and every 2 months
thereafter. Any operating authorizations
not used at least 80 percent of the time
over a two-month period would be
withdrawn by the FAA. The
Administrator could waive the 80
percent usage requirement in the event
of a highly unusual and unpredictable
condition which is beyond the control
of the carrier and which exists for a
period of 5 consecutive days or more.
8. In the event that operating
authorizations are withdrawn for nonuse, surrendered to the FAA or are
unassigned, the FAA would determine
whether any of the available operating
authorizations should be reallocated. If
so, the FAA would conduct a lottery
using the provisions specified in 14 CFR
93.225. The FAA may retime an
operating authorization prior to
reallocation in order to address
operational needs. When the final order
expires, any operating authorizations
reassigned under this paragraph would
revert to the FAA for reallocation
according to the reallocation mechanism
prescribed in the final rule that
succeeds the final order.
9. The FAA would enforce the final
order through an enforcement action
seeking a civil penalty under 49 U.S.C.
46301(a). An air carrier that is not a
small business as defined in the Small
Business Act, 15 U.S.C. 632, would be
liable for a civil penalty of up to $25,000
for every day that it violates the limits
set forth in the final order. An air carrier
that is a small business as defined in the
Small Business Act would be liable for
a civil penalty of up to $10,000 for every
day that it violates the limits set forth
in the final order. The FAA also could
file a civil action in U.S. District Court,
under 49 U.S.C. 46106, 46107, seeking
to enjoin any air carrier from violating
the terms of the final order.
B. Unscheduled Operations 12
Under the High Density Rule, the
FAA requires all operators at LaGuardia
12 Unscheduled operations are operations other
than those regularly conducted by an air carrier
between LaGuardia and another service point.
Unscheduled operations include general aviation,
public aircraft, military, charter, ferry, and
positioning flights. An air carrier can use an
operating authorization for a ferry, positioning, or
other non-revenue flight. An air carrier may choose
to do so if a reservation is not available. Helicopter
operations are excluded from the reservation
requirement. Reservations for unscheduled flights
operating under visual flight rules (VFR) are granted
when the aircraft receives clearance from air traffic
control to land or depart LaGuardia. Reservations
for unscheduled VFR flights are not included in the
limits for unscheduled operators.
PO 00000
Frm 00071
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
54333
to obtain a reservation for each takeoff
or landing.13 Each reservation for an
unscheduled operation at LaGuardia is
an authorization for a one-time arrival
or departure on a specific date within a
specific 30-or 60-minute period. FAA
Advisory Circular 93–1, ‘‘Reservations
for Unscheduled Operations at High
Density Traffic Airports,’’ describes the
procedures for obtaining a reservation.
The FAA uses similar procedures for
Special Traffic Management Programs
implemented to respond to temporary
increases in airport demand caused by
special events such as major
conventions or sporting events, and the
FAA intends to use these procedures to
allocate reservations for unscheduled
operations at LaGuardia under the final
order.
The FAA proposes to implement a
reservation system for unscheduled
operations to ensure that demand is
spread reasonably throughout the day in
support of the FAA’s peak hour
operational cap for scheduled and
unscheduled flights. The FAA proposes
to permit six (6) unscheduled operations
per hour from 6:30 a.m. through 9:59
p.m., Eastern Time, Monday through
Friday and 12 noon through 9:59 p.m.,
Eastern Time, on Sunday. This is
consistent with the current number of
peak hour reservations available for
unscheduled operations at LaGuardia.
The FAA believes that a half-hour
allocation period is appropriate and
proposes to limit reservations in each
half-hour period to no more than three
(3) operations (arrivals and departures)
unless otherwise authorized by the Air
Traffic Organization.
Therefore, with respect to
unscheduled flight operations at
LaGuardia, the FAA proposes to adopt
the following measures:
1. The final order would apply to all
operators of unscheduled flights, except
helicopter operations, at LaGuardia from
6:30 a.m. through 9:59 p.m., Eastern
Time, Monday through Friday and from
12 noon through 9:59 p.m., Eastern
Time, Sunday.
