OST Docket Filings for January 26, 2004
Updated:
| Applications and Renewals:
American - Miami-Grand Cayman Renewal Continental and Aeromexico - US-Mexico Codesharing EAS at Grand Island, NE - Proposal of Corporate Airlines Emirates - Commencement of Operations Answers and Replies: Homer Air - Request for Additional Information Special Rules for Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport - Within-Perimeter - Answer of Jackson, MS US Airways - Answer of United (Orlando-Bermuda) Notices of Action Taken: None Notices and Orders: Coastal Mountain - Consent Order EAS at Merced, CA - Setting Final Rates |
|||
|
OST-96-1141 - Frequency Allocation - Miami-Grand Cayman January 26, 2004 Application for Renewal of Frequency Allocation American Airlines, Inc. hereby applies for renewal of its allocation, most recently renewed by Notice of Action Taken in this docket on June 19, 2003, of seven weekly combination frequencies to provide additional nonstop service between Miami and Grand Cayman. American has used this allocation since June 1, 1996 to operate a third daily nonstop roundtrip in the Miami‑Grand Cayman market. Counsel: American, Carl Nelson, 202-496-5647, carl.nelson@aa.com Coastal Mountain Airways, Ltd. Order 04-1-19 Issued and Served January 26, 2004 CMA, a foreign air carrier within the meaning of 49 U.S.C. § 40102(a)(21), provides on demand air taxi services from its base in Pemberton, British Columbia, Canada, using two Cessna aircraft. CMA has never applied for or held economic authority from the Department or safety authority from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). Notwithstanding its lack of economic authority, CMA held out and operated charter air service between Canada and the United States in contravention of 49 U.S.C. § 41301, which states that foreign air carriers must obtain permit authority from the Department prior to commencing service to the United States.' Any violation of 49 U.S.C. § 41301 also constitutes an unfair and deceptive practice and unfair method of competition in violation of 49 U.S.C. § 41712. Without admitting or denying the violations described above, CMA consents to the issuance of this order to cease and desist from future violations of 49 U.S.C. § 41301 and 41712 and to the assessment of $2,500 (US) in compromise of potential civil penalties otherwise assessable. Of this total penalty amount, $500 shall be paid under the terms described below. By: Rosalind Knapp Continental Airlines, Inc. and Aerovias de Mexico, S.A. de C.V. / Continental Airlines, Inc. / Aerovias de Mexico, S.A. de C.V. OST-04-16972 - Statements of Authorization to Engage in Codesharing / Exemption - US-Mexico Points / Exemption - Mexico-US Points and Special Authorization Under 14 CFR Part 216 January 26, 2004 Applications of Continental and Aeromexico Apply pursuant to 49 U.S.C. § 40109 and Rule 302 of the Department's Rules of Practice for exemptions from 49 U.S.C. § 41101 for Continental and 49 U.S.C. § 41301 for Aeromexico to authorize them to provide additional services between the United States and Mexico and, for Aeromexico, between Mexico and Canada via the United States. Aeromexico also requests a special authorization pursuant to Part 216 of the Department's regulations to the extent necessary for Aeromexico to commingle Mexico-Canada traffic not in foreign air transportation on the same services that carry U.S. -Mexico traffic that is in foreign air transportation. To provide the proposed U.S.‑Mexico codeshare service with Aeromexico, Continental requests exemption authority to engage in scheduled foreign air transportation of persons, property and mail between points in the United States and points within Mexico beyond Continental's authorized Mexican gateway points for transborder services for the purpose of blind‑sector codesharing services operated between the Mexican gateway points and other points within Mexico on flights operated by either Continental or Aeromexico. Aeromexico requests exeinption authority to engage in scheduled foreign air transportation of persons, property and mail between points in Mexico and points within the United States beyond Aeromexico's authorized U.S. gateway points for transborder services for the purpose of blind-sector codesharing services operated between the U.S. gateway points and other points within the United States and Canada on flights operated by either Aeromexico or Continental and between Houston and Aguascalientes, LeonlGuanajuato, Chihuahua, Cozumel, Guadalajara, Manzanillo, Merida, Morelia, Mazatlan, Puerto Vallarta, San Jose del Cabo, San Luis Potosi, Saltillo, Tampico, Torreon, Veracruz, Villahermosa, and Ixtapa/Zihuatanejo and between New York/Newark and Cozumel and San Jose del Cabo. Continental requests a statement of authorization to display Aeromexico's AM* designator code on flights operated by Continental within the United States and between the United States and Canada beyond Aeromexico's authorized United States gateways for the carriage of Aeromexico's authorized Mexico-U.S./Canada traffic; between Houston and Acapulco, Aguascalientes, Leon/Guanajuato, Cancun, Chihuaha, Cozumel, Guadalajara, Manzanillo, Mexico City, Merida, Monterrey, Morelia, Mazatlan, Puerto Vallarta, San Jose del Cabo, San Luis Potosi, Saltillo, Tampico, Torreon, Veracruz, Villahermosa and Ixtapa/Zihuatenejo; and between New York/Newark and Acapulco, Cancun, Cozumel, Mexico City, Puerto Vallarta and San Jose del Cabo. Aeromexico requests a statement of authorization to display the Continental CO* code on flights operated by Aeromexico within Mexico beyond Continental's authorized Mexican gateways for the carriage of Continental's authorized U.S.-Mexico traffic and between Houston and Mexico City and Monterrey. Aeromexico also requests a special authorization pursuant to Part 216 of the Department's regulations to the extent necessary for Aeromexico to commingle Mexico-Canada traffic not in foreign air transportation on the same services that carry U.S.-Mexico traffic that is in foreign air transportation. Counsel: Piper Rudnick, William Evans, 202-861-6459 for Aeromexico / Continental and Crowell & Moring, Bruce Keiner, 202-624-2615 OST-00-7490 - U.S.- United Arab Emirates Scheduled Air Service January 23, 2004 On July 1, 2003, the Department issued a Notice of Action Taken ("NOAT") in Docket OST‑00‑7490 granting Emirates an exemption to serve the United States consistent with the scope of authority available under the U.S.