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
OST Docket Filings for March 7, 2006
Updated:
| Applications and Renewals:
Continental - Notice of Mail Award IATA - Mail Vote 475 Special Amending Resolution 010f Between Germany and Europe Intra-Alaska Class Service Mail Rates - Fairbanks North Star Borough for Postponement of the Effective Date of an Order of the USPS Northwest Airlines - Notice of Mail Award Answers and Replies: Aero Servicios Azteca - Answer of Lineas Aereas Azteca Business Jet Services - DOT Letter Approving Confidentiality Request EAS at Bradford, PA - Pennsylvania Transportation Secretary Urging Serious Review and Consideration of Letter of Bradford Regional Airport EAS at Greenbrier/White Sulphur Springs/Lewisburg, WV - Proposals of Air Midwest and RegionsAir / DOT Letters to Mayors John Manchester and Debra Fogus EAS at Jackson, TN - Response of Regional Aviation Partners Urging Reconsideration of Termination of Subsidy EAS at Vernal and Moab, UT - Grand County Council Support of Air Midwest Territory of Guam - Reply of Air Line Pilots Association to Answers of Continental and Northwest Notices of Action Taken: Canjet - Canada-US Renewal Finnair - Finland-US Renewal Qantas Airways - Denver-Australia Codeshare with American Renewal Volga-Dnepr - Moffett Field-Cape Canaveral - Emergency Exemption Xtra Airways - US-Mexico/Costa Rica/Dominican Republic Notices and Orders: EAS at Alitak, AK - Extending Service Obligation EAS at Clarksburg/Fairmont, Morgantown, and Parkersburg, WV - Extending Service Obligation Intra-Alaska Bush Service Mail Rates - Show Cause Proposing Updated Mail Rates Reagan Washington National Slots - Denying Petition of ACAA to Withdraw and Reallocate America West DCA Slots Streamlining Regulatory Procedures for Licensing US and Foreign Carriers - Final Order |
|||
|
Aero Servicios Azteca, S.A. de C.V. OST-2006-24007 - Exemption - Mexico-US Taxi Service March 6, 2006 Answer of Lineas Aereas Azteca As a general matter, Azteca expresses no view and does not take any position as to Applicant’s entitlement to hold the exemption authority it seeks herein. However, Azteca does strongly oppose Applicant’s proposed use of Azteca’s long-established trade name of “Azteca” based upon the confusion the use by Applicant of Azteca’s name will cause, as well as the potential to harm Azteca’s long-standing air carrier services to the U.S. Azteca has invested substantial resources in the development of its service trade name “Azteca” and holds common law rights in the U.S. relating to that service mark and trade name by virtue of the prominent use of these in the sale and advertising of its air carrier services in the U.S. over the last several years. Azteca submits that in the instant case it is appropriate for the Department to require Applicant to conduct its operations to the U.S. under a different trade name. As an initial matter both Azteca and Applicant are foreign air carriers engaged in airline operations from points in Mexico to the US. Secondly, not only is Applicant’s corporate trade name similar, but its proposed trade name is identical; indeed even in its own application Applicant refers to itself as “Azteca” and nothing in its application would appear to indicate that Applicant intends to do business in the U.S. other than as “Azteca”. Lastly, at least as far as it proposed U.S. operations are concerned, Applicant would appear to essentially be a start-up carrier, and so the carrier has not yet commenced the exercise of any authority and the selection at this time of another trade name with which to do business in the U.S. should not be unduly burdensome. Counsel: Pierre Murphy, 202-776-3980, pmurphy@lopmurphy.com OST-2006-23694 - Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity - Interstate Charter Passenger March 7, 2006 DOT Letter Approving Confidentiality Request On January 20, 2006, Business Jet Services, Ltd. filed applications in Dockets OST-2006-23694 and OST-2006-23695 requesting that the Department issue it certificate authority to engage in interstate and foreign charter passenger air transportation. In connection with its applications, BJS filed a motion for confidential treatment for certain information the company was providing. Specifically, the company requested confidentiality for the aircraft lease agreement between itself and The Jet Place, Inc. for the use of one BAC 1-11 aircraft. The purpose of this letter is to rule on this motion. There is no question that the information for which BJS seeks confidential treatment is financial or commercial in nature and that it was obtained from a person outside the government. The remaining question is whether the information is privileged or confidential--whether “disclosure of the information is likely to have either of the following effects: (1) impair the Government’s ability to obtain necessary information; or (2) cause substantial harm to the competitive position of the person from whom the information was obtained.” We have reviewed the information for which BJS requests confidentiality and agree with the company that public disclosure of its aircraft lease agreement, which includes certain terms and financial information that may be used by its competitors, could