OST-98-3603 / Savannah/Hilton Head / High Density Rule, Chicago O'Hare / Answer of Atlantic Coast Airlines / March 25, 1998
Application of
THE COMMUNITIES OF SAVANNAH, GEORGIA/HILTON HEAD, SOUTH CAROLINA
for an exemption from 14 C.F.R. Part 93, Subpart K and S. 49 U.S.C.)
§ 41714 as to allow non-stop service to Chicago O'Hare Airport
ANSWER OF ATLANTIC COAST AIRLINES
Atlantic Coast Airlines, Operating as United Express ("ACA") hereby answers the application of the Communities of Savannah, Georgia and Hilton Head, South Carolina for an exemption from the High Density Airport Rule (14 C.F.R. Subparts K and S of Part 93) for eight slots at O'Hare International Airport with which to mount four daily regional jet roundtrip flights between Savannah/Hilton Head and Chicago's O'Hare Airport.
As the Communities correctly observe in their application, ACA will commence regional jet service between Washington Dulles International Airport and Savannah on April 1, 1998. ACA will operate four weekday roundtrip flights in the market. /1 ACA has recently taken delivery of its, seventh 50-seat regional jet and is employing them with great success in a number of markets in which it previously offered turboprop service and in new markets such as Savannah.
1/ Three roundtrip flights will be operated on the weekend.
With the introduction of regional jet service, ACA has also looked at opportunities for bringing the benefits of regional Jet service to other new markets. For example, ACA is proposing to link seven defined non-hub communities 2/ with O'Hare in its application for an exemption from the High Density Airport Rule for 42 O'Hare slots. The DOT has not yet acted on ACA's application in Docket
OST-97-3259, but may do so at any time.The application of Savannah/Hilton Head presents the Department with several interesting issues. First, it is not clear that there is a statutory basis under 49 U.S.C. § 47414 to grant the relief for which the communities have applied. The communities are not designated as essential air service cities and Savannah/Hilton Head is not: a defined non-hub airport and, hence, subsection (a)(2) of Section 41714 does not apply. 3/ Subsection (c) grants authority to the Secretary to grant defined new entrant carriers (carriers operating 11 or fewer slots) slots with which to conduct operations at High Density Airports under "exceptional circumstances" as defined most recently in
Order 97-10-16. While ACA currently does not operate at O'Hare it has, as noted above, an application pending for 42 O'Hare slots. Depending on the DOT's disposition of ACA's application for which there is substantial community support,2/ Charleston, West Virginia; Duluth, Minnesota; Fayetteville, Arkansas; Montgomery, Alabama; Shreveport, Louisiana; Springfield/Branson, Missouri; Wilkes-Barre/Scranton, Pennsylvania.
3/ Subsection (b) of Section 41714 applies to foreign air carriers and is not germane to the Savannah/Hilton Head application.
ACA may or may not be a new entrant at O'Hare and, therefore, eligible to receive additional slots with which to serve Savannah.
Another unique aspect of the Savannah/Hilton Head application is its suggest-on that once it is granted O'Hare slots it would work with United Express and American Eagle to develop a pattern of service to O'Hare. It is not clear how Savannah/Hilton Head would allocate these slots to the carriers. On what basis would it make its carrier selection decision? What conditions might the community attach to the transfer or lease of the slot to the carriers? Would the slots be leased for consideration and what conditions might the DOT apply to the grant of the slots to the applicant? While any person may hold slots under the High Density Rule, the policy implications of communities transferring slots to competing carriers has not yet been considered by the Department.
Rather than address these issues, which could take considerable time, ACA proposes that the Department first consider the merits of providing an opportunity for carriers with regional jets to serve the Savannah/Hilton Head-O'Hare market and how it would be prepared to exercise its exemption authority under 49 U.S.C. § 41714 or its plenary exemption authority under 49 U.S.C. § 40109. If the public interest supports an award of slots to serve Savannah\Hilton Head, ACA suggests the DOT invite interested carriers to make application. This course was followed in
Order 96-10-42 when the Department offered all interested carriers the right to be considered equally for O'Hare exemption slots which, in that case, the Congress directed be made available for non-hub cities. This process is procedurally fair and places the Department: in a position to make any necessary carrier selection or public interest determinations, where such discretion properly belongs under the federal transportation statute.Having noted its position regarding the procedure by Welch slots ought to be awarded, ACA hereby states for the record that it is impressed with the traffic generating capacity of Savannah/ Hilton Head. The area has significant tourist and other commercial assets so as to deserve a high level of service to points throughout the United States. It is unfortunate that service to the High Density Airports is not freely available. This being the case, ACA requests the Department to analyze the service needs of the communities and if found deserving, the Department should invite regional jet carriers to seek such authority or otherwise to announce the basis on which slots for Savannah/Hilton Head would be made available for regional jet service.
Very truly yours,
BAGILEO, SILVERBERG & GOLDMAN, L.L.P.
Attorneys for ATLANTIC COAST AIRLINES
By: Robert P. Silverberg
Dated: March 25, 1998