Policy and Procedures Concerning the Use of Airport Revenue; Policy Regarding Airport Rates and Charges: Petition of the Clark County Department of Aviation To Use a Weight-Based Air Service Incentive Program, 21420-21422 [2011-9229]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
21420
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 73 / Friday, April 15, 2011 / Notices
procedures contained in Appendix A of
14 CFR part 150. Such determination
does not constitute approval of the
airport operator’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 exposure
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 14
CFR 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 14 CFR part
150, that the statutorily required
consultation has been accomplished.
Copies of the full Noise Exposure
Maps documentation and of the FAA’s
evaluation of the maps are available for
examination at the following locations:
Federal Aviation Administration,
Memphis Airports District Office,
2862 Business Park Drive, Building G,
Memphis, Tennessee 38118.
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
Questions may be directed to the
individual named above under the
heading, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT.
Issued in Memphis, Tennessee on April 7,
2011.
Phillip J. Braden,
Manager, Memphis Airports District Office.
[FR Doc. 2011–9224 Filed 4–14–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:58 Apr 14, 2011
Jkt 223001
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
[Docket No. FAA–2011–0361]
Policy and Procedures Concerning the
Use of Airport Revenue; Policy
Regarding Airport Rates and Charges:
Petition of the Clark County
Department of Aviation To Use a
Weight-Based Air Service Incentive
Program
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Notice of petition; request for
comments.
AGENCY:
This notice requests
comments on a petition to accept an air
service incentive program at McCarran
International Airport (Airport) as
consistent with Federal law and policies
on the use of airport revenue and on
airport rates and charges. The petitioner
Clark County Department of Aviation is
the owner and operator of the Airport.
The petitioner is the recipient of Federal
grants under the Airport Improvement
Program (AIP), and is subject to
obligations under AIP grant agreements,
including Federal law and policy on the
use of airport revenue and on airport
rates and charges. The FAA has
interpreted these policies, and the
underlying Federal statutes, to permit a
temporary waiver of standard airport
fees for carriers that provide new air
service at an airport, as an incentive to
begin or expand air service. The agency
recently issued the Air Carrier Incentive
Program Guidebook to provide specific
guidance to airport operators on the use
of air service incentive programs. That
guidance restates FAA’s previously
issued opinions regarding what
constitutes new service as characterized
in the FAA’s Policy and Procedures
Concerning the Use of Airport Revenue
(Revenue Use Policy) (64 FR 7696).
Since the inception of the Revenue Use
Policy in 1999, the FAA has defined
new air service as: (a) Service to an
airport destination not currently served,
(b) nonstop service where no nonstop
service is currently offered, (c) new
entrant carrier, and/or (d) increased
frequency of flights to a specific
destination. The FAA’s interpretation
has not permitted an airport operator to
offer an incentive program that provides
discounts based on increased aircraft
weight or an increased number of seats
on existing flights. The petitioner
proposes an incentive program that
would reward air carriers for an increase
in landed weight. An increase in landed
weight could result from an increase in
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00103
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
the size of aircraft used, or ‘‘upgauging,’’
on existing flights as well as from added
flights. The petitioner requests that the
FAA amend existing guidance to make
clear that its proposed incentive plan is
consistent with Federal law and general
agency policies on the use of airport
revenue and on airport rates and
charges. The FAA is publishing this
notice of the petition for public
comment on whether agency guidance
should be interpreted or amended as
requested.
Send your comments on or
before May 31, 2011.
ADDRESSES: You may send comments
[identified by Docket Number FAA–
2011–0361] using any of the following
methods:
• Government-wide rulemaking Web
site: Go to https://www.regulations.gov
and follow the instructions for sending
your comments electronically.
• Mail: Docket Operations, U.S.
Department of Transportation, West
Building, Ground Floor, Room W12–
140, Routing Symbol M–30, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC
20590.
• Fax: 1–202–493–2251.
• Hand Delivery: To Docket
Operations, Room W12–140 on the
ground floor of the West Building, 1200
New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington,
DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays.
Privacy: We will post all comments
we receive, without change, to https://
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information you provide. For
more information, see the Privacy Act
discussion in the SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION section of this document.
Docket: To read background
documents or comments received, go to
https://www.regulations.gov at any time
or to Room W12–140 on the ground
floor of the West Building, 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:
Stacy Swigart, Airport Compliance
Division, ACO–100, Federal Aviation
Administration, 800 Independence
Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591,
telephone (202) 267–8725; facsimile:
(202) 267–5257; e-mail:
Stacy.Swigart@faa.gov.