‑United Arab Emirates open skies bilateral agreement. At Emirates' request,1 however, the Department included in the NOAT a temporary condition, pending the FAA's issuance of Operations Specifications to Emirates, stating that "Emirates may exercise the authority granted in this notice only as part of a Department‑authorized code‑share or wet‑lease arrangement with a duly authorized and properly supervised carrier or carriers." This same condition was included in statements of authorization issued by the Department authorizing Emirates to engage in code sharing with Delta Air Lines, Inc and Continental Airlines, Inc. See Department Action dated July 1, 2003 (Docket OST‑00‑7495); NOAT dated Oct. 14, 2003 (Docket OST‑03‑15805). As the Department is aware, the FAA recently issued Operations Specifications to Emirates following receipt from the Transportation Security Administration of confirmation that Emirates has satisfied TSA's requirements and TSA's recommendation that the FAA issue Emirates' Operations Specifications. Emirates therefore respectfully requests that the Department amend the authorizations issued to Emirates in Dockets OST-00-7490, 00-7495, and 03-15805 to remove the above-referenced condition, thereby enabling Emirates to commence holding out service to and from the United States using its own aircraft. Emirates plans to commence such service in June 2004. Counsel: Wilmer Cutler, Jeffrey Manley, 202-863-6000 Essential Air Service at Grand Island, Nebraska January 26, 2004 Proposal of Corporate Airlines By: Corporate Airlines Essential Air Service at Merced, California Order 04-1-21 Issued and Served January 26, 2004 By Order 2001-10-9, October 18, 2001, the Department selected Eagle Canyon Airlines, Inc., dlb/a Scenic Airlines, to provide subsidized essential air service (EAS) at Merced, California, through October 31, 2003. Under that order, Scenic operates 14 nonstop round trips a week with 19-seat Beech 1900 aircraft to Las Vegas. First and second-year subsidy rates were set at $949,458 and $749,433. Most recently, by Order 2004-1-9 we requested proposals for EAS at Merced, because our selection of Scenic expired on October 31, 2003. Proposals are due February 17. The carrier has agreed to continue providing the service set by Order 2002‑5‑20 at the lower second year rate of $844,479 temporarily while we complete a carrier‑selection case. We have reviewed that rate and find it reasonable. By extending the second‑year rate the carrier will be continue to be compensated and the Department will have certainty as to its ultimate subsidy exposure in the interim. The rate is significantly lower than the first‑year rate of $1,031,224 that expired on October 31, 2002. We will continue to process the carrier‑selection proceeding. By: Karan Bhatia OST-01-9181 - Certificate - Interstate Scheduled Cargo, Passengers and Mail Air Transportation January 23, 2004 Re: Review of Capital Available On November 5, 2003 you submitted updated information regarding the application of Homer Air for certificate authority to conduct scheduled operations. We are now in the process of reviewing this information. Before we can complete processing your updated application we must have evidence that Homer has available to it sufficient capital to cover it proposed operations. Our rules require that an applicant for certificate authority have capital available to it equaling at least one quarter of its estimated first year operating expenses pertaining to scheduled operations. The note that you have estimated this amount to be approximately $10,000, although it is not clear if this includes one-time start-up costs. In determining a carrier's available financial resoiirces we also take into consideration it's working capital position and previous year's profit or loss In the case of Homer Air, based on financial statements dated September 30, 2003, we see that you show a negative working capital balance of close to $120,000 and a net loss from operations for the prior 12-month period of approximately $1 34,000. Adding these two totals to your estimated costs for scheduled operations results in a figure very close to $265.000. which may not include start-up costs. By: Air Carrier Fitness, Howard Serig Special Rules for Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport - Within-Perimeter January 26, 2004 Motion for Leave to File and Answer of The Jackson and Mississippi Parties Nonstop service to Washington is important to Jackson because it will provide access to the Nation's Capital and make it easier to conduct business. There are 21 Fortune 500 companies located in the Jackson area. 32 manufacturing firms have there headquarters here, and 17 international corporations have built facilities in the Jackson region. Important national defense bases are located near Jackson. And, Jackson has a significant healthcare industry, with eleven hospitals, including the acclaimed University of Mississippi Medical Center. All of these interests would benefit from the new service, given the significant communities of interest that exist with Washington, D.C. There are a substantial number of passengers traveling between Jackson and Washington every day, and, were it not for the slot restrictions at DCA, Jackson would already have nonstop service. In fact, some northeast communities that are smaller than Jackson and generate fewer DCA passengers have nonstop service - but that is an accident of existing airline slot holdings and established service patterns. Comair will remedy the situation by providing Jackson with the nonstop DCA service it deserves. By: Jackson Municipal Airport Authority, Dr. Glenda Glover OST-04-16899 - Exemption - Orlando-Bermuda January 26, 2004 United opposes any request by the U.S. to "exchange" Chicago as a gateway to Bermuda in order to enable Orlando to be named instead. United has firm plans to implement nonstop services between Chicago and Bermuda beginning May 1, 2004. United holds authority from DOT to operate Chicago‑Bermuda services and has already been designated under the U.S‑U.K. agreement to do so. The proposal of US Airways could have the effect either of blocking United's plans to serve Chicago as a gateway or requiring a carrier/gateway selection proceeding which could delay United's planned implementation of services. Counsel: United and Wilmer Cutler, Jeffrey Manley, 202-663-6670, jeffrey.manley@wilmer.com |
|||