Operating Limitations for Unscheduled Operations at John F. Kennedy International Airport and Newark Liberty International Airport, 64658-64660 [E8-25850]
Download as PDF
64658
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 211 / Thursday, October 30, 2008 / Notices
Please contact Chair of U.S.-Egypt S&T
Joint Board William Lawrence, Office of
Science and Technology Cooperation,
Bureau of Oceans, Environment and
Science, U.S. Department of State at
(202) 663–2619 or e-mail:
LawrenceWA@state.gov.
Dated: October 23, 2008.
Robert S. Senseney,
Acting Director, Office of Science and
Technology Cooperation, Bureau of Oceans,
Environment and Science, Department of
State.
[FR Doc. E8–25932 Filed 10–29–08; 8:45 am]
With the approval of the chairmen,
members of the public may present oral
statements at the meeting. Persons
wishing to present statements or obtain
information should contact the person
listed in the ‘‘FOR FUTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT’’ section. Members of the
public may present a written statement
to the committee at any time.
Issued in Washington, DC, on October 24,
2008.
Francisco Estrada C.,
RTCA Advisory Committee.
[FR Doc. E8–25939 Filed 10–29–08; 8:45 am]
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
BILLING CODE 4710–09–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
Federal Aviation Administration
[Docket No. FAA–2008–0629]
RTCA Government/Industry Air Traffic
Management Advisory Committee
Operating Limitations for Unscheduled
Operations at John F. Kennedy
International Airport and Newark
Liberty International Airport
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice of RTCA Government/
Industry Air Traffic Management
Advisory Committee.
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The FAA is issuing this notice
to advise the public of a meeting of
RTCA Government/Industry Air Traffic
Management Advisory Committee.
DATES: The meeting will be held
December 4, 2008, from 1 p.m. to 4 p.m.
ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at
the Holiday Inn Capitol, Columbia II
Ballroom, 550 C Street, SW., Corner of
6th & C Streets, SW., Washington, DC
20024. (Via Metro: L’Enfant Plaza
Station, Use 7th & Maryland Exit).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
RTCA Secretariat, 1828 L Street, NW.,
Suite 805, Washington, DC 20036;
telephone (202) 833–9339; fax (202)
833–9434; Web site https://www.rtca.org.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant
to section 10(a)(2) of the Federal
Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92–
463, 5 U.S.C., Appendix 2), notice is
hereby given for the Air Traffic
Management Advisory Committee
meeting. The agenda will include:
• Opening Plenary (Welcome and
Introductions).
• Assessment of New York 77
Initiatives.
• FAA Airspace Management
Program Review.
• NextGen Integration and
Implementation.
• Closing Plenary (Other Business,
Establish 2009 Meeting Schedule,
ATMAC Member Discussion, Adjourn).
Attendance is open to the interested
public but limited to space availability.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:45 Oct 29, 2008
Jkt 211001
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Disposition of Comments to
Proposed Order.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: On July 17, 2008, the FAA
issued a proposed order requesting
written views on the FAA’s tentative
determination to temporarily limit
unscheduled aircraft operations at John
F. Kennedy International Airport (JFK)
and Newark Liberty International
Airport (EWR). The temporary limit was
intended to supplement previously
issued FAA orders limiting scheduled
operations at both airports by
addressing congestion related delays
that would otherwise occur pending the
ongoing rulemaking action for JFK and
EWR. This disposition of comments
explains the FAA’s rationale for not
presently adopting the proposed order
and discusses the comments received in
response to the proposed order.
