FAA Rules Docket for November 28, 1997

FAA Rules Docket for November 28, 1997

Applications, Comments, and Notices:

Carry-On Baggage Advisory Circular | United

United Chicago Slot Petition of August 25, 1997 | ALPA Response | American Response | Chicago Response

Revised Standards for Cargo or Baggage Compartments

Dockets Filed in 28860 - Overflight Fees

Reports & Studies in 28860 - Overflight Fees

Federal Aviation Administration Advisory Circular - (Draft Copy)

Subject: Carry-On Baggage

This advisory circular (AC) provides information to the public, certificated air carriers, and airline personnel about Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)-approved certificated air carrier carry-on baggage programs. It updates, provides clarification, and additional information to AC 121-29, Carry-On Baggage.

FAA personnel, certificated air carriers, airline personnel, and the public have asked the FAA to clarify existing policy found in AC 121-29, 14 CFR section 121.589, and in the model carry-on baggage programs. The FAA agrees that additional policy guidance is needed because of changes in the airline industry, such as reduction in personnel in the gate area. In fact, the reductions of personnel at the gate area may be the basis for withdrawing approval from a previously approved program.

Appendix 1 - Carry-On Bag Examples (Full Text Below)

1 Bag 22x16x8 or 1 garment bag 8 inches when folded PLUS l
Briefcase l8x14x8
Total weight 20 pounds

1 Bag 22x16x8 PLUS ladies handbag
Total weight 20 pounds
1 Laptop computer 20x14x8 or 1 garment bag 8 inches when
folded PLUS Briefcase 18x14x8
Total weight 20 pounds

Cumulative totals
Under Seat 9x14x22 45"
Overhead
10x14x36 60"
Total weight 20 pounds

Under Double Seats
30xllx12
Single Seat
l5x11x12
Total weight 20 pounds

By: Thomas Stuckey, Acting Director, Flight Standards Service

Index

United Air Lines, Inc.

Docket 29009 | November 24, 1997

Reply of United Air Lines, Inc.

American, as the lone opponent of United's petition, appears deliberately to misinterpret United's Petition, mischaracterizing the relief requested, the statutory basis on which it is requested, and reiterating its inaccurate claims regarding the relationship between United and its commuter partners. American is the single largest beneficiary of the international slot withdrawal and allocation procedure, which has stripped United of slots for more than 10 years. In this regard, its objection to United's attempt to recover some of these lost slots is understandable. Certainly, American's comments do not offer any basis on which the FAA should delay or deny the relief United has requested.

As the Department is grappling with the needs of local communities for access to competitive air transportation services, slots that could be used to connect local communities to United's network at Chicago are instead being used to subsidize flights by international carriers to foreign points. Granting United's petition and restoring 16 slots as requested would allow United to add services to thousands of city-pairs over its connecting hub at O'Hare, enhance its domestic and international competitiveness, and, thereby, provide the greatest benefit to consumers. With the additional capacity now available at O'Hare, the FAA has no legitimate rationale for continuing to deny, with continued slot withdrawals, the realization of these benefits by U.S. travelers and shippers.

United continues to lose 33 domestic slots each season. The justification for this withdrawal no longer exists as DOT has identified sufficient capacity to meet international needs by exemption. American has failed utterly to raise any reason the FAA should not promptly grant United's Petition. The application is otherwise unopposed. The FAA should, therefore, return 16 slots to United immediately.

Counsel: Joel Burton, 202.637.9130

Index