DATES:
An air
service incentive program is a
temporary reduction in the fees that an
airport operator charges air carriers at
the airport, or other temporary benefits
for carriers, for the purpose of
promoting new or additional air service.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
E:\FR\FM\15APN1.SGM
15APN1
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 73 / Friday, April 15, 2011 / Notices
While incentive programs can take
many forms, they may involve a waiver
of fees that would otherwise be due,
such as landing fees; cooperation and
assistance in marketing new service;
and a subsidy of air service if airport
revenue is not used for that purpose.
Because incentive fee waivers can result
in differential fees charged to different
air carriers for similar use of the airport,
incentive programs can involve issues of
compliance with Federal obligations
regarding discriminatory treatment of
air carriers and use of airport revenue.
On February 14, 2011, the Federal
Aviation Administration (FAA) received
a letter from counsel for the Clark
County Department of Aviation, the
owner and operator of McCarran
International Airport in Las Vegas,
Nevada, requesting a determination
from the FAA that the Department of
Aviation’s proposed air service
incentive program does not conflict
with Federal obligations. As a matter of
process, the agency has elected to treat
the request as a petition to amend
agency policy, and is publishing notice
of the request for public comment before
making a determination. However, the
agency has made no determination on
whether granting the Department of
Aviation’s request would or would not
actually require amendment of any
existing agency policy statements.
Background: FAA policy on use of
airport revenue and airport rates and
charges.
Airport sponsors that accept grants
under the Airport Improvement Program
agree to a set of standard grant
assurances, as required by 49 U.S.C.
47107. These include an assurance that
airport revenue will be used for the
capital and operating costs of the airport
or airport system, or certain other
purposes. They also include assurances
that fees charged air carriers will be
reasonable, not unjustly discriminatory,
and substantially comparable to fees
charged other carriers making similar
use of the airport. The FAA has issued
comprehensive policies on each of these
assurances.
The Department of Transportation
published the Policy Regarding Airport
Rates and Charges on June 21, 1996 (61
FR 31994). Portions of the policy were
subsequently vacated by the United
States Court of Appeals for the District
of Columbia Circuit in Air Transport
Ass’n of America v. DOT, 119 F.3d 38,
amended by 129 F.3d 625 (DC Cir.
1997). In July 2008, the Department
published a notice in the Federal
Register adopting three amendments to
the 1996 Rates and Charges Policy (73
FR 40430, July 14, 2008). The
amendments are intended to provide
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:58 Apr 14, 2011
Jkt 223001
greater flexibility to operators of
congested airports to use landing fees to
provide incentives to air carriers to use
the airport at less congested times or to
use alternate airports to meet regional
air service needs. The policy as
amended does not specifically refer to
incentive programs or fee waivers, but
provides in part:
3. Aeronautical fees may not unjustly
discriminate against aeronautical users or
user groups.
3.1 The airport proprietor must apply a
consistent methodology in establishing fees
for comparable aeronautical users of the
airport. When the airport proprietor uses a
cost-based methodology, aeronautical fees
imposed on any aeronautical user or group of
aeronautical users may not exceed the costs
allocated to that user or user group under a
cost allocation methodology adopted by the
airport proprietor that is consistent with this
guidance, unless aeronautical users
otherwise agree.
3.1.1 The prohibition on unjust
discrimination does not prevent an airport
proprietor from making reasonable
distinctions among aeronautical users (such
as signatory and non-signatory carriers) and
assessing higher fees on certain categories of
aeronautical users based on those
distinctions (such as higher fees for nonsignatory carriers, as compared to signatory
carriers).
The Department of Transportation
and the FAA published the Policy and
Procedures for the Use of Airport
Revenue on February 16, 1999 (64 FR
7696). That policy, in paragraph
VI.B.12, Prohibited Uses of Airport
Revenue, prohibits the direct subsidy of
air carriers with airport revenues, but
notes:
Prohibited direct subsidies do not include
waivers of fees or discounted landing or
other fees during a promotional period. Any
fee waiver or discount must be offered to all
users of the airport, and provided to all users
that are willing to provide the same type and
level of new services consistent with the
promotional offering. [64 FR 7720]
In September 2010, the FAA
published the Air Carrier Incentive
Program Guidebook: A Reference for
Airport Sponsors. The Guidebook is
available on the FAA Airports Web site.