ADDRESSES: To read background
documents or comments received, go to
https://www.regulations.gov and follow
the online instructions for accessing the
docket. Alternatively, go to the Docket
Operations in Room W12–140 of the
West Building Ground Floor at 1200
New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington,
DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
technical questions concerning this
disposition of comments contact: Gerry
Shakley, System Operations Services,
Air Traffic Organization; telephone:
(202) 267–9424; facsimile: (202) 267–
7277; e-mail: gerry.shakley@faa.gov. For
PO 00000
Frm 00065
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
legal questions concerning this
disposition of comments contact:
Rebecca B. MacPherson, Office of the
Chief Counsel, Federal Aviation
Administration; telephone: (202) 267–
7240; facsimile: (202) 267–7971; e-mail:
rebecca.macpherson@faa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Availability of Rulemaking Documents
You may obtain an electronic copy
using the Internet by:
(1) Searching the Federal
eRulemaking Portal (https://
www.regulations.gov);
(2) Visiting the FAA’s Regulations and
Policies Web page at https://
www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/; or
(3) Accessing the Government
Printing Office’s Web page at https://
www.gpoaccess.gov/fr/.
You also may obtain a copy by
sending a request to the Federal
Aviation Administration, Office of
Rulemaking, ARM–1, 800 Independence
Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591, or
by calling (202) 267–9680. Make sure to
identify the amendment number or
docket number of this rulemaking.
Discussion of Written Submissions and
the Final Order
The FAA published the Notice of
Proposed Order, ‘‘Operating Limitations
for Unscheduled Operations at John F.
Kennedy International Airport and
Newark Liberty International Airport,’’
on July 17, 2008. The FAA concludes
that it is unnecessary to issue a final
order because the limits proposed are
imposed by a final rule, ‘‘Congestion
Management Rule for John F. Kennedy
International Airport and Newark
Liberty International Airport,’’ (‘‘Final
Rule’’) issued on October 10, 2008.1
However, if the Final Rule is rendered
ineffective for any reason, the FAA may
adopt the proposed order as final
without an opportunity for further
comment. Accordingly, the comments to
the proposed order are discussed below.
The Notice requested comments on
several aspects of the proposed order, as
well as any general comments. The
comment period closed on July 28,
2008. The FAA received one comment
during the comment period and eleven
additional comments after the closing
date. These comments are from
interested parties including airlines, allcargo air carriers, a public charter
operator, and industry organizations.
Several commenters generally support
the FAA’s goal of reducing congestion at
the New York area airports, and three
commenters support the proposal in its
entirety. Commenters opposing the
1 73
FR 60544.
E:\FR\FM\30OCN1.SGM
30OCN1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 211 / Thursday, October 30, 2008 / Notices
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
proposed order contend that it fails to
address the nature of charter, business,
and general aviation operations and the
effect of the proposed order on those
segments of the aviation industry.
Comments to the Notice are addressed
below by topic. The FAA also received
seven comments in response to
‘‘Congestion Management Rule for John
F. Kennedy International Airport and
Newark Liberty International Airport’’ 2
regarding unscheduled operations that
raised substantially the same issues and
are discussed below.
All-Cargo Operations
The comments submitted by the Cargo
Airline Association (CAA) best
summarize the concerns of all-cargo air
carriers. CAA contends that the
proposed order will have a serious,
adverse impact on all-cargo carriers,
arguing that, although most operations
are conducted during nighttime hours,
these carriers cannot always plan in
advance to meet service demands
during congested hours. All-cargo
carriers frequently conduct unscheduled
operations on short notice, and many
guarantee service by a time certain.
Because of these combined
circumstances, a failure to obtain a
required reservation may result in
liability to the shipper. CAA believes
that reservations will not be available
for last minute operations, which it
argues constitutes an unfair and
unlawful discrimination against allcargo carriers and other unscheduled
operations. Additionally, CAA contends
that because of the nature of the allcargo industry segment, it is not
practical to use other area airports for
unscheduled operations. One all-cargo
carrier claims that the proposed order
will preclude it from competing as an
‘‘ad-hoc charter operator’’ because its
operations often are planned two hours
in advance.
CAA suggests that all-cargo carriers be
treated similarly to military and public
aircraft, and aircraft operating under
contracts with the Department of
Defense or the United States Postal
Service to carry mail, because of the
‘‘mission-critical all-cargo business
model.’’ Under this treatment, all-cargo
carriers would be subject to the order
and would need a reservation, but they
would be given preferential treatment.