2. The final order would take effect on
January 2, 2007, and would expire at
9:59 p.m., Eastern Time, on September
30, 2007.
3. No person could operate an aircraft
other than a helicopter to or from
LaGuardia unless the operator has
received, for that unscheduled
operation, a reservation that is assigned
by the David J. Hurley Air Traffic
Control System Command Center’s
Airport Reservation Office (ARO).
Additional information on procedures
for obtaining a reservation will be
13 See,
E:\FR\FM\14SEN1.SGM
e.g., 14 CFR 93.125 (2006).
14SEN1
54334
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 178 / Thursday, September 14, 2006 / Notices
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with NOTICES
available via the Internet at https://
www.fly.faa.gov/ecvrs.
4. Six (6) reservations would be
available per hour for unscheduled
operations at LaGuardia. The ARO
would assign reservations on a 30minute basis.
5. The ARO would receive and
process all reservation requests.
Reservations would be assigned on a
‘‘first-come, first-served’’ basis,
determined as of the time that the ARO
receives the request. A cancellation of
any reservation that will not be used as
assigned would be required.
6. Filing a request for a reservation
would not constitute the filing of an
instrument flight rules (IFR) flight plan,
as separately required by regulation.
After the reservation is obtained, an IFR
flight plan could be filed. The IFR flight
plan would include the reservation
number in the ‘‘remarks’’ section and
would be filed in accordance with FAA
regulations and procedures.
7. Air Traffic Control would
accommodate declared emergencies
without regard to reservations. Nonemergency flights in direct support of
national security, law enforcement,
military aircraft operations, or publicuse aircraft operations would be
accommodated above the reservation
limits with the prior approval of the
Vice President, System Operations
Services, Air Traffic Organization.
Procedures for obtaining the appropriate
reservation for such flights would be
available via the Internet at https://
www.fly.faa.gov/ecvrs.
8. Notwithstanding the limits in
paragraph 4, if the Air Traffic
Organization determines that air traffic
control, weather, and capacity
conditions are favorable and significant
delay is not likely, the FAA could
accommodate additional reservations
over a specific period. Unused operating
authorizations could also be temporarily
made available for unscheduled
operations. Reservations for additional
operations would be obtained through
the ARO.
9. Reservations could not be bought,
sold, or leased.
III. Request for Comments
The FAA invites all interested
persons to submit written comments on
the proposals described in this order by
filing their written views in Docket
FAA–2006–25755 on or before October
16, 2006. The FAA does not intend this
proposal to address the longer-term
issues that will be considered in the
related proposed rulemaking. Therefore,
any submissions to the current docket
should focus on the issues specified in
this proposed order.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
20:23 Sep 13, 2006
Jkt 208001
Issued in Washington, DC, on September 7,
2006.
Nan Shellabarger for Nancy LoBue,
Deputy Assistant Administrator for Aviation
Policy, Planning, and Environment.
[FR Doc. E6–15221 Filed 9–13–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
Noise Exposure Map Notice; Fort
Worth Alliance Airport, Fort Worth, 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 Fort
Worth, Texas for Fort Worth Alliance
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.
EFFECTIVE DATE: The effective date of the
FAA’s determination on the noise
exposure maps is September 7, 2006.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.
Paul Blackford, Federal Aviation
Administration, 2601 Meacham Blvd.,
Fort Worth, Texas 76137–0650, (817)
222–5607.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This
notice announces that the FAA finds
that the noise exposure maps submitted
for Fort worth Alliance Airport are in
compliance with applicable
requirements of Part 150, effective
September 7, 2006. Under 49 U.S.C.
section 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 noncompatible 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
PO 00000
Frm 00072
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
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 Fort Worth. The
documentation that constitutes the
‘‘noise exposure maps’’ as defined in
section 150.7 of Part 150 includes:
Exhibits 4.1–4.5, Exhibits 5.1–5.5, Table
4.2, and Table 5.1. The FAA has
determined that these noise exposure
maps and accompanying documentation
are in compliance with applicable
requirements. This determination is
effective on September 7, 2006.