The Guidebook was issued to bring
together in one place the principles
behind FAA policy decisions on
individual air carrier incentive
programs. The Guidebook is intended to
interpret existing policies on use of
airport revenue and airport rates and
charges, and not to establish new policy.
Several statements in the Guidebook
have possible relevance to the
Department of Aviation’s proposed
incentive plan.
Specifically, for example, the
Guidebook states that promotional
PO 00000
Frm 00104
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
21421
incentives are limited to new service,
and provides a definition of new
service:
FAA defines new service as (a) service to
an airport destination not currently served,
(b) nonstop service where no nonstop service
is currently offered, (c) new entrant carrier,
and/or (d) increased frequency of flights to a
specific destination. (In the last case, the
incentive would be available only on the
added flights.) FAA does not recognize
repeated seasonal service, upgrade of
equipment type, or increased number of seats
on existing flights as new service.
The summary of prohibited practices
reaffirms that incentives are not
available for an increase in aircraft
weight or seating not associated with an
added flight:
Your Incentive Program may NOT:
• Offer incremental discounts based
on weight for existing service
• Offer incentives based on
incremental weight or increased number
of seats on existing flights.
The Petition
The February 14, 2011, letter from
counsel for the Clark County
Department of Aviation requests that
FAA determine that the Department’s
proposed air service incentive program
does not conflict with Federal
obligations, and attaches a 13-page
memorandum in support of that request.
The letter and memorandum are
available for review on the FAA
Airports Web site, as well as in the
docket locations described under
ADDRESSES in this document.
In brief, the Department of Aviation
states that the ‘‘objective of the proposed
Incentives Program is to provide an
incentive at the margin to promote
additions to scheduled air service seat
capacity.’’ The program provides,
subject to certain terms and exceptions,
that:
* * * all monthly scheduled service
landed weight, by airline, in excess of that
operated in the same month of the prior year,
would receive a credit of up to 100% of the
landing fee (currently $2.26 per 1,000 pounds
of landed weight) paid on the incremental
landed weight.
In addition to new flights, the credit
would apply to existing flights for
which an increase in aircraft size
resulted in an increase in landing
weight.
Request for comments
The FAA requests comments on
whether the petition can be considered
consistent with agency policy on use of
airport revenue and airport rates and
charges, including policy statements
contained in the Air Carrier Incentive
Program Guidebook, and if so, whether
E:\FR\FM\15APN1.SGM
15APN1
21422
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 73 / Friday, April 15, 2011 / Notices
the stated agency policy should be
revised to permit the kind of air service
incentive program proposed by the
Clark County Department of Aviation.
Issued in Washington, DC on April 11,
2011.
Randall Fiertz,
Director, Airport Compliance and Operations.
[FR Doc. 2011–9229 Filed 4–14–11; 8:45 am]
and Construction. The regulations
implementing Executive Order 12372
regarding intergovernmental consultation on
Federal programs and activities apply to this
program.)
Issued on March 30, 2011.
J. Don Martinez,
Division Administrator, Federal Highway
Administration, Santa Fe, New Mexico.
[FR Doc. 2011–9124 Filed 4–14–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
BILLING CODE 4910–22–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Highway Administration
Notice To Rescind a Notice of Intent to
Prepare a Tiered Environmental Impact
Statement
The FHWA is issuing this
notice to advise the public and other
agencies that the Notice of Intent
published January 16, 2009, DOCID:
fr16ja09–155, to prepare a tiered EIS for
the Northwest Loop in Sandoval and
Bernalillo Counties, New Mexico, is
being rescinded.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.
Greg Heitmann, Environmental
Specialist, Federal Highway
Administration, New Mexico Division
Office, 4001 Office Court Drive, Suite
801, Santa Fe, NM 87507 Telephone
(505) 820–2027.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The scope
of the project has been adjusted to
include only the construction of a 2-lane
all-weather roadway within existing
right-of-way owned by Sandoval
County.
The project will begin 3.06 miles
north of the Bernalillo County line and
extend north for 2.12 miles to Alice
King Way. The proposed roadway will
consist of two 12-ft driving lanes and
3.7-ft shoulders. The roadway will have
a gravel surface and will be designed to
meet a design speed of 50 miles per
hour. Drainage improvements will be
provided where the roadway crosses
existing water flows.
Pursuant to the National
Environmental Policy Act, as amended,
FHWA, in cooperation with the
NMDOT, is preparing a categorical
exclusion for the proposed
improvements. While hard copy
comments are preferred, comments by
electronic mail may be sent to
Greg.Heitmann@dot.gov.
