page counter FAA Docket for June 11, 2008

Home | Search | Help
OST by Number | OST by Order | OST by Carrier | OST by Subject | OST by Day
OIA by Carrier/Subject | OIA by Day | FAA by Number | FAA by Subject | FAA by Day
Carrier Financials | Charter Office


FAA Docket for June 11, 2008

Updated: 6/11/08 | 4:42 PM


Applications and Petitions:

None

Answers and Replies:

Congestion Management Rule for LaGuardia Airport - FAA Re-Posting of "Changes in Small Community Air Service Pattern at LGA: January 2007 vs. 2008" / Response to Extension of Comment Period Request of PANYNJ / ECU Dept of Economics Requesting Reconsideration of Slots per Hour

Orders and Notices:

None

Rules and Regulations:

None

Grant of Petitions:

None




Congestion Management Rule for LaGuardia Airport

FAA-2006-25709


June 5, 2008

FAA Memorandum: Re-Post of "Changes in Small Community Air Service Pattern at LGA: January 2007 vs: 2008" | Word

FAA has re-posted this table in the docket, at the request of the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, since they assert that the original table that was filed in the docket is unreadable.


June 10, 2008

Re: Federal Aviation Administration Response to Extension of Comment Period Request of Port Authority of New York and New Jersey

As an initial matter, the FAA believes it has provided ample explanation of both its legal authority to conduct an auction and the two different proposals contained within the SNPRM. We have nothing further to say on these matters at this time. Naturally, we will address any concerns raised in the comments to the docket in issuing any final rule. Second, you have asserted a need to review the FAA's utilization records for the use-or-Iose requirement in the existing LaGuardia Order in order to comment on the appropriateness of the proposed 80 percent usage requirement. We believe you already have ample information at your disposal as the airport's proprietor to comment on whether the 80 percent usage requirement that has been in effect at the airport for the past 40 years is appropriate. Certainly you have not requested this type of information in commenting on the proposed usage requirement in the past, most recently in response to the NPRM for this rulemaking. Likewise, no other interested party has claimed that they are unable to provide meaningful comment on this issue. Accordingly, we believe that your own experience at the airport provides not only a sufficient basis for meaningful comment, but one that may bring a different perspective from the one held by the FAA which is based on the agency's own experiences at the airport.

The FAA continues to believe 60 days is an adequate time to allow for comment on the SNPRM, and the agency does not believe it is necessary to extend the comment period as you have requested. Therefore, the FAA denies your request for an extension. However, as stated in 14 Code of Federal Regulations §11.45, we will consider comments filed late if it is possible to do so without incurring expense or delay.

By: FAA, Rebecca MacPherson


June 11, 2008

Re: East Carolina University Department of Economics Letter Requesting Reconsideration of Number of Slots per Hour

I would like the FAA to reconsider the number of slots per hour proposed for LaGuardia Airport. The currently considered 75 slots per hour rule regardless of the time of day seems rather inflexible given the ebb and flow of actual flight operations. For example, see attached Figure 1 which reveals substantially longer actual travel times averaging 80 minutes from Boston Logan Airport arriving in LGA in July 2003 in the early evening (between 6-8pm). This figure reflects every non-stop flight during the month between these two airports for major commercial carriers. Whereas for flights departing BOS at 3pm, the actual travel time to LGA is 20 minutes less (on average for the month).

From a minimizing delay perspective, given the cascading effect of flight delays…My suggestion would be to consider altering the number of scheduled operations throughout the day to account for anticipated slow-downs (maybe 75 scheduled operations is too many for the 5-6pm block?) also, maybe 75 is not enough for the earlier morning blocks?

Rather than using a fixed rule: 75 maximum regardless of the departure time, the FAA should consider being more flexible expanding this when possible and reducing it when necessary. The total number of daily flights could still ultimately be the same, however, there maybe improvement in operations by altering the schedule load.

By: Nicholas Rupp

FAA-2008-0656 - Request for Waiver of Minimum Slot Usage Requirement - AirTran, American, Delta, Northwest, United and US Airways

Index


Home | Search | Help
OST by Number | OST by Order | OST by Carrier | OST by Subject | OST by Day
OIA by Carrier/Subject | OIA by Day | FAA by Number | FAA by Subject | FAA by Day
Carrier Financials | Charter Office | Answer/Reply Calendar