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
implementation of that program. If
questions arise concerning the precise
relationship of specific properties to
noise exposure contours depicted on a
noise exposure map submitted under
section 47503 of the Act, it should be
noted that the FAA is not involved in
any way in determining the relative
locations of specific properties with
regard to the depicted noise contours, or
in interpreting the noise exposure maps
to resolve questions concerning, for
example, which properties should be
covered by the provisions of section
47506 of the Act. These functions are
inseparable from the ultimate land use
control and planning responsibilities of
local government. These local
responsibilities are not changed in any
way under Part 150 or through FAA’s
review of noise exposure maps.
Therefore, the responsibility for the
detailed overlaying of noise exposure
contours onto the map depicting
properties on the surface rests
exclusively with the airport operator
that submitted those maps, or with
those public agencies and planning
agencies with which consultation is
required under section 47503 of the Act.
The FAA has relied on the certification
by the airport operator, under section
150.21 of FAR Part 150, that the
statutorily required consultation has
been accomplished.
Copies of the full noise exposure map
documentation and of the FAA’s
evaluation of the maps are available for
examination at the following locations:
Federal Aviation Administration, 2601
E:\FR\FM\14SEN1.SGM
14SEN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 178 (Thursday, September 14, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Pages 54331-54334]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-15221]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
[Docket No. FAA-2006-25755]
Operating Limitations at New York LaGuardia Airport
ACTION: Proposed Order and request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has tentatively
determined that it will be necessary to place temporary limitations on
flight operations at New York's LaGuardia Airport (LaGuardia), as
described in this proposed order. The period during which the FAA
anticipates that these limitations will remain in effect is January 2,
2007, through September 30, 2007.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Komal Jain, Regulations Division,
Office of the Chief Counsel; Telephone: (202) 267-3073; E-mail:
komal.jain@faa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Proposed Order and Request for Comments
The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has tentatively
determined that it will be necessary to place temporary limitations on
flight operations at New York's LaGuardia Airport (LaGuardia), as
described in this proposed order. The period during which the FAA
anticipates that these limitations will remain in effect is January 2,
2007, through September 30, 2007. The FAA invites air carriers and
other interested persons to submit written comments on this proposal in
Docket FAA-2006-25755. After reviewing and evaluating the comments, the
FAA expects to issue a final order on this proposal.
In the absence of the operational limitations proposed in this
order, the FAA anticipates a return of the congestion-related delays
that the traveling public experienced in 2000. These delays were not
limited to LaGuardia, but spread to other airports throughout the
National Airspace System (NAS). In a separate docket, the FAA is
soliciting public comments on a proposed rule that would limit the
number of scheduled and unscheduled operations at LaGuardia (2006
LaGuardia NPRM).\1\ The FAA expects that the expiration of the
operational limitations under this proposed order would coincide with
the effective date of any final rule that the FAA adopts in the related
rulemaking proceeding.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Docket FAA-2006-25709; 71 FR 51360.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The FAA's authority to limit the number of flight operations at
LaGuardia is an essential component of the FAA's statutory
responsibilities. The FAA holds broad authority under 49 U.S.C.
40103(b) to regulate the use of the navigable airspace of the United
States. This provision authorizes the FAA to develop plans and policy
for the use of navigable airspace and, by order or rule, to regulate
the use of the airspace as necessary to ensure its efficient use.
I. Background
As a result of LaGuardia's history of congestion-related delays,
the FAA, over the course of nearly forty years, applied increasingly
detailed rules to govern the allocation and use of limited capacity at
the airport.\2\ These regulations, collectively known as the High
Density Rule and the Buy-Sell Rule (slot rules), were effective at
controlling congestion at LaGuardia. In 2000, however, out of concern
with the collateral effects of the slot rules at LaGuardia on airport
access and competition, Congress elected to phase out the slot
regulations at the airport under the Wendell H. Ford Aviation
Investment and Reform Act for the 21st Century (AIR-21).\3\ Congress
simultaneously directed the U.S. Department of Transportation,
effective immediately, to grant all applications for exemptions from
the slot rules for specific types of flight, i.e., flights operated by
new entrant carriers and flights that would serve small hub and non-hub
airports with aircraft with less than 71 seats operations.\4\ By
statute, the slot rules will expire at LaGuardia after January 1,
2007.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ See 33 FR 17,896, 17,898 (Dec. 3, 1968); 34 FR 2603 (Feb.
