OST Filings for February 23, 2000

OST-00-6957	February 23, 2000	Answer of JetBlue Airways Scanned Copy	Columbus- LaGuardia, NY; Phoenix/Las Vegas- JFK, NY
		Attachment: Finding of No Significant Evidence
		Service List

As a matter of public policy, the Department must ensure that all new entrant applicants, as the term is defined in 49 U.S.C. § 41714 (c), applying for slot exemptions comply with the same federal environmental requirements. JetBlue will strongly advocate that all of its new entrant competitors, and indeed all domestic airlines, comply with existing environmental laws when introducing new aircraft at JFK or any other domestic airport, just as JetBlue has been required to do. JetBlue is also concerned with the resolution of how any slots granted to America West, or any other airline applying to operate from JFK, will fit into the FAA’s operational plan. If America West or the Department assumes that because JetBlue will not be immediately using all of its 75 slot exemptions, and therefore those slots are available, JetBlue would want America West and any other carrier proposing to "piggyback" on JetBlue’s Slot Order and EA, to clearly understand that when JetBlue is ready to utilize those slots exemptions as its new aircraft arrive, America West, and others filing for JFK slots, will have to return the JetBlue slot exemptions on demand. Such a scenario will likely cause future operational issues for America West which ought best to be addressed as part of the present proceeding.

Counsel: Dow Lohnes, Jonathan Hill, 202.776.2000

Index

American Airlines, Inc.

OST-98-3401	February 23, 2000	Reply of Continental Airlines and Motion for Leave to File Scanned Copy	South Africa Codeshare with British Airways
		Service List

American seeks to get a leg up on U.S.-South Africa codesharing by claiming that it already holds U.S.-South Africa authority, despite the fact that its existing authority was awarded only for the purpose of codesharing with South African Airways and only at two specified U.S. gateways. As United has pointed out in its answer, and as Continental, Delta, Houston and United have demonstrated in opposing codesharing between American and British Airways, the dominance of American and British Airways at Heathrow and the U.K.’s refusal to open up Heathrow to new competition preclude any authorization which would enhance the American/British Airways dominance further.

Counsel: Continental and Crowell Moring, Bruce Keiner, 202-624-2500

Index

American Airlines, Inc. and British Airways PLC

OST-99-6507	February 23, 2000	Answer of United Air Lines HTML	U.S.- U.K. Codeshare
		Attachment A: Answer of United Air Lines - 12/1/99 HTML
		Service List
OST-99-6507	February 23, 2000	Motion of United Air Lines for Leave to File	U.S.- U.K. Codeshare

United previously filed an answer to the joint application on December 1, 1999, which United incorporates herein by reference.' In that Answer, United demonstrated that a decision by the Department as to whether to grant the joint application is discretionary, and that the joint applicants had failed to show that granting the application on routes to, from, or via London's Heathrow or Gatwick Airports would be consistent with the public interest. As United explained, in exercising its discretion as to whether to grant American's and BA's joint application to extend their global alliance to include reciprocal code sharing on Heathrow and Gatwick routes, the Department must be guided by two considerations: the effect its actions will have on the stalled efforts of the United States government to liberalize the Bermuda 2 Agreement, and the need to avoid strengthening American and BA at Heathrow and Gatwick Airports, where they are already entrenched, dominant incumbents on key U.S.-London routes, while competition on those routes remains constrained by the highly protectionist terms of Bermuda 2.

As United also explained, under the current Bermuda 2 Agreement, Heathrow and Gatwick are closed to new entrants, and incumbents serving those airports are constrained from adding new service by the restrictions in the Agreement, including those in Annex 2. While those restrictions remain in place, any decision by the Department authorizing reciprocal code sharing by American and BA on routes involving Heathrow or Gatwick would serve only to strengthen those carriers' competitive position on London-U.S. routes which they already dominate thanks to the protectionist provisions of Bermuda 2. If that result is to be avoided, the opportunity for American and BA to code share on routes involving London-U.S. service must be tied directly to the liberalization of the Bermuda 2 Agreement, and to the introduction by other carriers of significant new service between Heathrow and Gatwick Airports and the United States.

Nothing has changed since United filed its initial answer in this docket on December 1. Indeed, if anything, the prospects for meaningful liberalization of Bermuda 2 appear to have deteriorated as the U.K. government has steadfastly refused to open Heathrow and Gatwick Airports to significant new services through two additional rounds of negotiations. So long as the British remain adamant in their pursuit of an anticompetitive, mercantilist advantage for BA on Heathrow/Gatwick-U.S. routes, the Department simply cannot make the public interest findings the statute and its own regulations require to grant American's and BA's joint application in full.

Counsel: Wilmer Cutler, Bruce Rabinovitz, 202.663.6960, brabinovitz@wilmer.com

Index

British Midland Airways Limited

OST-00-6954

February 23, 2000

Answer of the Washington Parties

Manchester. England- Chicago, Illinois- Washington, D.C.