Another all-cargo carrier requests that a
number of reservations be allocated to
allow all-cargo operations on an asneeded basis.
The purpose of the reservation system
is to allow for unscheduled operations,
and the number of reservations available
2 Docket
No. FAA–2008–0517.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:45 Oct 29, 2008
Jkt 211001
should accommodate operations in the
desired hour of operation or in
surrounding hours. It is impractical to
allocate a certain number of reservations
for last minute operations when the
carriers themselves cannot identify
when these operations will be needed.
Unscheduled operations can be
accommodated under the Final Rule if
operators are flexible in their arrival and
departure times. Based on data from
FAA’s Enhanced Traffic Management
System (ETMS) for the year ended May
31, 2008, most unscheduled flights can
be accommodated in visual
meteorological conditions or through
capacity in an adjacent hour (one hour
on either side of the actual hour of
operation in the data). The ETMS data
shows that fewer than one flight per day
on average would be affected by the
Final Rule at each airport, where there
is insufficient capacity in the adjacent
two hours to handle excess demand.
Based on this data, with minor
accommodations in flight plans,
unscheduled operators should be able to
obtain reservations and operate without
incurring additional costs. However, if
an operator cannot obtain a reservation
for its preferred time, its planned flight
times may need to be revised because of
the limited available reservations. This
is similar to the burden borne by
scheduled operators that conduct flights
during available reservation times.
Private Charter and Business Aviation
The National Air Carrier Association
(NACA) contends that the proposed
order unfairly targets a segment of the
industry, unscheduled operations, that
does not contribute significantly to the
capacity constraints at the airports.
Additionally, because of the nature of
their business, these carriers cannot
plan operations 72 hours in advance,
and reservations may be unavailable at
the last minute when they are needed to
perform contractual obligations.
As discussed above, unscheduled
operations can be accommodated under
the Final Rule if operators are flexible
in their arrival and departure times.
Additionally, the FAA believes that
general aviation demand and a segment
of flights conducted as business and
private charters can be accommodated
within regional capacity.
Number of Reservations and Applicable
Hours
NACA argues that the use of calendar
year 2007 as a baseline is inappropriate
because only LaGuardia was operating
under an administrative order limiting
the number of hourly operations. NACA
further argues that with all three major
New York airports operating under
PO 00000
Frm 00066
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
64659
limitations, there is no alternative for
unscheduled operations.
CAA contends that the FAA failed to
disclose detailed information related to
its analysis of unscheduled operations,
including what types of operations
comprise the baseline and at what time
of day or night those operations
occurred. The CAA contends that
meaningful comment to the proposed
order or analysis of possible alternatives
cannot be made without this detailed
information.
The FAA understands CAA’s and
NACA’s concerns. However, the
analysis of impact on JFK and EWR in
the final regulatory evaluation for the
Final Rule (contained in docket number
FAA–2008–0517) assumed that the
reservation restrictions were in place for
the year ended May 31, 2008.3 (See
‘‘Availability of Rulemaking
Documents’’ section for information on
how to access the docket.) Therefore,
that analysis should reflect the
conditions at the three major New York
airports after the Final Rule becomes
effective. Additionally, that analysis
considered all operations during the
slot-controlled hours, as indicated in the
proposal. Unscheduled demand
included operations that were not
allocated Operating Authorizations
under the FAA’s order for scheduled
flights. More detailed information
regarding the exact times or type of
operation would not change the net
effect of the reservation system because
the reservation system does not
distinguish between the various types of
unscheduled operations.