26, 1969); cf. 14 CFR 93.121-93.133, 93.211-93.227 (2006)
\3\ Public Law No. 106-181, Sec. 231, 114 Stat. 61, 106-10
(2000) (codified at 49 U.S.C. 41714-16).
\4\ 49 U.S.C. 41716.
\5\ 49 U.S.C. 41715(a)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As carriers began using the slot exemptions permitted under AIR-21,
the number of scheduled flight operations at LaGuardia began to far
exceed the airport's capacity even under optimal operating
conditions.\6\ With no new airport infrastructure or air traffic
control procedures, overall airport capacity remained the same while
the
[[Page 54332]]
number of aircraft operations and delays soared. The average minutes of
delay for all arriving flights at LaGuardia increased 144% from 15.52
minutes in March 2000 (the months before AIR-21 was enacted) to 37.86
minutes in September 2000.\7\ The increase in delay was not limited to
delays at LaGuardia. Flights that arrived and departed late at
LaGuardia affected flights at other airports and in adjacent airspace
as well; by September 2000, flight delays at LaGuardia accounted for 25
percent of the nation's delays, compared to 10 percent for the previous
year.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ The increase in scheduled operations at LaGuardia is
described more fully at 66 FR 31,731, 31,732-34 (June 12, 2001).
\7\ Source: FAA's Aviation System Performance Metrics (ASPM).
\8\ Calculated from FAA's Air Traffic Operations Network
Database (OPSNET).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In order to quell the growing congestion at LaGuardia, the FAA
intervened in November 2000. The FAA reduced the number of daily
exemptions from the High Density Rule at LaGuardia to 159 during peak
operating hours and distributed the exemptions via lottery.\9\ The 159
daily operations reflected an increase of almost eleven hourly
operations above the limits in place before the statutory amendments.
Despite the FAA's partial rollback of the number of exemption flights,
LaGuardia is now operating at its peak, optimal weather capacity during
weekday daytime and evening hours and during Sunday afternoon and
evening hours, and LaGuardia continues to have a relatively serious
delay problem.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ 65 FR 69,126, 69,127-28 (Nov. 15, 2000). This was extended
through December 31, 2006. 70 FR 36998 (June 27, 2005).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Although LaGuardia lacks the capacity to handle additional flight
operations beyond the current peak hour limits, the legislative
expiration of the High Density Rule at LaGuardia after January 1, 2007,
will eliminate the scheduling and reservation mechanisms that currently
sustain the airport's operational balance.\10\ Accordingly, the FAA has
proposed a new rule to maintain the number of operations at LaGuardia's
current hourly limits. The 2006 LaGuardia NPRM has only recently been
published for public comment, and a final rule cannot be issued before
the expiration of the High Density Rule. An order that temporarily
maintains LaGuardia's current operational limits during the interval
between the High Density Rule's expiration and the effective date of
the proposed replacement rule appears necessary, because we need to
avoid any increase in the number of operations or a significant
rescheduling of existing flights at LaGuardia.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ The FAA maintains safe operations through the use of air
traffic control procedures. Traffic management initiatives would be
applied as needed but would result in significant aircraft and
passenger delays.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Based on past experience, the FAA expects that the termination of
the slot rules at LaGuardia will lead to a significant increase in
flights, seriously worsening delays at LaGuardia and elsewhere in the
NAS. The FAA believes that airline demand for flights into and out of
LaGuardia substantially exceeds the number of flights currently
permitted at the airport. Six years ago the statutory change that
required the Department to grant all slot exemption applications for
specified types of service created an unacceptable level of delay at
LaGuardia even though established carriers could not obtain slot
exemptions for service to larger communities or for flights operated
with larger aircraft. If the FAA does not adopt temporary limits on
LaGuardia flights, the termination of the slot rules would eliminate
all legal restrictions on the airlines' addition of flights to larger
communities and flights operated with larger aircraft.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ Several years after Congress' decision in 2000 to abolish
the High Density and Buy-Sell Rules at O'Hare, the increasing
congestion and delay problems at O'Hare forced the FAA to limit
flights at that airport. See 70 FR 15521 (March 25, 2005).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The FAA has tentatively determined not to propose several aspects
of the current slot and slot exemption rules in this proposed order. In
addition to reducing the days and hours covered by the slot rules, the
FAA is not proposing limitations based on the number of passenger seats
on the aircraft or the community served. While there may be legitimate
policy objectives for such limits, such as those under consideration in
the 2006 LaGuardia NPRM, they are not essential to control congestion
in the interim.
