Issued January 22, 1999
Notice of Action TakenHome | OST Filings by Number | OST Orders and Notices | OST Filings by Carrier
OST Filings by
Proceeding | OST Filings by Day | Office of Intl Aviation Filings by Carrier | Office of Intl Filings by Day
OST Docket Filings for January 22, 1999 |
Last Updated 01/25/99 04:07 PM
Queens Borough Answer to Eastwind Available in FastPDF
Love Field Exhibits Added | NPRM-Fees PDF Added
Applications and Renewals:
HeavyLift | Servicios Aereos Ilsa | TAESA - Cancun-Los Angeles/Permit Amendment | Transportes Monterrey
NPRM: Fees & Services - Supplement
Answers and Replies:
Eastwind - Answer of Queens Borough | Love Field - Answer of Continental Express/Opposition of Dallas
1998 US-Brazil Combination - Reply of Continental/Delta
Notices of Action Taken:
China Airlines | Northwest | Polynesian
Notices and Orders:
IATA | Expanded Services at Alaska Intl Airports | Northwest v European Union
| OST-97-3138 | Filed November 17, 1998 Issued January 22, 1999 |
Notice of Action Taken |
Taiwan-US-Beyond |
Renew exemption from 49 U.S.C. 41301 to conduct scheduled foreign air transportation of persons, property and mail from points behind Taiwan, via Taiwan, and intermediate points, to points in the United States and beyond; charter foreign air transportation of persons, property and mail between Taiwan and the United States, and between points not in Taiwan and points not in the United States pursuant to the terms of the 1997 Air Transport Agreement; and other charters pursuant to 14 CFR 212 of the Department’s regulations; and all other rights as enumerated in Annexes I and II of the 1997 Air Transport Agreement.
By: Paul Gretch
| OST-99-4979 | January 21, 1999 | Motion for Leave to File an
Answer and Answer of The Office of The Queens Borough President, City of New York |
High Density Rule - New York LaGuardia & Washington National |  HTML |
Eastwind also completely fails to demonstrate that there is no real competition for service between LaGuardia and Boston and Washington, D.C. and that this lack of competition accounts for comparatively high fares. First, Eastwind provides no hard evidence for its anecdotal assertion that there are separate markets for each of the New York City-area airports. Indeed, in the past, other airlines seeking slots certainly have made the opposite assertion for the purpose of serving the New York City-Boston market. In fact, service to alternative airports is an important federal goal and is one of the stated public interest factors which the Department must review before granting a slot exemption. There are over 200 non-stop flights every day between New York City and Boston on 6 airlines. Similarly, there are over 200 flights between New York City and Washington (over 100 to National and over 100 to Dulles) on 6 airlines. There is no reason to believe that an additional 10 flights to each of these cities will have any impact whatsoever on the market.
Counsel: Queens, Michael Rogovin, 718-286-2888
Expanded Air Services at Alaska International Airports
| Order 99-1-11 OST-99-5035 |
Issued January 22, 1999 Served January 26, 1999 |
Order to Show Cause |
Expanded Air Services at Alaska International Airports |
We intend as a matter of general policy in appropriate bilateral aviation negotiations -to seek, on a reciprocal basis with the other country involved, to waive any designation anchor frequency limitations in the bilateral agreement, for services by carriers of both countries on flights that operate via a point or points in Alaska. This would allow each side in an otherwise restricted bilateral relationship to add carriers beyond the number allowed in the agreement, so long as those new carriers operated via Alaska, and to add frequencies beyond the number allowed in the agreement, so long as those additional frequencies were operated via Alaska.
By: Charles Hunnicutt
| OST-99-5034 | January 22, 1999 |  Application for an Exemption |
Wichita-Boeing Field |
Application of Heavylift-Volgadnepr Limited pursuant to 49 U.S.C. Section 40109(g), applies for an emergency exemption to permit the operation of one outsized cargo charter flight, on or about January 26, 1999, utilizing Volga Dnepr's AN124-100 aircraft for the transportation of oversized aircraft parts as described from Wichita, Kansas to boeing Field, Seattle, Washington.