The Aircraft Owners and Pilots
Association (AOPA) argues that a
reservation system for visual flight rules
(VFR) operations is not justified because
air traffic control permits these
operations only when weather and
traffic conditions allow. AOPA also
argues that the proposed order ignores
recent announcements by airlines to
reduce capacity and the effect of that
reduced capacity on the congestion at
JFK and EWR. AOPA contends that the
proposed order unfairly burdens general
aviation operators at JFK and EWR
The FAA appreciates AOPA’s
concerns, but the Final Rule permits
additional operations when capacity
exists and significant delays are not
expected. A reservation system for
additional VFR operations maintains an
equitable and orderly mechanism for
allowing additional traffic at JFK and
3 The FAA recently reduced the number of
available hourly reservations at LaGuardia to reflect
historic usage and in recognition that additional
operations at LaGuardia would further increase
delays and congestion in the region. 73 FR 48428
(Aug. 19, 2008).
E:\FR\FM\30OCN1.SGM
30OCN1
64660
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 211 / Thursday, October 30, 2008 / Notices
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
EWR and provides greater opportunity
to plan for airport demand.
Additionally, although airlines may
reduce capacity in the short term, many
of the temporary reductions are in less
congested hours. Moreover, it is
important to have a comprehensive,
long-term system in place to manage
congestion and future growth at these
airports. The FAA intends to use its
authority under the Final Rule to
provide reservations for unscheduled
operations when reservations set aside
for scheduled operations are not
expected to be used, when capacity
exists in the system, and when events or
other local circumstances warrant
special consideration. The FAA believes
the flexibility to add reservations in
positive operating conditions could
allow greater access by general aviation
and other unscheduled operations
without the risks of having to
implement restrictions later in the day.
Use of Reservations for Alternate
Diversion Flights
NACA argues that the entire
reservation allocation process will
encourage individual carriers to hoard
unscheduled reservations to protect
their operations and then fail to use
those reservations, especially for those
awarded for alternate diversion
scenarios. NACA contends that the
proposed order encourages this behavior
because there is no accountability for
failure to use the reservation.
The FAA appreciates NACA’s
concerns regarding operators obtaining
reservations and failing to use them.
There are limited reservations, and
operators should not hoard or fail to
cancel unneeded ones because of the
impact on other operators. The FAA did
not propose a penalty for failing to use
a reservation. However, the FAA will
monitor reservations and actual
operations to determine if abuse occurs
and will work with individual operators
to eliminate any abusive behavior. The
final rule for JFK and EWR does not
contain a requirement to obtain a
reservation when filing flight plans
listing those airports as alternates
because such a requirement would
result in unnecessary reservations that
would remain unused in most cases. A
reservation requirement applies only to
actual operations at the airports, except
in the case of a declared emergency. The
FAA understands that there may be
other safety or operational justifications
that could dictate the use of an alternate
airport. However, this is not expected to
occur on a regular basis, and the FAA
would consider the individual
circumstances as part of any
enforcement proceeding.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:45 Oct 29, 2008
Jkt 211001
Delta and Continental suggest that the
FAA eliminate all unscheduled
operations during the peak hours to
maximize the efficiency of the airports.
The FAA considered these comments
but believes that the Final Rule strikes
the appropriate balance between the
operational needs of the various users of
the airports.
Issued in Washington, DC on October 23,
2008.
Rebecca B. MacPherson,
Assistant Chief Counsel for Regulations.
[FR Doc. E8–25850 Filed 10–29–08; 8:45 am]
Cost-Benefit Analysis of Limitations on
Unscheduled Operations
NetJets contends that the economic
analysis for limiting unscheduled
operations did not demonstrate any
congestion reduction benefit or properly
quantify the costs to aircraft operators.
Without this analysis, NetJets contends
there is no evidence that the proposed
limitations are justified, and the public
has had no opportunity to comment on
this justification.
The economic analysis addressed the
costs and benefits of implementing the
comprehensive congestion management
plan and includes limits on
unscheduled operations. Because all
operations contribute to the congestion
and delay problems at JFK and EWR, the
solution must incorporate limitations on
all operations. Under the Final Rule,
scheduled operations bear the majority
of the operational reduction. Even
though unscheduled operations, which
are a small fraction of the total
operations at JFK and EWR, are not the
root cause of the congestion and delay,
the current situation where demand
outstrips supply means that the addition
of even one operation can have a
disproportionate effect on congestion
and delay. Accordingly, these
limitations on unscheduled operations
are part of the comprehensive plan to
reduce congestion and delay.