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance
Program Number 20.205, Highway Planning
Jkt 223001
[U.S. DOT Docket No. NHTSA–2011–0046]
National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration (NHTSA), DOT.
ACTION: Request for public comment on
proposed collection of information.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY:
16:58 Apr 14, 2011
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration
Reports, Forms, and Record Keeping
Requirements
Federal Highway
Administration (FHWA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice to Rescind a Notice of
Intent to Prepare a Tiered
Environmental Impact Statement.
AGENCY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Before a Federal agency can
collect certain information from the
public, it must receive approval from
the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB). Under procedures established
by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), before seeking
OMB approval, Federal agencies must
solicit public comment on proposed
collections of information, including
extensions and reinstatements of
previously approved collections.
This document describes an
Information Collection Request (ICR) for
which NHTSA intends to seek OMB
approval.
SUMMARY:
Comments must be submitted on
or before June 14, 2011.
ADDRESSES: Direct all written comments
to the U.S. Department of
Transportation Dockets, 1200 New
Jersey Ave., SE., Washington, DC 20590.
You may also submit comments
electronically at https://
www.regulations.gov. All comments
should refer to the Docket No. NHTSA–
2011–0046.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Jessica Cicchino, PhD, Contracting
Officer’s Technical Representative,
Office of Behavioral Safety Research
(NTI–131), National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration, 1200 New Jersey
Ave., SE., W46–491, Washington, DC,
20590. Dr. Cicchino’s phone number is
202–366–2752 and her e-mail address is
jessica.cicchino@dot.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995,
before an agency submits a proposed
collection of information to OMB for
DATES:
PO 00000
Frm 00105
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
approval, it must publish a document in
the Federal Register providing a 60-day
comment period and otherwise consult
with members of the public and affected
agencies concerning each proposed
collection of information. The OMB has
promulgated regulations describing
what must be included in such a
document. Under OMB’s regulations (at
5 CFR 1320.8(d)), an agency must ask
for public comment on the following:
(i) Whether the proposed collection of
information is necessary for the proper
performance of the functions of the
agency, including whether the
information will have practical utility;
(ii) The accuracy of the agency’s
estimate of the burden of the proposed
collection of information, including the
validity of the methodology and
assumptions used;
(iii) How to enhance the quality,
utility, and clarity of the information to
be collected; and
(iv) How to minimize the burden of
the collection of information on those
who are to respond, including the use
of appropriate automated, electronic,
mechanical, or other technological
collection techniques or other forms of
information technology, e.g., permitting
electronic submission of responses.
In compliance with these
requirements, NHTSA asks public
comment on the following proposed
collection of information:
Title: Evaluation of Impaired Riding
Interventions.
Type of Request: New information
collection request.
OMB Clearance Number: None.
Form Number: This collection of
information uses no standard forms.
Requested Expiration Date of
Approval: 3 years from date of approval.
Summary of the Collection of
Information: The National Highway
Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA)
proposes to collect information from the
public to evaluate intervention
programs in multiple locations designed
to reduce impaired motorcycle riding.
NHTSA anticipates that the programs
will take place over the 2012 riding
season. In-person interviews will be
conducted with motorcycle riders in up
to 4 program sites, and in up to 2
control sites not carrying out an
intervention. Motorcycle riders will be
interviewed at locations within the sites
where riders congregate. Interview
length will average 5 minutes and will
collect information on attitudes,
awareness, knowledge, and behavior
related to the intervention.