In order to promote the use of scarce resources, carriers would be
permitted to temporarily transfer operating authorizations to other
carriers.
The FAA proposes to include a minimum usage requirement for the
flight operations assigned under the order. These flight operations are
a scarce resource and we desire that they are efficiently utilized
during the effective period of the order. Our experience with the
August 2004 Scheduling Reduction Order at Chicago's O'Hare
International Airport, which capped scheduled arrivals during peak
hours and allocated arrival authorizations without a minimum usage
requirement, was that some carriers did not utilize their authorities
and thereby the airport, the traveling public at O'Hare and the
aviation system in general suffered unused capacity. We propose a
minimum usage requirement for the operating authorizations, as we have
adopted in the final rule reducing congestion and delay at O'Hare. 14
CFR part 93, subpart B (71 FR 51382-51404, August 29, 2006.). Carriers
would be required to use their authorizations at least 80 percent of
the time over any two month reporting period in order to retain the
authorization. The Administrator could decide to waive the 80 percent
usage requirement under highly unusual conditions that are beyond the
carrier's control and that last for at least 5 consecutive days.
In addition, this proposed order contains a lottery provision to
reallocate withdrawn, surrendered, or unallocated operating
authorizations. We propose to follow the lottery procedures set forth
in 14 CFR 93.225. The reallocation of operating authorizations by
lottery under this proposed order would be temporary. The limits on
flights and the allocation of any operations created by the FAA's final
decision in the rulemaking proceeding will control LaGuardia operations
after any new rule takes effect.
After reviewing the comments received on the following proposed
measures, the FAA expects to issue a final order that temporarily
governs flight operations at LaGuardia. Because the airport has unused
capacity in the terminal facilities, a final decision limiting the
number of flights presumably would not discourage airlines from using
their rights in a way that increased passenger traffic at LaGuardia.
The FAA has determined that it has the statutory authority to adopt
this proposal. The FAA has broad authority under 49 U.S.C. 40103 to
regulate the use of the navigable airspace of the United States.
Section 40103 authorizes the FAA to develop plans and policy for the
use of navigable airspace and to assign the use that the FAA deems
necessary for its safe and efficient utilization. It further directs
the FAA to prescribe air traffic rules and regulations governing the
efficient utilization of the navigable airspace. The FAA interprets its
broad statutory authority to ensure the efficient use of the navigable
airspace to encompass management of the nationwide system of air
commerce and air traffic control. While Congress determined to phase
out the long-standing slot rules at LaGuardia, Congress did not strip
the FAA of its authority to place operating limitations on air carriers
or other operators to preserve the efficient utilization of the
national airspace. Indeed, the FAA has used that authority to restrict
the number of slot exemptions since 2001,
[[Page 54333]]
with general support from the impacted operators.
II. Proposed Interim Measures
A. Scheduled Operations
The FAA proposes to adopt the following measures with respect to
scheduled operations at LaGuardia:
1. The final order would govern scheduled arrivals and departures
at LaGuardia from 6:30 a.m. through 9:59 p.m., Eastern Time, Monday
through Friday and from 12 noon through 9:59 p.m., Eastern Time,
Sunday.
2. The final order would take effect on January 2, 2007, and would
expire at 9:59 p.m., Eastern Time, on September 30, 2007.