substantially harm BJS’ competitive position. Moreover, it has been the Department’s practice to grant confidentiality to such agreements and we see no reason not to do so in this case. Therefore, we will provide confidential treatment to BJS’ aircraft lease agreement. By: Air Carrier Fitness Division, Lauralyn Remo OST-2005-21774 - International Surface Air Lift March 6, 2006 Continental Airlines is submitting to the Department today an unredacted copy of the international mail IATs 06 contracts awarded to Continental by the United States Postal Service pursuant to Solicitation No. 5AAIMT-06-A-0017 for SFO-NRT (segments 02 & 07); JEC-NRT (segment 06); JEC-LHR (segment 09), JEC-CDG (segment 19) and JFK-NRT (segment 05) (primary awards) and LAX-NRT (segment 03; back-up award) and requesting confidential treatment for the confidential, proprietary and commercially sensitive price information contained in the unredacted contract. A copy of the contract, effective May 31, 2006, with the confidential information redacted, is attached to this message below. The information redacted is exempt from disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act. Counsel: Crowell & Moring, Bruce Keiner, 202-624-2615, rbkeiner@crowell.com Essential Air Service at Alitak, Alaska Issued March 7, 2006 | Served March 10, 2006 Order Extending Service Obligation On August 19, 2005, Island Air filed a 90-day notice of its intent to suspend its unsubsidized service at Alitak. By Order 2005-10-17, October 19, 2005, the Department prohibited Island Air from suspending service and requested proposals, with subsidy if necessary, from carriers interested in providing replacement service. As required by 49 U.S.C. 41734, we have extended Island Air’s service obligation for additional 30-day periods, the latest through March 20, 2006, by Order 2006-2-2. The carrier-selection process is currently underway; however, this case will not be completed before the end of the current hold-in period. Therefore, in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 41734(c), we will extend Island Air’s service obligation at Alitak for an additional 30 days, or until suitable replacement service actually begins, whichever occurs first. By this order, the Department of Transportation extends the service obligation of Redemption, Inc., d/b/a Island Air Service, at Alitak, Alaska, for an additional 30 days, through April 19, 2006. By: Todd Homan Essential Air Service at Bradford, PA March 6, 2006 The letter raises a number of serious concerns regarding, among other things, the airport connection to be used for this service, the reliability of the proposed service, and the impact which the choice you will make may have on Pennsylvania. Among the concerns raised in the letter is whether an alternative to connections through Dulles International Airport will appropriately serve the community.
By: Allen Biehler Essential Air Service at Clarksburg/Fairmont, Morgantown, and Parkersburg, West Virginia Order 2006-3-8 Issued March 7, 2006 | Served March 10, 2006 Order Extending Service Obligation On March 31, 2005, Air Midwest filed a 90-day notice of its intent to suspend its unsubsidized service at Clarksburg/Fairmont, Morgantown and Parkersburg, WV. By Order 2005-4-19, April 19, 2005, the Department prohibited Air Midwest from suspending service and requested proposals, with subsidy if necessary, from carriers interested in providing replacement service. As required by 49 U.S.C. 41734, we have extended Air Midwest’s service obligation for additional 30-day periods, the latest through March 20, 2006, by Order 2006-2-3. By Order 2005-9-8, September 9, 2005, the Department selected RegionsAir to provide subsidized essential air service at the communities. However, the carrier transition will not have taken place before the end of the current hold-in period. Therefore, in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 41734(c), we must extend Air Midwest’s service obligation at the communities for an additional 30 days, or until RegionsAir inaugurates service, whichever occurs first. By this order, the Department of Transportation extends the service obligation of Mesa Air Group, Inc., d/b/a Air Midwest, Inc. at Clarksburg/Fairmont, Morgantown and Parkersburg, West Virginia, for an additional 30 days, through April 19, 2006. By: Todd Homan
Essential Air Service at Greenbrier/White Sulphur Springs/Lewisburg, West Virginia
March 6, 2006 Mesa Air Group, Inc d/b/a Air Midwest is pleased to submit two proposals to provide Essential Air Service at Lewisburg, West Virginia. Mesa’s proposed options would contemplate service to Charlotte, Pittsburgh and/or Washington Dulles. Option 1 reflects the current status quo, while Option 2 focuses on the US Airways hubs of Charlotte and Pittsburgh. All operations proposed would utilize our modem fleet of Raytheon/Beechcraft B-1900D airliners. These aircraft offer a very comfortable 19-seat, pressurized cabin with two turboprop engines. Mesa has a long history of offering Essential Air Service throughout the country, from New Mexico to New York. We intend to operate this service under our Codeshare agreement with US Airways, allowing for convenient connections in their largest hub.
