Applications and Petitions: None Answers and Replies: Congestion Management Rule at LGA - Comments of ACI-NA, American, American Association of Airport Executives, AOPA, ATA, Bureau of Economics of the FTC, Canadian Airports Council, Daniel Kaspar and Darin Lee, IATA, Elliot Gewirtz of Milbank, Tweed, PANYNJ and US Airways Orders and Notices: PFC Approvals for May Rules and Regulations: None Grant of Petitions: None

	Congestion Management Rule for LaGuardia Airport FAA-2006-25709 Comments of Delta, RAA and United are on the June 16th FAA Page June 16, 2008 Comments of the Air Transport Association of America - Bookmarked The FAA’s proposal to implement slot auctions at LaGuardia is unnecessary as far as managing congestion is concerned, is ill-advised as a matter of policy, and is unlawful to boot. Under current conditions and for the foreseeable future, it appears that a congestion management program at LaGuardia is needed in order to avoid unacceptable delays in the New York-New Jersey air management region and beyond. However, congestion management can be accomplished, as it has been in the past, without resorting to unauthorized and ill-conceived “market-based” experimentation in one of the nation’s busiest air corridors. The flying public, DOT, Congress, and carriers all share the goal of improving performance at LaGuardia and in the northeast. The NY ARC pointed in the right direction: we should all focus on implementing the ARC’s recommendations for alleviating congestion in the New York-New Jersey area. Counsel: ATA, David Berg, 202-626-4000 June 16, 2008 Comments of the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association As expressed by much of the industry, it is very apparent that the SNPRM lacks sufficient detail of how the slot auctions would be conducted or implemented. In efforts to manage congestion at the New York area airports in a compressed timeframe, the DOT and the FAA have not fully examined the implications of a slot auction system. In December 2007, the New York Aviation Rulemaking Committee expressed opposition of the use of a slot auction system to address congestion at LOA and other New York airports. Until a well thought out, vened plan has been established; AOPA strongly suggests this rulemaking be suspended. By: AOPA, Andrew Cebula June 16, 2008 Comments of the Airports Council International - North America - Bookmarked ACI-NA believes that the FAA cannot and should not adopt either of the proposed rules set forth in its SNPRM. The FAA has not shown that it has statutory authority to adopt the proposed rules or that the FAA’s suggested scheme would achieve its stated objectives, promote air carrier competition or preserve service to small communities. The SNPRM fails to recognize the primary role of local airport proprietors in managing congestion at their airports and seeks unlawfully to usurp the proprietary right of the Port Authority to control how its facilities at LGA are used. Instead of pursuing its misconceived “slot auction” proposal, the FAA should work collaboratively with the Port Authority and the air carriers to develop and implement a reasonable and effective program of congestion management for LGA. Counsel: Anderson & Kreiger, Scott Lewis, 617-621-6560 June 16, 2008 Comments of American Airlines - Bookmarked American is concerned that the LGA SNPRM represents a fundamental misunderstanding of the role of government in commercial aviation. Despite being touted as a market-based mechanism, the confiscation and auction scheme proposed in the LGA SNPRM is more akin to collectivization. A system of periodic governmental seizure and redistribution of assets is completely at odds with the FAA's mandate to place umaximum reliance on competitive market forces and on actual and potential competition" (49 U.S.C. § 40101(a) (6)). Deregulation has fostered one.".of the most brutally competitive industries in history. The government should focus on creating more capacity and managing it more efficiently, and let competition take care of itself - as it always has, and always will. Counsel: American, Carl Nelson, 202-496-5647 June 16, 2008 Comments of the American Association of Airport Executives While we acknowledge that the situation at LGA is unique, AAAE reaffirms its position that the only real solution to aviation congestion and delays that does not penalize communities or economic growth is to expand the capacity at our Nation’s airports. A healthy and robust Airport Improvement Program and Passenger Facility Charge program are the essential tools for increasing airport capacity throughout the United States. AAAE does not believe that the SNPRM as proposed contains adequate statutory authority to be implemented without Congressional authorization, or that it will adequately address the cause of these delays. AAAE believes that the SNPRM contains numerous provisions that give rise to an unknown