Application
for a Renewal of Exemption© Copyright 2001 Airline Information Research, Inc. All rights reserved.
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
OST Docket Filings for February 22, 2001 |
Last Updated 03/16/01 02:17 PM
Applications and Renewals:
Aerodan - U.S.- Mexico | Air Japan - U.S.- Japan | IATA
Answers and Replies:
Alaska Mail Rates - Comments | All Nippon - Suspension of Codeshare | American/Swissair - Additional Codeshare
Cardinal Airlines - Letter | CommutAir - Petition for Reconsideration | MNG - Answer of United
Northwest - Polling Letter | In the Matter of American/TWA - Additional Information
Sky King - Updated Fitness Information | Wendell Ford - Answers of Continental/Delta to American/Alaska to Frontier
Notices of Action Taken:
Aeronaves | Air Japan | Qantas
Notices and Orders:
None
| OST-98-4825 | February 22, 2001 | Application
for a Renewal of Exemption |
U.S.- Mexico Charters |
| Attachments: Certificate of Insurance, Financials |
Counsel: Daniel Elizondo, 210.927.2581
| OST-99-5804 | Filed January 31, 2001 Issued February 22, 2001 |
Notice
of Action Taken |
U.S.- Mexico |
By: Paul Gretch
| OST-00-8299 | Filed November 14, 2000 Issued February 22, 2001 |
Notice
of Action Taken |
U.S.- Japan Services |
Exemption from 49 U.S.C. § 41301 to engage in scheduled foreign air transportation of persons, property and mail between any point or points in Japan and any point or points in the United States; and to conduct charters in accordance with Part 212 of our rules.
Based on the record in this case, we found that Air Japan is financially and operationally qualified to perform the services authorized above. In addition, we found that Air Japan is substantially owned and effectively controlled by Japanese citizens. Specifically, Air Japan is 78 % owned by All Nippon Airways (ANA), a foreign air carrier of Japan. The remaining shares of Air Japan are held by ANA subsidiary companies. All of Air Japan's stockholders and chief management personnel are citizens of Japan. Air Japan is properly licensed and designated by the Government of Japan to perform the proposed services. By memorandum dated February 20, 2001, the FAA advised us that it knew of no reason why we should act unfavorably on Air Japan's application.
By: Paul Gretch
| OST-01-8965 | February 22, 2001 | Application for Statement of Authorization |
U.S.- Japan Same Country Codesharing |
| Service List |
AJX and ANA have entered into a code-share arrangement, under which AJX will display ANA's designator code on AJX flights. Specifically, AJX will display ANA's code on AJX daily scheduled combination flights between Osaka, Japan and Guam. AJX and ANA intend to commence these code-share services on March 25, 2001.
Counsel: Zuckert Scoutt, Charles Simpson, 202.298.8660
| OST-99-6278 | February 22, 2001 | Notice of Suspension of Codesharing Services |
Tokyo, Japan- Honolulu |
Counsel: Zuckert Scoutt, Charles Simpson, 202.298.8660
American Airlines, Inc. and Swissair, Swiss Air Transport Company Ltd.
| OST-99-5944 | February 22, 2001 | Notice of Additional Code-Sharing Services |
Blanket Statements of Authorization to Engage in
Reciprocal Code-Sharing Services |
| Service List |
Swissair, Swissair Transport Company, Ltd. pursuant to condition (2) of Department Action OST-99-5944, hereby gives notice that no sooner than March 25, 2001 or within 15 days after all governmental authorities are received, whichever is later, (i) Swissair and/or its subsidiary Crossair AG will commence display of the "AA" designator code on flights operated by either between Zurich and Budapest and between Zurich and Hannover; and (ii) Crossair will commence display of the AA code on flights operated by it between Zurich and Munich and between Zurich and Nice.
Swissair previously gave notice (on April 14, 2000) of AA codeshare service on Swissair flights operated between the Zurich-Munich and Zurich-Nice city-pairs.
