None

Answers and Replies:

Operating Limitations at Chicago O'Hare - Comments of Air Canada and America West / Reply of Independence Air / Response of American

Orders and Notices:

None

Rules and Regulations:

Revisions to Cockpit Voice and Flight Data Recorder Regulations - Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

Grant of Petitions:

None

Operating Limitations at Chicago O'Hare International Airport

FAA-2004-16944

February 23, 2005

Re: Comments of Air Canada

We do not object to extending the August 18 order. We would suggest though ending it on October 29, 2005 instead of October 31 in order to coincide with the end of the IATA summer season.

We are however concerned about the allocation of any unused capacity to new entrants. Such allocation during off‑peak‑ hours may not be an issue but in principle unused capacity should be kept and allocated to existing air carriers for their "day of' operations. Air carriers currently operating at Chicago O'Hare International Airport, a congested airport, need to preserve any unused capacity for spare movements in order to avoid operational nightmares that may be encountered during peak hours.

By: Air Canada, Benjamin Smith

February 24, 2005

Comments of America West Airlines

America West does not oppose the proposed extension of the current limitation on scheduled operations through October 31, 2005, but will oppose any continuation of restrictions beyond that date. In this regard, as stated in its Comments filed August 13, 2004, in this docket, America West strongly opposes government intervention to regulate operations at O'Hare or other high density airports. America West continues to believe that ultimately, to preserve customer loyalty, American and United, the carriers primarily responsibly for the congestion delays at O'Hare, will reduce the number of flights they or their regional affiliates are operating to meet their published schedules. If not, continuing extensive flight delays will lead consumers to find alternate carriers and flights connections that bypass O'Hare.

America West appreciates that the FAA in the August 18, 2004 Order, recognizes the importance of promoting competition and new entry. See, August 18, 2004 Order at 22-27. However, America West believes the 8 arrival cap for limited incumbents, most of which are low-cost carriers, imposed by the FAA is inadequate to generate sustained price competition. America West pointed out in its August 13, 2004 comments that as a low-fare carrier, it acts as a catalyst for increasing low fare service at O'Hare.

Counsel: Baker & Hostetler, Joanne Young, 202-861-1532

February 24, 2005

Response of American Airlines to Order to Show Cause

The Department should allocate any unused capacity that becomes available during the term of the extended order. American is one of the carriers that complied with previous FAA orders by reducing operations in 2004 and 2005 to accommodate the FAA's program. Accordingly, American urges that any unused capacity, whether due to under‑utilization or an increase in the number of authorized arrivals, should be returned proportionately to American and the other carriers that reduced their O 'Hare operations.

Counsel: American, Carl Nelson, 202-496-5647, carl.nelson@aa.com

February 24, 2005

Reply of Independence Air to Order to Show Cause

Even though the FAA is now proposing to extend the effectiveness of the August 18 Order for an additional six months, the current limit is expected by the FAA to have a shelf life of only one year, after which time a more permanent regulatory solution will be instituted. The FAA would no doubt have difficulty in crafting a capacity allocation mechanism that would be found reasonably acceptable by the interested parties, thereby potentially delaying any final ruling in this matter. Also, it appears that the ability of air carriers to engage in trades and transfers on an intra-airport basis has had the effect of providing necessary flexibility for scheduling purposes, and at the same time, insure that carrier allocations are not materially underutilized. Consequently, in the absence of any facts warranting the adoption of a potentially controversial unused allocation procedure for the few months by which the current Order will be extended, the FAA should not seek to add any additional complexity to the August 18 Order. Indeed, were the FAA to formulate a specific allocation regime after the receipt of responses to its Show Cause Order, it would necessarily have to subject the plan to an additional round of public comments in order to meet the requirements of the Administrative Procedures Act, 5 U.S.C. § 553(c), allowing for public comments on the substance of any proposed regulation prior to adoption. Such additional procedures may not be viewed by the FAA as consistent with the intent of the Show Cause Order and that it is to merely extend the current rule for the minimum time necessary until permanent rules are proposed, circulated for public comment, and adopted by the FAA.

Counsel: Silverberg Goldman, Robert Silverberg, 202-944-3300, rsilverberg@sgbdc.com

Index

Revisions to Cockpit Voice and Flight Data Recorder Regulations

FAA-2005-20245 - Revisions to Cockpit Voice and Flight Data Recorder Regulations

February 22, 2005

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

The FAA proposes to amend the cockpit voice recorder and digital flight data recorder regulations for certain air carriers, operators, and aircraft manufacturers. This proposed rule would increase the duration of CVR and flight data recorder recordings; increase the data recording rate of certain DFDR parameters; require physical separation of the DFDR and CVR; improve the reliability of the power supply to both the CVR and DFDR; and if data-link communication equipment is installed, require that all data-link communications received on an aircraft be recorded. This proposal is based on recommendations issued by the National Transportation Safety Board following the investigations of several accidents and incidents, and includes other revisions that the FAA has determined are necessary. The proposed improvements to the CVR and DFDR systems are intended to improve the quality and quantity of information recorded and increase the potential for retaining important information needed during accident and incident investigations.

By: Ronald Wojnar

Index