number of negative consequences harming both competition and small community service. It is for these reasons that the AAAE does not believe that the SNPRM should be enacted. By: Todd Hauptli June 16, 2008 Comment of Bureau Economics of the Federal Trade Commission - Bookmarked We find the proposal to be a reasonable, measured introduction of auctions to improve the efficiency of congestion management and to gain experience using auctions for allocating slots. The proposal does not provide great detail about the auction design, and as the spectrum auctions demonstrate, tailoring the rules to fit the application is crucial; the airline industry is sufficiently unique, complex, and important to warant auction designs specifically tailored to it. We think it is important that any candidate auction designs be thoroughly analyzed and tested, perhaps in an experimental setting. In light of the tradeoffs between auctions and congestion pricing, it is likely socially beneficial for both solutions to be given a trial. We therefore support the current proposal to consider the implementation of auctions, but also encourage consideration of a congestion pricing test. By: Michael Baye June 16, 2008 Comments of the Canadian Airports Council The members of CAC cannot support the Department's proposal to create slot auctions at LaGuardia airport. The Department does not have the authority to impose the proposed rules, and it is clear that the proposed rules usurp the exclusive right of the airport to sensitively control the way that its facilities are used. Should the Department decide to continue with this proposal, the CAC recommends the Department extend an exception to international flights, Including transborder flights between Canada and the U.S. By: Jim Facette June 16, 2008 Comments of Daniel Kaspar and Darin Lee - Retained by ATA to Provide Independent Economic Analysis - Bookmarked Although the FAA’s modified proposal does away with the ill-conceived minimum aircraft size requirement that was a prominent component of the earlier NPRM, it is still plagued by serious conceptual flaws and relies on assumptions that are unjustified or demonstrably incorrect. As a result of these serious shortcomings, the proposal would impose—without adequate economic analysis or support—a number of unnecessarily intrusive regulations—including a complex and unnecessary auction mechanism to involuntarily reallocate a portion of LGA slots. Moreover, key findings of the FAA’s accompanying Initial Regulatory Evaluation—including its cost benefit analysis—are gravely flawed and rely on unrealistic (or simply incorrect) assumptions and oversimplifications that result in grossly overstating the likely benefits of the proposed rule. FAA casts the current SNPRM as a proposal to address the potential for increased congestion and delay at New York’s LaGuardia Airport. But in reality the SNPRM would have virtually no impact on congestion or delay compared to the present because the (non-weather related) levels of congestion and delay are determined by the number of hourly operations permitted—a number that the SNPRM does not propose to significantly change. What the SNPRM would do, however, is permit the FAA to reclaim slots at LGA and to reallocate them by means of an auction. In doing so, the SNPRM would impose economically costly and unnecessary regulatory framework on carriers serving LGA, a framework that is far more likely to reduce than to enhance overall economic efficiency and social welfare. By: Daniel Kaspar and Darin Lee June 16, 2008 Comments of Elliot Gewirtz, Partner, Milbank, Tweed, Hadley & McCloy Attachment: Exhibit A - 93.68 Sale, Assignment, Sublease and Transfer of Slots - Strike Through The following is a summary of proposed changes to the Congestion Management rule for LaGuardia Airport relating to the transfer of slots and our reasons for them. We note at the outset that the commentary to the proposed rules asserts that the “best way to maximize competition [among airlines at airports] is with the development of a robust secondary market.” Our comments are in furtherance of this objective. Specific suggested revisions to the text of the proposed rules are contained in the attached Exhibit A. Counsel: Milbank Tweed, Elliot Gewirtz Comments of the International Air Transport Association - Bookmarked IATA has had insufficient notice of the likely need to comment on the LaGuardia proceeding in order to forestall the creation of precedent that will determine the outcome of the FAA’s consideration of similar congestion mitigation rules at LaGuardia and Newark. Under these circumstances, IATA has had time only to review the comments submitted by the ATA, and to determine that we are in general agreement with the views expressed in those comments. The ATA comments, however, do not address all of the relevant issues that IATA would have addressed had we known that