Counsel: Steptoe Johnson, William Karas, 202.429.6223
| OST-99-5798 | February 22, 2001 | Re:
Letter to Cardinal Airlines |
Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity |
By: Patricia Thomas
| OST-00-8012 | February 22, 2001 | Petition
for Reconsideration of Champlain Enterprises |
90 Day Notice to Terminate EAS at Northern Maine Regional Airport |
| Exhibits: Letters on Selection Proceeding |
By: Champlain Enterprises, Andrew Price
| OST-01-8949 | February 21, 2001 | Additional
Information of AirTran Airways' Third-Party Complaint |
Unfair Methods of Competition in Violation of 49 U.S.C. Section 41712 |
Counsel: Wiley Rein, Bert Rein, 202.719.7045
Intra-Alaska Class Service Mail Rates
| OST-95-405 | February 22, 2001 | Comments of Village Aviation |
Order to Show Cause Establishing Final Bush Service Mail Rates |
By: Village Aviation, Don King
| OST-98-4486 | February 22, 2001 | Answer of United Air Lines |
U.S. - Turkey |
| Service List |
MNG also seeks to amend its application to include the right to operate scheduled passenger/cargo combination services between all points in Turkey and "any point or points in the United States" via all intermediate and beyond points. This authority is inconsistent with the U.S./Turkey bilateral air services agreement as amended May 2, 2000. Under Annex IV of that agreement, Turkish carriers such as MNG may operate scheduled combination passenger/cargo services only to a limited number of points in the U.S. for a transitional period. Beginning April 1, 2001, the number of U.S. points to be served by Turkish combination carriers increases to four, with an allowance of 10 additional points for code-share service only. These transitional limits continue, subject to additional phased-in increments, through March 31, 2003. There are also limits on the number of points at which Turkish carriers may exercise intermediate traffic rights for scheduled passenger/cargo combination services.
On the U.S. side, there are reciprocal transitional limits on code-share services between the U.S. and Turkey that can be operated by U.S. carriers with third-country carrier partners. As a result of these limits, United and other U.S. carriers cannot exercise their full potential of code-share services between the U.S. and Turkey but must operate subject to frequency allocations and designations issued by DOT. At present, DOT is engaged in selecting carriers for one additional third-country code-share designation and 14 additional weekly frequencies. United and three other U.S. carriers have filed applications for 35 additional weekly frequencies. See Docket OST-01-8781. Unless Turkey is prepared to substantially relax or eliminate the transitional limits on U.S. carrier code-share services, U.S. carriers will be unable to operate as many U.S.-Turkey code-share services as would be warranted by competitive requirements in the marketplace.
Counsel: Wilmer Cutler, Jeffery Manley, 202.663.6670, jmanley@wilmer.com
| OST-01-8922 | February 22, 2001 | Re:
Polling Letter |
U.S.- Philippines Route 2 |
| Service List |
This letter is to confirm my prior telephonic notification of Ms. Teresa Bingham of your staff that Northwest Airlines, Inc. has polled all carriers included on the service list to Northwest's above-referenced application, and none intend to file an objection. Northwest therefore requests that the Department approve as expeditiously as possible Northwest's aforementioned application.
Counsel: Northwest, Megan Rae Rosia, 202.842.3193, megan.rosia@nwa.com
| OST-00-7785 | Filed August 24, 2000 Date of Action February 22, 2001 |
Department
Action on Application |
Australia- Canada via Honolulu; Codeshare w/American |
By: Barbara Schools
| OST-97-3017 | February 2, 2001 | Re: Updated Fitness Information |
Certificate of Public Convenience, Interstate and Foreign |
| Exhibits: Financials, Resumes |
While it may be theoretically possible to limit Sky King's charter services to one aircraft, it would be cumbersome and unwarranted. Sky King has presented ample evidence of its qualifications and Financial fitness to provide charter services as herein described with two aircraft. The addition of a second aircraft will enhance the quality of the services Sky King can offer to the public. With a single aircraft, there is always a danger that a mechanical problem, weather related delays or operational difficulties will have a very disruptive effect on the direct air carrier's ability to provide promised services. Authorization of a second aircraft would provide a desirable back-up to respond in these unanticipated or unavoidable situations. Sky King anticipates that the decision to add aircraft in the future will be driven by the demand for its specialized service transporting sports teams and that the charter business for which it seeks DOT authority will be an adjunct to these flight operations. Sky King, Inc. therefore respectfully requests that the Department remove condition 3 or, in the alternative, authorize it to provide charter services utilizing two aircraft.