As British Midland points out in its application, this request for codeshare authority is considerably more narrow than its previous blanket codeshare authority request sought in Docket OST-00-6842, and therefore, should not create the same competitive concerns that have been previously raised in that Docket. The Authority supports this application for United Airlines and British Midland to codeshare on the new service to be operated by British Midland. The additional twenty (20) destinations United Airlines serves beyond Washington Dulles included in the codeshare application effectively creates a new, more viable competitive gateway to the U.S. The Authority believes the broader array of new competitive options to be created from this codeshare will benefit consumers on both sides of the Atlantic.

Counsel: M.W.A.A., Edward Faggen, 703.417.8615

Index

Cardinal Airlines, Inc.

Order 00-2-27 OST-99-5798	Issued February 23, 2000 Served February 23, 2000	Final Order	Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity
		Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity
		Terms, Conditions, and Limitations
		Service List

By: Bradley Mims

Index

Compania Mexicana de Aviacion, S.A. de C.V.

OST-00-6976	February 23, 2000	Application for Exemption	Guadalajara, Mexico- Las Vegas, Nevada
		Attachment: Letter to Secretary of Transportation (In Spanish)
		Service List

Mexicana requests authority from the Department to engage M scheduled combination foreign air transportation between Guadalajara. Mexico and Las Vegas, Nevada. Flights will be operated by Mexicana twice weekly with B727 aircraft configured to seat 150 passengers. Service will begin on April 1, 2000.

Counsel: Squire Sander Dempsey, Charles Donley, 202.626.6601

Index

Great Lakes Aviation, Ltd.

Order 00-2-25 OST-99-6589	Issued February 22, 2000 Served February 25, 2000	Order Prohibiting Suspension of Service and Requesting Proposals	Ninety Day Notice to Terminate Service at Pueblo, Colorado
		Appendix A: Map
		Appendix B: Historical Traffic
		Service List

Order 2000-2-25 is prohibiting Great Lakes Aviation, Ltd., from suspending service at Pueblo, Colorado, and requesting proposals from carriers interested in providing replacement essential air service at the community, within 20 days after the date of service of this order.

By: Bradley Mims

Index

Servicios Aereos Ilsa, S.A. de C.V. - SAILSA

OST-96-1959

Filed January 20, 2000
Issued February 23, 2000

Notice of Action Taken

U.S.- Mexico

Exemption from 49 USC section 41301 to permit the applicant to continue to conduct passenger charter operations between Mexico and the United States, and other passenger charter operations in accordance with 14 CFR Part 212, using small equipment.

By: Paul Gretch

Index

Sun Country Airlines, Inc.

OST-00-6838	February 23, 2000	Motion to File Out of Time and Answer of JetBlue Airways Scanned Copy	Minneapolis/St. Paul, Minnesota
		Attachment: Finding of No Significant Evidence
		Service List

While JetBlue vigorously supports increased competition in the airline industry, especially by other low fare new entrants, the application of Sun Country for two new entrant exemption slots at JFK is neither supported nor opposed by JetBlue. JetBlue does have reservations, however, about applications for JFK exemption slots not necessarily based on the particular merits of a specific request, but rather based upon both the operational availability of exemptions and compliance with all environmental laws. The Department’s grant of this, or any other application for an exemption at JFK, without first requiring that the appropriate operational and environmental analyses be performed, including the assumption that JetBlue’s operations will utilize all 75 slots granted in Order 99-9-11, would set a disturbing precedent.

Counsel: Dow Lohnes, Jonathan Hill, 202.776.2000

Index

Transportes Aeros de Monterrey, S.A. de C.V. - TAMSA

OST-96-1919

Filed January 18, 2000
Issued February 23, 2000

Notice of Action Taken

U.S.- Mexico

By: Paul Gretch

Index

Turkish Airlines (Turk Hava Yollari, A.O.)

OST-99-5039	February 23, 2000	Application for Renewal of Exemption	Turkey-Miami via Amsterdam/ Brussels; Coterminalize Miami with New York/Chicago
		Service List

On February 24, 1999, the Department granted Turkish Airlines exemption authority to engage in the scheduled foreign air transportation of persons, property and mail between a point or points in Turkey and the U.S. coterminal point Miami, Florida, on a nonstop basis or via the intermediate points Amsterdam and Brussels. See Notice of Action Taken, Docket OST-99-5039, February 24, 1999. The exemption authority is. scheduled to expire on February 24, 2000. Turkish Airlines is a flag carrier of Turkey and holds a foreign air carrier permit authorizing scheduled foreign air transportation of persons, property and mail between Turkey and New York and Chicago, via the intermediate points Amsterdam and Brussels. Turkish Airlines requests that the grant of authority in this docket be renewed for a period of two years or until the Department issues a final order granting Turkish Airlines' pending application to amend its foreign air carrier permit to include authority to serve Miami (Docket OST-99-5633, filed May 4, 1999), whichever is later.

Counsel: Zuckert Scoutt, Charles Simpson, 202.298.8660, cjsimpson@zsrlaw.com

Index