Federal Highway Administration
Periodic Review of Orders
NACA requests the FAA to review the
necessity of limitations on unscheduled
operations on a semi-annual basis in
conjunction with the submission of
summer and winter flight schedules to
ensure that all operators may share in
any additional capacity.
The FAA agrees that available airport
capacity could potentially be used by
unscheduled operators. The Final Rule
provides for additional reservations
when weather and capacity conditions
allow, which includes decreased
demand by scheduled operators.
Additionally the Air Traffic
Organization, primarily through the Air
Traffic Control System Command
Center, constantly reviews demand at
JFK and EWR, and will respond
accordingly to changes in capacity by
adding reservations that do not result in
significant delay.
PO 00000
Frm 00067
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Environmental Impact Statement, San
Bernardino, CA
Federal Highway
Administration (FHWA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice of withdrawal.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The FHWA is providing this
notice to advise the public that the
California Department of Transportation
(Caltrans) is withdrawing the Notice of
Intent (NOI) published in the Federal
Register (Vol. 71, No. 128) on
Wednesday, July 5, 2006. That notice
addressed the intent to prepare an
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)
for the proposed U.S. 395 Realignment
Freeway/Expressway project on U.S.
395 from Interstate 15 (I–15/U.S. 395
interchange) to Farmington Road. The
original NOI was published by FHWA.
Pursuant to 23 U.S.C. 327,
environmental responsibilities for this
project have been assigned to Caltrans.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Boniface Udotor, Senior Environmental
Planner, California Department of
Transportation, 464 West 4th Street, 6th
Floor, MS823, San Bernardino,
California 92401–1400; telephone (909)
388–1387.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Caltrans,
District 8, will stop further studies of
this proposed project to realign U.S.
395. The project is currently undergoing
re-scoping for project modifications.
The corridor, which was to be
evaluated, was located on either side of
existing U.S. 395 and to the west of
existing U.S. 395. The proposed 45-mile
project was to include studies within
the communities of Oak Hills, Hesperia,
Victorville, Adelanto and
unincorporated areas of San Bernardino
County.
(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance:
Program Number 20.205, Highway Research
Planning and Construction. The regulations
implementing Executive Order 12372
regarding inter-governmental consultation on
federal programs and activities apply to this
program.)
Issued on: October 24, 2008.
Nancy E. Bobb,
Director, State Programs.
[FR Doc. E8–25889 Filed 10–29–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–22–P
E:\FR\FM\30OCN1.SGM
30OCN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 211 (Thursday, October 30, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 64658-64660]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-25850]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
[Docket No. FAA-2008-0629]
Operating Limitations for Unscheduled Operations at John F.
Kennedy International Airport and Newark Liberty International Airport
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Disposition of Comments to Proposed Order.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: On July 17, 2008, the FAA issued a proposed order requesting
written views on the FAA's tentative determination to temporarily limit
unscheduled aircraft operations at John F. Kennedy International
Airport (JFK) and Newark Liberty International Airport (EWR). The
temporary limit was intended to supplement previously issued FAA orders
limiting scheduled operations at both airports by addressing congestion
related delays that would otherwise occur pending the ongoing
rulemaking action for JFK and EWR. This disposition of comments
explains the FAA's rationale for not presently adopting the proposed
order and discusses the comments received in response to the proposed
order.
ADDRESSES: To read background documents or comments received, go to
https://www.regulations.gov and follow the online instructions for
accessing the docket. Alternatively, go to the Docket Operations in
Room W12-140 of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200 New Jersey
Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For technical questions concerning
this disposition of comments contact: Gerry Shakley, System Operations
Services, Air Traffic Organization; telephone: (202) 267-9424;
facsimile: (202) 267-7277; e-mail: gerry.shakley@faa.gov. For legal
questions concerning this disposition of comments contact: Rebecca B.