We feel that our proposal as US Airways Express will allow the passengers of Lewisburg to continue to have cost-effective and convenient connecting options in Charlotte, Pittsburgh and/or Dulles. As a note, Mesa has lowered its local fare in Pittsburgh and Dulles by more than half, in hopes of encouraging more local passengers and passengers connecting to other airlines. Counsel: Air Midwest, Mickey Bowman
March 6, 2006 RegionsAir is proposing two daily nonstop roundtrip flights for a total of 24 weekly departures between Greenbrier/White Sulphur Springs/Lewisburg , West Virginia and Cleveland, Ohio. The service will be operated as Continental Connection, which will augment our other West Virginia service and provide seamless connections to 317 daily flights to 76 destinations on Continental Airlines and partners. The proposed aircraft is the 30-seat Saab 340A, which will introduce these communities to cabin-class service and most likely increase traffic in itself. In addition to larger aircraft, Continental Airlines has a large domestic and international network that will stimulate traffic substantially and possibly eliminate the reliance on subsidies in the future.
By: RegionsAir
March 7, 2006 DOT Letters to:
As you know, by Order 2006-1-23, January 30, 2006, the Department requested proposals from carriers interested in providing scheduled air service at Greenbrier/White Sulphur Springs/Lewisburg under the essential air service program for a new two-year period beginning June 1, 2006, with or without subsidy. In response to our request, we have received a proposal from two carriers: from Mesa Air Group, Inc., on behalf of its subsidiary and the incumbent, Air Midwest, and from RegionsAir, Inc.
We would appreciate receiving your final comments on the carriers’ proposals before we make our recommendation to the Acting Assistant Secretary. In particular, we recommend that you list more than one choice, in order of preference. By: Dennis DeVany
Essential Air Service at Jackson, Tennessee March 6, 2006 Re: Response of Regional Aviation Partners Regional Aviation Partners requests the Department to reconsider their tentative decision to terminate the EAS subsidy at Jackson, TN and vacate Order 2006-2-11, dated February 16, 2006. It is our view that Jackson, TN has made clear and significant progress in satisfying the Department’s stated requirement to “work closely with the incumbent air carrier to create a plan to stay below the $200 cap.” In the DOT’s letter of October 28, 2005, they chose to focus on the O&D numbers for the 7 month period following the DOT’s warning to Moses Lake, WA. [Whereas in Jackson,] the DOT applied O&D passenger traffic data from the period prior to the Department’s warning to the community. RAP argues that if the DOT applied the same standard to Jackson, TN, using the numbers following the warning that they afforded Moses Lake, WA, the per passenger subsidy rate for Jackson would be $184 for the 5 month period ending on November 30, 2005. In fairness, RAP asks the DOT to apply the much improved O&D passenger traffic data at Jackson, in the same fashion as they did in Moses Lake, WA. Since the DOT mandate, the community and the air carrier have consistently demonstrated that the per passenger subsidy rate at Jackson is once again below the $200 cap. If this is done, we think an equitable result will be achieved and this community will be able to retain their valuable air service link to the national transportation system. By: RAP, Maurice Parker, exdir@regionalaviationpartners.org Essential Air Service at Vernal and Moab, Utah OST-1997-2706 - Vernal, UT February 28, 2006 Grand County Council Support of Air Midwest Since their meeting with you, the County Council has received new information they wish to have on record for consideration before the bid is awarded. We have also recently met with local staff from Congressman Matheson's office to discuss this new information. They encouraged us to get this letter on the record because it might still be possible to get Air Midwest, rather than Salmon Air. In the same week you met with Council members, wc had a meeting locally with the DOE on the Moab Tailings Project. DOE has offices in Grand Junction, Colorado. The tailings project will take place over the next twenty years in Grand County and DOE will need transportation. We proposed a charter flight to which they have agreed, if it can be demonstrated that flying is more cost effective then driving. This will. increase our enplanements over the qualifying threshold for increased federal funding. This is a way for Grand County to mitigate the impact of the tailings project on our community over the next twenty years which we believe can be used to support our local effort to meet the federal requirements required to upgrade the airport. Air Midwest will help us grow and is a lynch pin in om economic development. We are a tourist area with some of the world’s most beautiful national parks and scenic