By: Sky King, Susan Jollie, 704.354.8450, sjollie@erols.com
The Wendell H. Ford Aviation Investment and Reform Act for the 21st Century (Slot Exemptions)
| OST-00-7181 | February 22, 2001 | Answer of Alaska Airlines to Application of Frontier
Air Lines |
Washington D.C. (DCA)- Denver, CO |
| Service List |
In anticipation of the institution of a reallocation proceeding, several carriers and communities, including Frontier for Denver, have expressed interest in the slots. Alaska wants to make clear that it intends to vigorously prosecute an application for these beyond- perimeter slots so that Alaska may offer passengers throughout the State of Alaska and the Pacific Northwest the first Seattle-DCA nonstop service. Accordingly, Alaska would encourage the Department to initiate promptly a slot reallocation proceeding as soon as the TWA bankruptcy process has reached an appropriate juncture.
Counsel: Squire Sanders, Marshall Sinick, 202.626.6600, msinick@ssd.com
| OST-00-7181 | February 22, 2001 | 
Answer of Continental Airlines to Application of American
Airlines |
Washington D.C. (DCA)- Los Angeles (LAX) |
Both Continental and American have demonstrated that awarding authority to continue nonstop Washington Reagan-Los Angeles service would provide compelling public benefits. Los Angeles is by far the largest city outside the perimeter for Washington Reagan, and far more passengers travel the Washington-Los Angeles route than any other beyond-perimeter route. Even Delta, which has applied for a Washington Reagan-Salt Lake City perimeter exemption, recognized the importance of Los Angeles when it said that if the perimeter rule were lifted at LaGuardia it would provide "at least three daily nonstop flights to Los Angeles" which would "produce service and competitive benefits that are equal to or greater than America West’s proposal" for Phoenix and Las Vegas service because "Los Angeles produces more long-haul O&D traffic to New York than any other city located outside the perimeter." The same can be said for Los Angeles-Washington. The decision to continue nonstop Washington Reagan-Los Angeles service should be easy. The decision to select Continental to replace TWA should be equally easy.
Counsel: Crowell Moring, Bruce Keiner, 202.624.2615
| OST-00-7181 | February 22, 2001 | Answer of Delta Air Lines to Application of American
Airlines |
Washington D.C. (DCA)- Los Angeles (LAX) |
| Service List |
Los Angeles is poorly situated to serve as a connecting hub for all but a handful of West Coast cities. Moreover, American already operates one of the largest within-perimeter hubs serving the western United States at Dallas/Ft. Worth. American's DFW hub (like the Houston hub of Continental, the other DCA-Los Angeles applicant), gives American extensive nonstop- to-nonstop coverage of the western United States, including most of the connecting cities American claims it will serve in its application. It is difficult to see how enabling American to offer duplicate (and in many cases more circuitous) connections to West Coast cities such as Fresno, Palm Springs, and Las Vegas -- via Los Angeles instead of Dallas -- would increase "network benefits" or "competition in multiple markets" to any measurable degree.
By contrast, Delta's Salt Lake City proposal excels in terms of the statutory criteria under AIR-21. Unlike Los Angeles, Salt Lake City is effectively positioned to provide enhanced network benefits and improved competition for vast areas of the western United States -- particularly the critically underserved regions of the intermountain west. By virtue of the perimeter rule, Delta is effectively cut off from its primary western hub, and cannot offer nonstop-to-nonstop DCA connections for any of the numerous western communities that Delta serves exclusively from Salt Lake City. Travelers wishing to use Delta must double or triple connect to reach DCA, resulting in a significant degradation of the network and multi-market competitive benefits Delta would otherwise provide on DCA-western U.S. routes.
In sum, whatever unique circumstances may have led the Department to award DCA-Los Angeles slots to TWA do not apply to American or any other would-be-replacement" carrier at Los Angeles. Under the clear and unambiguous criteria set forth by Congress in AIR-21, Delta's Salt Lake City hub should be the Department's first choice for an award.
Counsel: Shaw Pitman, Robert Cohn, 202.663.8078
International Air Transport Association
| OST-01-8955 | February 22, 2001 | Application for Approval of Agreements |
PTC23 EUR-SASC 0075 |
By: David O'Connor
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
© Copyright 2001 Airline Information Research, Inc. All rights reserved.