3. The final order would assign operating authority to conduct an
arrival or a departure at LaGuardia during the affected hours to the
air carrier that holds equivalent slot or slot exemption authority (or
the air carrier that operates it if a non-air carrier holds such
authority) under the High Density Rule or FAA slot exemption rules as
of January 1, 2007. The FAA would not assign operating authority under
the final order to any person or entity other than a certificated U.S.
or foreign air carrier with appropriate economic authority to conduct
scheduled passenger service and FAA operating authority under 14 CFR
part 121, 129, or 135.
4. For administrative tracking purposes only, the FAA would assign
an identification number to each operating authorization.
5. An air carrier could transfer an operating authorization to
another carrier, not to exceed the duration of the final order. An air
carrier also could trade an operating authorization to another air
carrier on a one-for-one basis, not to exceed the duration of the final
order. Notice of transfer or a trade under this paragraph would be
submitted in writing to the FAA Slot Administration Office, facsimile
(202) 267-7277 or e-mail 7-AWA-Slotadmin@faa.gov, and must come from a
designated representative of each air carrier. The air carriers would
be required to receive written confirmation from the FAA prior to
operating under the traded operating authority.
6. An air carrier could not buy, sell, trade, or transfer an
operating authorization, except as described in paragraph 5.
7. Every air carrier holding an operating authorization would
forward in writing to the FAA Slot Administration Office a list of all
operating authorizations held by the carrier along with a listing of
the operating authorizations actually operated for each day of the 2-
month reporting period within 14 days after the last day of the 2-month
reporting period beginning January 2 and every 2 months thereafter. Any
operating authorizations not used at least 80 percent of the time over
a two-month period would be withdrawn by the FAA. The Administrator
could waive the 80 percent usage requirement in the event of a highly
unusual and unpredictable condition which is beyond the control of the
carrier and which exists for a period of 5 consecutive days or more.
8. In the event that operating authorizations are withdrawn for
non-use, surrendered to the FAA or are unassigned, the FAA would
determine whether any of the available operating authorizations should
be reallocated. If so, the FAA would conduct a lottery using the
provisions specified in 14 CFR 93.225. The FAA may retime an operating
authorization prior to reallocation in order to address operational
needs. When the final order expires, any operating authorizations
reassigned under this paragraph would revert to the FAA for
reallocation according to the reallocation mechanism prescribed in the
final rule that succeeds the final order.
9. The FAA would enforce the final order through an enforcement
action seeking a civil penalty under 49 U.S.C. 46301(a). An air carrier
that is not a small business as defined in the Small Business Act, 15
U.S.C. 632, would be liable for a civil penalty of up to $25,000 for
every day that it violates the limits set forth in the final order. An
air carrier that is a small business as defined in the Small Business
Act would be liable for a civil penalty of up to $10,000 for every day
that it violates the limits set forth in the final order. The FAA also
could file a civil action in U.S. District Court, under 49 U.S.C.
46106, 46107, seeking to enjoin any air carrier from violating the
terms of the final order.
B. Unscheduled Operations \12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ Unscheduled operations are operations other than those
regularly conducted by an air carrier between LaGuardia and another
service point. Unscheduled operations include general aviation,
public aircraft, military, charter, ferry, and positioning flights.