The interviews will follow a pre-post
design where they are administered
prior to the implementation of the
intervention and after its conclusion. Up
E:\FR\FM\15APN1.SGM
15APN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 73 (Friday, April 15, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 21420-21422]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-9229]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
[Docket No. FAA-2011-0361]
Policy and Procedures Concerning the Use of Airport Revenue;
Policy Regarding Airport Rates and Charges: Petition of the Clark
County Department of Aviation To Use a Weight-Based Air Service
Incentive Program
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Notice of petition; request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This notice requests comments on a petition to accept an air
service incentive program at McCarran International Airport (Airport)
as consistent with Federal law and policies on the use of airport
revenue and on airport rates and charges. The petitioner Clark County
Department of Aviation is the owner and operator of the Airport. The
petitioner is the recipient of Federal grants under the Airport
Improvement Program (AIP), and is subject to obligations under AIP
grant agreements, including Federal law and policy on the use of
airport revenue and on airport rates and charges. The FAA has
interpreted these policies, and the underlying Federal statutes, to
permit a temporary waiver of standard airport fees for carriers that
provide new air service at an airport, as an incentive to begin or
expand air service. The agency recently issued the Air Carrier
Incentive Program Guidebook to provide specific guidance to airport
operators on the use of air service incentive programs. That guidance
restates FAA's previously issued opinions regarding what constitutes
new service as characterized in the FAA's Policy and Procedures
Concerning the Use of Airport Revenue (Revenue Use Policy) (64 FR
7696). Since the inception of the Revenue Use Policy in 1999, the FAA
has defined new air service as: (a) Service to an airport destination
not currently served, (b) nonstop service where no nonstop service is
currently offered, (c) new entrant carrier, and/or (d) increased
frequency of flights to a specific destination. The FAA's
interpretation has not permitted an airport operator to offer an
incentive program that provides discounts based on increased aircraft
weight or an increased number of seats on existing flights. The
petitioner proposes an incentive program that would reward air carriers
for an increase in landed weight. An increase in landed weight could
result from an increase in the size of aircraft used, or ``upgauging,''
on existing flights as well as from added flights. The petitioner
requests that the FAA amend existing guidance to make clear that its
proposed incentive plan is consistent with Federal law and general
agency policies on the use of airport revenue and on airport rates and
charges. The FAA is publishing this notice of the petition for public
comment on whether agency guidance should be interpreted or amended as
requested.
DATES: Send your comments on or before May 31, 2011.
ADDRESSES: You may send comments [identified by Docket Number FAA-2011-
0361] using any of the following methods:
Government-wide rulemaking Web site: Go to https://www.regulations.gov and follow the instructions for sending your
comments electronically.
Mail: Docket Operations, U.S. Department of
Transportation, West Building, Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Routing
Symbol M-30, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590.
Fax: 1-202-493-2251.
Hand Delivery: To Docket Operations, Room W12-140 on the
ground floor of the West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE.,
Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays.
Privacy: We will post all comments we receive, without change, to
https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you
provide. For more information, see the Privacy Act discussion in the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document.
Docket: To read background documents or comments received, go to
https://www.regulations.gov at any time or to Room W12-140 on the ground
floor of the West Building, 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: Stacy Swigart, Airport Compliance
Division, ACO-100, Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence
Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591, telephone (202) 267-8725; facsimile:
(202) 267-5257; e-mail: Stacy.Swigart@faa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: An air service incentive program is a
temporary reduction in the fees that an airport operator charges air
carriers at the airport, or other temporary benefits for carriers, for
the purpose of promoting new or additional air service.
[[Page 21421]]
While incentive programs can take many forms, they may involve a waiver
of fees that would otherwise be due, such as landing fees; cooperation
and assistance in marketing new service; and a subsidy of air service
if airport revenue is not used for that purpose. Because incentive fee
waivers can result in differential fees charged to different air
carriers for similar use of the airport, incentive programs can involve
issues of compliance with Federal obligations regarding discriminatory
treatment of air carriers and use of airport revenue.
On February 14, 2011, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)
received a letter from counsel for the Clark County Department of
Aviation, the owner and operator of McCarran International Airport in
Las Vegas, Nevada, requesting a determination from the FAA that the
Department of Aviation's proposed air service incentive program does
not conflict with Federal obligations. As a matter of process, the
agency has elected to treat the request as a petition to amend agency
policy, and is publishing notice of the request for public comment
before making a determination. However, the agency has made no
determination on whether granting the Department of Aviation's request
would or would not actually require amendment of any existing agency
policy statements.
Background: FAA policy on use of airport revenue and airport rates
and charges.
Airport sponsors that accept grants under the Airport Improvement
Program agree to a set of standard grant assurances, as required by 49
U.S.C. 47107. These include an assurance that airport revenue will be
used for the capital and operating costs of the airport or airport
system, or certain other purposes. They also include assurances that
fees charged air carriers will be reasonable, not unjustly
discriminatory, and substantially comparable to fees charged other
carriers making similar use of the airport. The FAA has issued
comprehensive policies on each of these assurances.
The Department of Transportation published the Policy Regarding
Airport Rates and Charges on June 21, 1996 (61 FR 31994). Portions of
the policy were subsequently vacated by the United States Court of
Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit in Air Transport Ass'n of
America v. DOT, 119 F.3d 38, amended by 129 F.3d 625 (DC Cir. 1997). In
July 2008, the Department published a notice in the Federal Register
adopting three amendments to the 1996 Rates and Charges Policy (73 FR
40430, July 14, 2008). The amendments are intended to provide greater
flexibility to operators of congested airports to use landing fees to
provide incentives to air carriers to use the airport at less congested
times or to use alternate airports to meet regional air service needs.