byways. We are an international resource for bicyclists from around the world, yet we cannot offer a plane that can be pressurized or take a $5,000 bicycle that breaks down but is not less than 35 pounds. Also, Utah families with children and others with sensitive breathing issues cannot fly with us. It should also be on record that our airport was recently approved for a federal grant of 4.1 million dollars to improve the safety grading, so again we are showing local growth and an investment in our airport. By: Grand County Council, Jane Woodside Finnair OyJ d/b/a Finnair Oy and/or Finnair Cargo OY OST-1997-3006 - Exemption - Finland-US Filed December 6, 2005 | Issued March 7, 2006 Renewal of exemption from 49 U.S.C. § 41301 to conduct scheduled foreign air transportation of persons, property, and mail from points behind Finland, via Finland and intermediate points, to a point or points in the United States and beyond, and other services encompassed in the U.S.-Finland open skies aviation agreement. By: Paul Gretch I.M.P. Group Limited c.o.b.a. Canjet Airlines OST-2002-13814 - Exemption - Canada-US Filed November 30, 2005 | Issued March 7, 2006 Renewal of exemption from 49 U.S.C. § 41301 to conduct 1) scheduled foreign air transportation of persons, property, and mail between any point or points in Canada and any point or points in the United States; and 2) charter foreign air transportation of persons, property, and mail between Canada and the United States, and other charters in accordance with 14 CFR Part 212. The applicant requests that the authority be granted for a two-year term. The one-year duration of the authority we granted is consistent with our usual policy of granting exemption authority in the circumstances presented. We, therefore, dismissed the application to the extent that it sought authority for a longer period. By: Paul Gretch International Air Transport Association March 7, 2006 Application for Approval of Agreements PTC2 Mail Vote 475 Special Amending Resolution 010f Between Germany and Europe Intended Effective Date: 1 April 2006. Counsel: IATA, Douglas Lavin Intra-Alaska Bush Service Mail Rates Issued and Served March 7, 2006 Show Cause Order Proposing Updated Mail Rates - Bookmarked By this order, the Department directs the parties to show cause why the proposed Intra-Alaska bush service mail rates in Appendices A, B, C, and F should not be made final. The rates that are currently in effect were established by Order 2005-1-18, based on data for year ended June 30, 2003, adjusted for more recent quarterly fuel expenses. The rates that we are proposing, summarized below, are based on data for year ended June 30, 2005. This order also directs the parties to show cause why the exemption granted to the United States Postal Service by Orders 2005-3-27 and 2005-11-15 should not be extended beyond its expiration date of March 18, 2006, through November 30, 2008, to preserve rate flexibility until the transition contemplated by the Rural Service Improvement Act , P.L. 107-206, $3002, is complete. Rate Comparisons:
By: Michael Reynolds Intra-Alaska Class Service Mail Rates March 6, 2006 Fairbanks North Star Borough hereby applies to postpone the effective date of an Order of the United States Postal Service. The Order directly affects the bypass mail and passenger route between Fairbanks, Alaska and Point Barrow Alaska, and the mail route between Fairbanks, Alaska, and Deadhorse, Alaska about three miles from Prudhoe Bay. FNSB is aggrieved because the Order in not in the best interest of FNSB. By March 14, 2006 USPS must file and serve upon the Department and FNSB, the documentation which USPS actually considered or relied upon prior to February 28, 2006 in making its February 28, 2006 determination that the ordered change provided: "an anticipated savings out of $1.3 million annually." USPS would be required to forward those same materials to the offices of Ted Stevens, Don Young, and Lisa Murkowski also. Any materials delivered which were not considered or relied in making the February 28, 2006 determination must be so marked. USPS has until July 30, 2006 within which to agree to cancel and withdraw this Order. Otherwise, FNSB has through August 30, 2006 within which to file and serve its application for relief having the benefit of the ordered materials which will have been provided by USPS. USPS did not consider the cost to the bypass mail system of transferring materials, equipment, and supplies necessary to build the Alaska Natural Gas Pipeline to Deadhorse. However, if the objective of USPS in reality, has been to support the upcoming Alaska Natural Gas Pipeline by a surface mode bypass mail route between Deadhorse to Fairbanks, such support would clearly cost the Bypass mail system a fortune. Counsel: Fairbanks North Star Borough, Albert Parrish, 907-459-1318, aparrish@co.fairbanks.ak.us OST-2005-21774 - International Surface Air Lift March 7, 2006 Northwest hereby provides notice of its selection for mail awards and is submitting copies of the relevant agreement to your office and the Dockets Section. This award was made pursuant to solicitation No. 55AIMT-06-A-0017. Northwest was selected as the Awarded Supplier for the following route:
We request that this contract be approved for effectiveness on or about May 31, 2006, and to withhold from public disclosure confidential details concerning the award of this contract to Northwest pursuant to 14 C.F.R 302.12. Counsel: Northwest, Megan Rosia, 202-842-3950, megan.rosia@nwa.com OST-2002-11962 - Denver-Australia Codeshare with American Airlines Filed November 2, 2005 | Issued March 7, 2006 Renewal of exemption from 49 USC § 41301 to permit the applicant to conduct scheduled foreign air transportation of persons, property, and mail between points in Australia, other authorized points, and Denver, Colorado, via authorized U.S. coterminal or “gateway” points that the applicant is authorized to serve pursuant to its foreign air carrier permit issued by Order 1994-3-27. (Qantas states that it operates codeshare services to Denver under a codeshare arrangement on American Airlines flights between Los Angeles and Denver that connect with Qantas flights in Los Angeles.) By: Paul Gretch Reagan Washington National Airport Slots Order 2006-3-6 Issued March 7, 2006 | Served March 10, 2006 Order Denying Petition to Withdraw and Reallocate America West's DCA Slots On November 21, 2005, the ACAA filed a petition asking the Department to revoke and reallocate the eight beyond-perimeter exemption slots at DCA that had been awarded to America West Airlines. ACAA contends that America West is no longer a limited incumbent as a result of its merger with US Airways, and that the merger has in fact made it the largest slot holding carrier at DCA. Thus, ACAA argues that America West is not qualified to retain the eight DCA beyond-perimeter slot exemptions under AIR-21 or Vision 100 statutory criteria, which require the Secretary to find that award of exemptions would provide domestic network benefits beyond the perimeter and increase competition by new entrants or in multiple markets. ACAA states that America West’s own arguments in applying earlier for the exemptions, which for example stress the anti-competitive effects of awarding them to incumbent carriers, demonstrate why America West is not entitled to hold them now. We have decided to deny the ACAA request to withdraw eight beyond-perimeter slot exemptions from America West. As a factual matter, the Department did nut use the new entrant/limited criterion in awarding America West the original six slot exemptions. In our decision awarding a total of 12 beyond-perimeter slot exemptions, six of which were to America West, we stated, “ [Although because of its [America West’s] code-share relationships with Continental it would not be a new entrant at DCA, allowing America West to serve DCA from those hubs [Phoenix and Las Vegas] will provide the carrier the opportunity to become an effective new competitor between DCA and all beyond perimeter cities it serves via Phoenix and Las Vegas.”’ Moreover, we have awarded slot exemptions to other carriers that were not new entrants or limited incumbents, such as Delta Air Lines (Order 2002-11-20) and United Airlines (Order 2004-4-1). ACAA is of course correct that the post-merger US Airways/America West has significantly more operations at DCA than the pre-merger America West, and that the post-merger carrier could not now qualify there as a new entrant or limited incumbent. The issue, however, is whether the applicable Federal statutes at 49 U.S.C. 41714 and 41718 mandate that we use these facts retroactively to strip America West of the exemptions it had been lawfully awarded earlier. We do not read such a requirement in the statutes. By: Michael Reynolds Streamlining Regulatory Procedures for Licensing US and Foreign Carriers Issued January 3, 2006 | Served March 7, 2006 Final Order - Bookmarked By Order 2005-12-5, issued December 9, 2005, we directed all interested persons to show cause why we should not make final our tentative findings and conclusions stated therein and award to each applicant of record a blanket route integration certificate of public convenience and necessity in the form attached to the Order and subject to the conditions set forth therein and to such other conditions as the Department may establish. We gave interested persons 21 days to file objections to the Order. We said that if no objections are filed with respect to an applicant of record, all further procedural steps shall be deemed waived with respect to that applicant, and the Department will enter an order (subject to Presidential review under 49 USC 541307) which will make final the findings and conclusions of the Order as to that applicant of record. No objections were received within the time period provided. We make final our findings and conclusions as stated in the Order and award to the applicant of record a