the precedent created by the LaGuardia proceeding will likely predetermine the outcome of the JFK/Newark NPRM. We will expand on the ATA’s comments when we submit our comments in the JFK/Newark proceeding – despite the appearance that the FAA will make decisions on the basic framework of its congestion-mitigation and slot allocation rules before we submit those comments on July 21, 2008. Counsel: IATA, Douglas Lavin, 202-628-9292 June 16, 2008 Comments of the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey - Bookmarked The Port Authority does not believe that the FAA has the statutory authority to implement the SNPRM proposal without Congressional authorization, or that the SNPRM proposal adequately addresses the cause of delays at LGA. The Port Authority believes that the SNPRM contains numerous provisions that would create negative consequences, harming both competition and small community service. It is for these reasons that the Port Authority does not believe that the proposal set forth in the SNPRM should be enacted. Counsel: PANYNJ, Carlene McIntyre, 212-435-3503 June 16, 2008 Comments of US Airways Group - Bookmarked Cloaked in the premise of congestion management, FAA's proposal to withdraw and auction slots is a dangerous attempt to carry out an economic experiment that would test novel academic theories of efficiency in a real world situation. Unfortunately, due to flawed assumptions, and a misunderstanding of the realities ofthe airline business decision making process and current economic conditions, the FAA's proposal would, on the front end, devalue the assets of network air carriers that have made substantial investment in LGA over decades. On the back end, the proposal imposes additional costs on network carriers - even just to try and maintain their status quo - and places an unneeded thumb on the competitive scale in favor ofthe "new entrant" carriers. Intent on conducting its experiment, the FAA fails answer fundamental questions, such as just how much capacity LGA can handle without undue congestion, and why a slot withdrawal program is needed? FAA also fails to consider other less intrusive options that could simultaneously alleviate congestion and promote entry. These options, such as an improved secondary market and the lifting of the perimeter rule, have been suggested by US Airways and other carriers on multiple occasions. In a surprising overreach of authority, with its proposal, FAA attempts to stretch the Agency's fundamental statutes that allow it function to create new regulatory powers, including market-based redistribution methods. Suddenly discovering these powers - after denying them just 20 months ago - FAA now seeks to affect illegal takings of air carrier property. Most appalling, however, is the complete lack of public benefit associated with FAA's "one minute" proposal, both in New York and throughout the national air transportation system. For passengers outside New York, service to smaller markets will suffer, and increased air traffic to larger, already well-served markets will only increase airspace congestion between New York and those cities. For LGA air travelers, there will be no meaningful reduction to congestion, a fact that FAA readily admits. In calling the SNPRM a "congestion management" rule, FAA attempts to rally support for a proposal that will not manage congestion. Counsel: US Airways, Howard Kass, 202-326-5153 Congestion Management in the New York Airspace - Transportation and Infrastructure - Subcommittee on Aviation - Video and Written Testimony - June 18, 2008 Index Notice of Passenger Facility Charge (PFC) Approvals and Disapprovals FAA-2008-0696 One File at the Federal Register June 17, 2008 Notice of Approvals and Disapprovals for May 2008 Monthly Notice of PFC Approvals and Disapprovals. In May 2008, there were 11 applications approved. Additionally, 16 approved amendments to previously approved applications are listed. Panama City-Bay County Airport and Industrial District, Panama City, Florida City of Rapid City, South Dakota Central West Virginia Regional Airport Authority, Charleston, West Virginia Port of Bellingham, Bellingham, Washington City of Manhattan, Kansas Texarkana Airport Authority, Texarkana, Arkansas Wichita Airport Authority, Wichita, Kansas Lafayette Airport Commission, Lafayette, Louisiana Detroit Metropolitan Wayne County Airport Authority, Detroit, Michigan Metropolitan Airports Commission, Minneapolis, Minnesota City of Albany, Georgia By: Joe Hebert FAA-2008-0466 - PFC Charges Approvals and Disapprovals - January 2008 FAA-2008-0467 - PFC Charges Approvals and Disapprovals - February 2008 FAA-2008-0468 - PFC Charges Approvals and Disapprovals - March 2008 FAA-2008-0653 - PFC Charges Approvals and Disapprovals - April 2008 FAA-2008-0696 - PFC Approvals and Disapprovals for May 2008 FAA-2008-0806 - Passenger Facility Charges Approvals - June 2008 Index