MacPherson, Office of the Chief Counsel, Federal Aviation
Administration; telephone: (202) 267-7240; facsimile: (202) 267-7971;
e-mail: rebecca.macpherson@faa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Availability of Rulemaking Documents
You may obtain an electronic copy using the Internet by:
(1) Searching the Federal eRulemaking Portal (https://
www.regulations.gov);
(2) Visiting the FAA's Regulations and Policies Web page at https://
www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/; or
(3) Accessing the Government Printing Office's Web page at https://
www.gpoaccess.gov/fr/.
You also may obtain a copy by sending a request to the Federal
Aviation Administration, Office of Rulemaking, ARM-1, 800 Independence
Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591, or by calling (202) 267-9680. Make
sure to identify the amendment number or docket number of this
rulemaking.
Discussion of Written Submissions and the Final Order
The FAA published the Notice of Proposed Order, ``Operating
Limitations for Unscheduled Operations at John F. Kennedy International
Airport and Newark Liberty International Airport,'' on July 17, 2008.
The FAA concludes that it is unnecessary to issue a final order because
the limits proposed are imposed by a final rule, ``Congestion
Management Rule for John F. Kennedy International Airport and Newark
Liberty International Airport,'' (``Final Rule'') issued on October 10,
2008.\1\ However, if the Final Rule is rendered ineffective for any
reason, the FAA may adopt the proposed order as final without an
opportunity for further comment. Accordingly, the comments to the
proposed order are discussed below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 73 FR 60544.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Notice requested comments on several aspects of the proposed
order, as well as any general comments. The comment period closed on
July 28, 2008. The FAA received one comment during the comment period
and eleven additional comments after the closing date. These comments
are from interested parties including airlines, all-cargo air carriers,
a public charter operator, and industry organizations. Several
commenters generally support the FAA's goal of reducing congestion at
the New York area airports, and three commenters support the proposal
in its entirety. Commenters opposing the
[[Page 64659]]
proposed order contend that it fails to address the nature of charter,
business, and general aviation operations and the effect of the
proposed order on those segments of the aviation industry. Comments to
the Notice are addressed below by topic. The FAA also received seven
comments in response to ``Congestion Management Rule for John F.
Kennedy International Airport and Newark Liberty International
Airport'' \2\ regarding unscheduled operations that raised
substantially the same issues and are discussed below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Docket No. FAA-2008-0517.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
All-Cargo Operations
The comments submitted by the Cargo Airline Association (CAA) best
summarize the concerns of all-cargo air carriers. CAA contends that the
proposed order will have a serious, adverse impact on all-cargo
carriers, arguing that, although most operations are conducted during
nighttime hours, these carriers cannot always plan in advance to meet
service demands during congested hours. All-cargo carriers frequently
conduct unscheduled operations on short notice, and many guarantee
service by a time certain. Because of these combined circumstances, a
failure to obtain a required reservation may result in liability to the
shipper. CAA believes that reservations will not be available for last
minute operations, which it argues constitutes an unfair and unlawful
discrimination against all-cargo carriers and other unscheduled
operations. Additionally, CAA contends that because of the nature of
the all-cargo industry segment, it is not practical to use other area
airports for unscheduled operations. One all-cargo carrier claims that
the proposed order will preclude it from competing as an ``ad-hoc
charter operator'' because its operations often are planned two hours
in advance.
CAA suggests that all-cargo carriers be treated similarly to
military and public aircraft, and aircraft operating under contracts
with the Department of Defense or the United States Postal Service to
carry mail, because of the ``mission-critical all-cargo business
model.'' Under this treatment, all-cargo carriers would be subject to
the order and would need a reservation, but they would be given
preferential treatment. Another all-cargo carrier requests that a
number of reservations be allocated to allow all-cargo operations on an
as-needed basis.