blanket route integration certificate of public convenience and necessity and conditions attached thereto. By: Paul Gretch TEM Enterprises d/b/a Xtra Airways OST-2006-23666 - Exemption and Designations - US-Mexico/Costa Rica/Dominican Republic Filed January 17, 2006 | Issued March 7, 2006 Scheduled foreign air transportation of persons, property, and mail between (1) any point or points in the United States, and any point or points in the Republic of Costa Rica; (2) any point or points in the United States, and any point or points in the Dominican Republic; (3) Memphis, Tennessee, and Cancun, Mexico; (4) Atlanta, Georgia, and Cancun, Mexico; and (5) Orlando, Florida, and Cancun, Mexico. The carrier states that, although it intends to provide the subject services on a point-to-point roundtrip basis, it also requests the flexibility, consistent with applicable bilateral agreements, to serve these points on a coterminal basis, as demand warrants (and without local traffic rights from one foreign point to another foreign point). By letter dated February 24, 2006, the carrier provided information to further clarify its request for coterminal flexibility. By: Paul Gretch OST-2006-23918 - Expanded Air Services at the Antonio B. Won Pat International Airport March 3, 2006 Reply of Air Line Pilots Association ALPA agrees with Northwest's cogent statement of reasons why Guam's application should be denied. As Northwest points out, there appears to be little need for the unusual relief Guam seeks. Foreign carriers from 74 countries already have ability to serve Guam from their home countries, and this service can be operated via intermediate points and beyond Guam to third countries. Many of these carriers are from Asian countries that have open skies arrangements with the U.S. -- e.g. Korea, Indonesia, Malaysia and Singapore -- and thus can already conduct the services Guam seeks to attract. Moreover, Guam's passenger and cargo traffic have been increasing rapidly since 2003 even without extra-bilateral program the Territory is seeking. Indeed, Guam's visitor bureau predicts a near-record number of visitors to the Territory in 2006. Should DOT nonetheless decide to afford some flexibility or incentives to foreign air carriers in connection with service to Guam, the Department should take care to ensure that any unilateral grant of opportunities does not undercut the ability of the U.S. to negotiate additional rights for its own carriers, does not go beyond the opportunities granted to foreign carriers in connection with the expanded air services programs for Alaska and Hawaii, and is limited in duration. In this regard, Continental in its answer to Guam's application has provided a detailed set of conditions for a grant of extra-bilateral authority that would accomplish those objectives. Should DOT find that some of the relief requested by Guam should be granted, ALPA believes that that relief should be subject to the conditions proposed by Continental. Counsel: ALPA, Russell Bailey, 202-797-4086, russell.bailey@alpa.org Volga-Dnepr J.S. Cargo Airline OST-2006-23787 - Emergency Exemption - Moffett Field-Cape Canaveral Filed January 31, 2006 | Supplemented March 1, 2006 | Issued March 7, 2006 Exemption from 49 USC § 40109(g) to permit the applicant to operate one, one-way, all-cargo charter flight, using its AN-124-100 aircraft, carrying outsized cargo on behalf of Lockheed Martin Commercial Space Systems, from Moffett Field, California, to Cape Canaveral, Florida, during the period March 8 through March 11, 2006. The applicant states that the flight would carry a LMCSS SES Astra Satellite. The applicant asserts that LMCSS needs the subject lift to meet extremely tight schedules associated with maintaining the assigned launch slot of the satellite; that the cargo is too large for transportation on U.S.-carrier aircraft; and that surface transportation is not feasible because of the delicate nature and extremely high value of the cargo. We are granting Volga-Dnepr’s request to operate the proposed one-way flight, on behalf of LMCSS. We found that its request met all the relevant criteria of 49 USC § 40109(g) for the grant of an exemption of this type, and that the grant was required in the public interest. Specifically, we were persuaded that the need to move the cargo to meet extremely tight schedules associated with maintaining the assigned launch slot of the satellite; the fact that the cargo could not be transported by surface because of its delicate nature and extremely high value; and the unique, outsized nature of the cargo, constituted an emergency not arising in the normal course of business. Moreover, based on the representations of the U.S. carriers, we concluded that no U.S. carrier had aircraft available that could be used to conduct the operation at issue here. We also found that grant of this authority would prevent unreasonable hardship to LMCSS. By: Michael Reynolds |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||