An air carrier can use an operating authorization for a ferry,
positioning, or other non-revenue flight. An air carrier may choose
to do so if a reservation is not available. Helicopter operations
are excluded from the reservation requirement. Reservations for
unscheduled flights operating under visual flight rules (VFR) are
granted when the aircraft receives clearance from air traffic
control to land or depart LaGuardia. Reservations for unscheduled
VFR flights are not included in the limits for unscheduled
operators.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Under the High Density Rule, the FAA requires all operators at
LaGuardia to obtain a reservation for each takeoff or landing.\13\ Each
reservation for an unscheduled operation at LaGuardia is an
authorization for a one-time arrival or departure on a specific date
within a specific 30-or 60-minute period. FAA Advisory Circular 93-1,
``Reservations for Unscheduled Operations at High Density Traffic
Airports,'' describes the procedures for obtaining a reservation. The
FAA uses similar procedures for Special Traffic Management Programs
implemented to respond to temporary increases in airport demand caused
by special events such as major conventions or sporting events, and the
FAA intends to use these procedures to allocate reservations for
unscheduled operations at LaGuardia under the final order.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ See, e.g., 14 CFR 93.125 (2006).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The FAA proposes to implement a reservation system for unscheduled
operations to ensure that demand is spread reasonably throughout the
day in support of the FAA's peak hour operational cap for scheduled and
unscheduled flights. The FAA proposes to permit six (6) unscheduled
operations per hour from 6:30 a.m. through 9:59 p.m., Eastern Time,
Monday through Friday and 12 noon through 9:59 p.m., Eastern Time, on
Sunday. This is consistent with the current number of peak hour
reservations available for unscheduled operations at LaGuardia. The FAA
believes that a half-hour allocation period is appropriate and proposes
to limit reservations in each half-hour period to no more than three
(3) operations (arrivals and departures) unless otherwise authorized by
the Air Traffic Organization.
Therefore, with respect to unscheduled flight operations at
LaGuardia, the FAA proposes to adopt the following measures:
1. The final order would apply to all operators of unscheduled
flights, except helicopter operations, at LaGuardia from 6:30 a.m.
through 9:59 p.m., Eastern Time, Monday through Friday and from 12 noon
through 9:59 p.m., Eastern Time, Sunday.
2. The final order would take effect on January 2, 2007, and would
expire at 9:59 p.m., Eastern Time, on September 30, 2007.
3. No person could operate an aircraft other than a helicopter to
or from LaGuardia unless the operator has received, for that
unscheduled operation, a reservation that is assigned by the David J.
Hurley Air Traffic Control System Command Center's Airport Reservation
Office (ARO). Additional information on procedures for obtaining a
reservation will be
[[Page 54334]]
available via the Internet at https://www.fly.faa.gov/ecvrs.
4. Six (6) reservations would be available per hour for unscheduled
operations at LaGuardia. The ARO would assign reservations on a 30-
minute basis.
5. The ARO would receive and process all reservation requests.
Reservations would be assigned on a ``first-come, first-served'' basis,
determined as of the time that the ARO receives the request. A
cancellation of any reservation that will not be used as assigned would
be required.
6. Filing a request for a reservation would not constitute the
filing of an instrument flight rules (IFR) flight plan, as separately
required by regulation. After the reservation is obtained, an IFR
flight plan could be filed. The IFR flight plan would include the
reservation number in the ``remarks'' section and would be filed in
accordance with FAA regulations and procedures.
7. Air Traffic Control would accommodate declared emergencies
without regard to reservations. Non-emergency flights in direct support
of national security, law enforcement, military aircraft operations, or
public-use aircraft operations would be accommodated above the
reservation limits with the prior approval of the Vice President,
System Operations Services, Air Traffic Organization. Procedures for
obtaining the appropriate reservation for such flights would be
available via the Internet at https://www.fly.faa.gov/ecvrs.
8. Notwithstanding the limits in paragraph 4, if the Air Traffic
Organization determines that air traffic control, weather, and capacity
conditions are favorable and significant delay is not likely, the FAA
could accommodate additional reservations over a specific period.
Unused operating authorizations could also be temporarily made
available for unscheduled operations. Reservations for additional
operations would be obtained through the ARO.
9. Reservations could not be bought, sold, or leased.
III. Request for Comments
The FAA invites all interested persons to submit written comments
on the proposals described in this order by filing their written views
in Docket FAA-2006-25755 on or before October 16, 2006. The FAA does
not intend this proposal to address the longer-term issues that will be
considered in the related proposed rulemaking. Therefore, any
submissions to the current docket should focus on the issues specified
in this proposed order.
Issued in Washington, DC, on September 7, 2006.
Nan Shellabarger for Nancy LoBue,
Deputy Assistant Administrator for Aviation Policy, Planning, and
Environment.
[FR Doc. E6-15221 Filed 9-13-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P