Counsel: Miller Hamilton, Lester Bridgeman
Love Field Interpretation Service Proceeding
| OST-98-4363 | January 22, 1999 | Consolidated Answer of Continental Express to
Petitions for Reconsideration |
Love Field |
After dumping piles of documents in the Department's docket without identifying specific information supporting DFW's patently absurd claim that the world's second largest airport is jeopardized by a limited number of additional flights with aircraft seating 56 or fewer passengers at a far smaller facility, DFW now cites specific testimony on reconsideration. Prior to this time, other parties submitted specific information demonstrating the absurdity of the claim that DFW International Airport would be threatened by operations at Love Field in compliance with the Wright and Shelby amendments, but DFW failed to rebut that is too late now. Fort Worth also complains that it was not given an opportunity to submit evidence demonstrating that DFW would be jeopardized by the operations proposed at Love Field. Clearly, Fort Worth was on notice that the Department would be considering whether the limitations it has proposed at Love Field are preempted by federal law. Moreover, Fort Worth knew that the balance between the federal interest in precluding state regulation of airline routes and services and airport proprietors' rights depended on a rational conclusion, after extensive study, that limitations on airport operations were required. Finally, the Department extended the time available for comments and allowed Fort Worth and other parties to submit numerous pleadings which were otherwise unauthorized. In light of the positions taken by Fort Worth in the courts which have considered these issues claiming that DOT has neither expertise nor justification for ruling on these issues, it is particularly ironic that Fort Worth now seeks a hearing before the Department. The Department should recognize Fort Worth's ploy for what it is, a desperate effort to delay or prevent competition among airports in the Dallas/Ft. Worth area as specified in the Shelby amendment.
Counsel: Crowell Moring, Bruce Keiner, 202-624-2615
The Department need not, at this time, determine whether the evidence supports the conclusions asserted by the DFW Board or contrary conclusions urged by Legend and Continental. Indeed, determining the actual economic impact on DFW Airport of any particular level of service at Love Field would require studies and analyses of numerous complex and interrelated factors. The threshold legal question, however, is the standard for determining the type and scope of competitive impact that may properly be considered by Dallas as the proprietor of Love Field. If it is consistent with federal law and aviation policies for Dallas to restrict interstate passenger traffic serving Love Field in order to protect DFW Airport from competition and thus optimize its growth and development, then Dallas intends to take all actions "necessary, appropriate, and legally permissible" to accomplish the goals articulated in the 1968 Concurrent Bond Ordinance. However, if proprietary rights and powers do not encompass regulation for economic or other governmental purposes, then it serves little purpose to embark on the extensive studies and analysis that would be required to resolve the myriad of questions raised by the conflicting evidence on the potential impact of Love Field on DFW Airport.
Counsel: Dallas and Spiegel McDiarmid, Rise Peters, 202-879-4000
| OST-98-4831 | Filed December 1, 1998 Issued January 22, 1999 |
Notice of Action Taken |
Newark/Houston-Antigua & Barbuda - Codeshare with Continental |
Scheduled foreign air transportation of persons, property, and mail between Newark, New Jersey and Houston,, Texas, on the one band, and Antigua and Barbuda, on the other. Northwest intends to operate this service pursuant to a code-share arrangement with Continental Airlines, Inc. Northwest requested the authority for an indefinite duration
By: Paul Gretch
| Order 99-1-10 OST-99-5011 |
Issued and Served January 22, 1999 | Order |
Northwest against the European Union |
Order 99-1-10, invites interested persons to file answers to the complaint of Northwest Airlines, Inc., in Docket OST-99-5011, no later than February 5, 1999; and if answers are filed, replies to those answers should be filed no later than February 12, 1999. Answers to the complaint and replies, if any should be served upon the persons named in ordering paragraph 4, below.
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking: Fees and Charges for Special Services
| OST-99-5003 | January 22, 1999 | Supplement - Aviation User Fees/Service Job Costs Pt. 1 | Pt. 2 | Pt. 3 |
NPRM: Fees and Charges |
By: DOT
| OST-95-791 OST-95-806 OST-96-1687 OST-98-3631 |
Filed December 17, 1998 Issued January 22, 1999 |
Notice of Action Taken |
Renew exemptions from 49 U.S.C. 41301 to conduct foreign air transportation of persons, property and mail between: (1) Apia, Samoa and Pago Pago, American Samoa, and beyond to Rarotonga, Cook Islands, and Papeete, Tahiti (OST-95-791); (2) Apia and Honolulu, HI (OST 95-806); (3) Apia and Los Angeles, CA (OST-96-1687); and (4) Maota, Samoa and Pago Pago (OST-98-3631).