The policy as amended does not specifically refer to incentive programs
or fee waivers, but provides in part:
3. Aeronautical fees may not unjustly discriminate against
aeronautical users or user groups.
3.1 The airport proprietor must apply a consistent methodology
in establishing fees for comparable aeronautical users of the
airport. When the airport proprietor uses a cost-based methodology,
aeronautical fees imposed on any aeronautical user or group of
aeronautical users may not exceed the costs allocated to that user
or user group under a cost allocation methodology adopted by the
airport proprietor that is consistent with this guidance, unless
aeronautical users otherwise agree.
3.1.1 The prohibition on unjust discrimination does not prevent
an airport proprietor from making reasonable distinctions among
aeronautical users (such as signatory and non-signatory carriers)
and assessing higher fees on certain categories of aeronautical
users based on those distinctions (such as higher fees for non-
signatory carriers, as compared to signatory carriers).
The Department of Transportation and the FAA published the Policy
and Procedures for the Use of Airport Revenue on February 16, 1999 (64
FR 7696). That policy, in paragraph VI.B.12, Prohibited Uses of Airport
Revenue, prohibits the direct subsidy of air carriers with airport
revenues, but notes:
Prohibited direct subsidies do not include waivers of fees or
discounted landing or other fees during a promotional period. Any
fee waiver or discount must be offered to all users of the airport,
and provided to all users that are willing to provide the same type
and level of new services consistent with the promotional offering.
[64 FR 7720]
In September 2010, the FAA published the Air Carrier Incentive
Program Guidebook: A Reference for Airport Sponsors. The Guidebook is
available on the FAA Airports Web site. The Guidebook was issued to
bring together in one place the principles behind FAA policy decisions
on individual air carrier incentive programs. The Guidebook is intended
to interpret existing policies on use of airport revenue and airport
rates and charges, and not to establish new policy. Several statements
in the Guidebook have possible relevance to the Department of
Aviation's proposed incentive plan.
Specifically, for example, the Guidebook states that promotional
incentives are limited to new service, and provides a definition of new
service:
FAA defines new service as (a) service to an airport destination
not currently served, (b) nonstop service where no nonstop service
is currently offered, (c) new entrant carrier, and/or (d) increased
frequency of flights to a specific destination. (In the last case,
the incentive would be available only on the added flights.) FAA
does not recognize repeated seasonal service, upgrade of equipment
type, or increased number of seats on existing flights as new
service.
The summary of prohibited practices reaffirms that incentives are
not available for an increase in aircraft weight or seating not
associated with an added flight:
Your Incentive Program may NOT:
Offer incremental discounts based on weight for existing
service
Offer incentives based on incremental weight or increased
number of seats on existing flights.
The Petition
The February 14, 2011, letter from counsel for the Clark County
Department of Aviation requests that FAA determine that the
Department's proposed air service incentive program does not conflict
with Federal obligations, and attaches a 13-page memorandum in support
of that request. The letter and memorandum are available for review on
the FAA Airports Web site, as well as in the docket locations described
under ADDRESSES in this document.
In brief, the Department of Aviation states that the ``objective of
the proposed Incentives Program is to provide an incentive at the
margin to promote additions to scheduled air service seat capacity.''
The program provides, subject to certain terms and exceptions, that:
* * * all monthly scheduled service landed weight, by airline,
in excess of that operated in the same month of the prior year,
would receive a credit of up to 100% of the landing fee (currently
$2.26 per 1,000 pounds of landed weight) paid on the incremental
landed weight.
In addition to new flights, the credit would apply to existing
flights for which an increase in aircraft size resulted in an increase
in landing weight.
Request for comments
The FAA requests comments on whether the petition can be considered
consistent with agency policy on use of airport revenue and airport
rates and charges, including policy statements contained in the Air
Carrier Incentive Program Guidebook, and if so, whether
[[Page 21422]]
the stated agency policy should be revised to permit the kind of air
service incentive program proposed by the Clark County Department of
Aviation.
Issued in Washington, DC on April 11, 2011.
Randall Fiertz,
Director, Airport Compliance and Operations.
[FR Doc. 2011-9229 Filed 4-14-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