The purpose of the reservation system is to allow for unscheduled
operations, and the number of reservations available should accommodate
operations in the desired hour of operation or in surrounding hours. It
is impractical to allocate a certain number of reservations for last
minute operations when the carriers themselves cannot identify when
these operations will be needed.
Unscheduled operations can be accommodated under the Final Rule if
operators are flexible in their arrival and departure times. Based on
data from FAA's Enhanced Traffic Management System (ETMS) for the year
ended May 31, 2008, most unscheduled flights can be accommodated in
visual meteorological conditions or through capacity in an adjacent
hour (one hour on either side of the actual hour of operation in the
data). The ETMS data shows that fewer than one flight per day on
average would be affected by the Final Rule at each airport, where
there is insufficient capacity in the adjacent two hours to handle
excess demand. Based on this data, with minor accommodations in flight
plans, unscheduled operators should be able to obtain reservations and
operate without incurring additional costs. However, if an operator
cannot obtain a reservation for its preferred time, its planned flight
times may need to be revised because of the limited available
reservations. This is similar to the burden borne by scheduled
operators that conduct flights during available reservation times.
Private Charter and Business Aviation
The National Air Carrier Association (NACA) contends that the
proposed order unfairly targets a segment of the industry, unscheduled
operations, that does not contribute significantly to the capacity
constraints at the airports. Additionally, because of the nature of
their business, these carriers cannot plan operations 72 hours in
advance, and reservations may be unavailable at the last minute when
they are needed to perform contractual obligations.
As discussed above, unscheduled operations can be accommodated
under the Final Rule if operators are flexible in their arrival and
departure times. Additionally, the FAA believes that general aviation
demand and a segment of flights conducted as business and private
charters can be accommodated within regional capacity.
Number of Reservations and Applicable Hours
NACA argues that the use of calendar year 2007 as a baseline is
inappropriate because only LaGuardia was operating under an
administrative order limiting the number of hourly operations. NACA
further argues that with all three major New York airports operating
under limitations, there is no alternative for unscheduled operations.
CAA contends that the FAA failed to disclose detailed information
related to its analysis of unscheduled operations, including what types
of operations comprise the baseline and at what time of day or night
those operations occurred. The CAA contends that meaningful comment to
the proposed order or analysis of possible alternatives cannot be made
without this detailed information.
The FAA understands CAA's and NACA's concerns. However, the
analysis of impact on JFK and EWR in the final regulatory evaluation
for the Final Rule (contained in docket number FAA-2008-0517) assumed
that the reservation restrictions were in place for the year ended May
31, 2008.\3\ (See ``Availability of Rulemaking Documents'' section for
information on how to access the docket.) Therefore, that analysis
should reflect the conditions at the three major New York airports
after the Final Rule becomes effective. Additionally, that analysis
considered all operations during the slot-controlled hours, as
indicated in the proposal. Unscheduled demand included operations that
were not allocated Operating Authorizations under the FAA's order for
scheduled flights. More detailed information regarding the exact times
or type of operation would not change the net effect of the reservation
system because the reservation system does not distinguish between the
various types of unscheduled operations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ The FAA recently reduced the number of available hourly
reservations at LaGuardia to reflect historic usage and in
recognition that additional operations at LaGuardia would further
increase delays and congestion in the region. 73 FR 48428 (Aug. 19,
2008).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association (AOPA) argues that a
reservation system for visual flight rules (VFR) operations is not
justified because air traffic control permits these operations only
when weather and traffic conditions allow. AOPA also argues that the
proposed order ignores recent announcements by airlines to reduce
capacity and the effect of that reduced capacity on the congestion at
JFK and EWR. AOPA contends that the proposed order unfairly burdens
general aviation operators at JFK and EWR
The FAA appreciates AOPA's concerns, but the Final Rule permits
additional operations when capacity exists and significant delays are
not expected. A reservation system for additional VFR operations
maintains an equitable and orderly mechanism for allowing additional
traffic at JFK and
[[Page 64660]]
EWR and provides greater opportunity to plan for airport demand.