By: Paul Gretch
Servicios Aereos Ilsa, S.A. de C.V.
| OST-96-1959 | January 22, 1999 | Application for Renewal of Exemption |
Mexico-US Charter |
| Exhibit A: Changes in Operations | |||
| Service List |
Counsel: Roller & Bauer, Lee Buaer, 202-331-3300
Transportes Aereos de Monterrey, S.A. de C.V.
| OST-96-1919 | January 22, 1999 | Application for Renewal of Exemption |
Mexico-US Charter |
| Exhibit A: Changes in Operations | |||
| Service List |
TAMSA acquired a second small, business-get aircraft to provide personalized air transportation for the executives of companies closely affiliated with TAMSA. The aircraft is a Falcon 900B with Mexican registration XA-TJG, and is configured for 12 passenger seats. TAMSA is awaiting the FAA inspection for inclusion of this aircraft on the Company's Part 129 Operations Specifications.
Counsel: Roller & Bauer, Lee Buaer, 202-331-3300
Transportes Aereos Ejecutivos, S.A. de C.V.
| OST-99-5037 | January 22, 1999 | Application for Exemption Authority |
Cancun-Los Angeles Scheduled All-Cargo |
| Attachment: DGAC License, 12/16/98 | |||
| Service List |
Applies for an Exemption to the extent necessary to permit TAESA to engage in scheduled all-cargo air transportation between the Cancun, Mexico and Los Angeles, California.
| OST-97-3187 45723 |
January 22, 1999 | Application for Amendment of Foreign Air Carrier Permit |
Mexico-US Scheduled and Charter Combination |
| Attachment: DGAC License 12/16/98 | |||
| Service List |
Applies for amendment and re-issuance of its Foreign Air Carrier Permit issued to it by Order 95-3-11 to the extent necessary to permit TAESA to engage in scheduled air transportation of property and mail on the following Mexico-U.S. scheduled all-cargo routes: Cancun, Mexico - Los Angeles, California Cancun, Mexico - Miami, Florida.
Counsel: Pierre Murphy, Elizabeth Collins, 202-872-1679
1998 U.S.-Brazil Combination Service Case
| OST-98-3863 | January 22, 1999 | Reply of Continental Airlines and Motion for
Leave to File |
1998 US-Brazil Combination |
United's sudden unwillingness to accept interim Brazil authority provides no basis for reopening this case for more information of any kind. The fact that United has apparently lost confidence in the economic future of Brazil should have no bearing on the Department's final award of primary and backup authority. Unlike United, Continental believes that Brazil is now taking the difficult steps which should ultimately stabilize and restore its economy, and Continental strongly desires to begin offering Houston-Sao Paulo service. Continental is already making the investment necessary to develop nonstop Brazil service on the Newark-Rio de Janeiro and Newark-Sao Paulo routes, and Continental intends to make the same investment to develop the nonstop Houston-Sao Paulo route. Although Continental did not object to United's interim service proposal, Continental's willingness to accommodate United provides no justification for reopening the record or delaying the award of authority to Continental now that United has abandoned its interim service proposal.
Counsel: Continental and Crowell Moring, Bruce Keiner, 202-624-2500
| OST-98-3863 | January 22, 1999 | Motion for Leave to File
and Consolidated Answer of Delta Air Lines |
1998 US-Brazil Combination | HTML |
Counsel: Delta and Shaw Pittman, Robert Cohn, 202-663-8060
Notice of Approval of IATA Agreement(s)
| OST-99-4983 | Posted January 22, 1999 | Notice |
Weekly Period Ending January 15, 1999 |
By: Paul Gretch
Home | OST Filings by Number | OST Orders and Notices | OST Filings by Carrier
OST Filings by
Proceeding | OST Filings by Day | Office of Intl Aviation Filings by Carrier | Office of Intl Filings by Day