Additionally, although airlines may reduce capacity in the short term,
many of the temporary reductions are in less congested hours. Moreover,
it is important to have a comprehensive, long-term system in place to
manage congestion and future growth at these airports. The FAA intends
to use its authority under the Final Rule to provide reservations for
unscheduled operations when reservations set aside for scheduled
operations are not expected to be used, when capacity exists in the
system, and when events or other local circumstances warrant special
consideration. The FAA believes the flexibility to add reservations in
positive operating conditions could allow greater access by general
aviation and other unscheduled operations without the risks of having
to implement restrictions later in the day.
Use of Reservations for Alternate Diversion Flights
NACA argues that the entire reservation allocation process will
encourage individual carriers to hoard unscheduled reservations to
protect their operations and then fail to use those reservations,
especially for those awarded for alternate diversion scenarios. NACA
contends that the proposed order encourages this behavior because there
is no accountability for failure to use the reservation.
The FAA appreciates NACA's concerns regarding operators obtaining
reservations and failing to use them. There are limited reservations,
and operators should not hoard or fail to cancel unneeded ones because
of the impact on other operators. The FAA did not propose a penalty for
failing to use a reservation. However, the FAA will monitor
reservations and actual operations to determine if abuse occurs and
will work with individual operators to eliminate any abusive behavior.
The final rule for JFK and EWR does not contain a requirement to obtain
a reservation when filing flight plans listing those airports as
alternates because such a requirement would result in unnecessary
reservations that would remain unused in most cases. A reservation
requirement applies only to actual operations at the airports, except
in the case of a declared emergency. The FAA understands that there may
be other safety or operational justifications that could dictate the
use of an alternate airport. However, this is not expected to occur on
a regular basis, and the FAA would consider the individual
circumstances as part of any enforcement proceeding.
Delta and Continental suggest that the FAA eliminate all
unscheduled operations during the peak hours to maximize the efficiency
of the airports.
The FAA considered these comments but believes that the Final Rule
strikes the appropriate balance between the operational needs of the
various users of the airports.
Cost-Benefit Analysis of Limitations on Unscheduled Operations
NetJets contends that the economic analysis for limiting
unscheduled operations did not demonstrate any congestion reduction
benefit or properly quantify the costs to aircraft operators. Without
this analysis, NetJets contends there is no evidence that the proposed
limitations are justified, and the public has had no opportunity to
comment on this justification.
The economic analysis addressed the costs and benefits of
implementing the comprehensive congestion management plan and includes
limits on unscheduled operations. Because all operations contribute to
the congestion and delay problems at JFK and EWR, the solution must
incorporate limitations on all operations. Under the Final Rule,
scheduled operations bear the majority of the operational reduction.
Even though unscheduled operations, which are a small fraction of the
total operations at JFK and EWR, are not the root cause of the
congestion and delay, the current situation where demand outstrips
supply means that the addition of even one operation can have a
disproportionate effect on congestion and delay. Accordingly, these
limitations on unscheduled operations are part of the comprehensive
plan to reduce congestion and delay.
Periodic Review of Orders
NACA requests the FAA to review the necessity of limitations on
unscheduled operations on a semi-annual basis in conjunction with the
submission of summer and winter flight schedules to ensure that all
operators may share in any additional capacity.
The FAA agrees that available airport capacity could potentially be
used by unscheduled operators. The Final Rule provides for additional
reservations when weather and capacity conditions allow, which includes
decreased demand by scheduled operators. Additionally the Air Traffic
Organization, primarily through the Air Traffic Control System Command
Center, constantly reviews demand at JFK and EWR, and will respond
accordingly to changes in capacity by adding reservations that do not
result in significant delay.
Issued in Washington, DC on October 23, 2008.
Rebecca B. MacPherson,
Assistant Chief Counsel for Regulations.
[FR Doc. E8-25850 Filed 10-29-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P