Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 68 / Monday, April 9, 2012 / Notices 21145 

ways to minimize the burden of the 

collection of information on 

respondents, by the use of electronic 

means, including the use of automated 

collection techniques or other forms of 

information technology. All responses 

to the notice will be summarized and 

included in the request for OMB 

approval. All comments will also 

become a matter of public record. 

Dated: Issued in Washington, DC, on 

March 23, 2012. 

Jeffrey B. Gaynes, 

Assistant Director for Regulatory Affairs. 

[FR Doc. 2012–7657 Filed 4–6–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–9X–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Office of the Secretary 

Notice of Applications for Certificates 

of Public Convenience and Necessity 

and Foreign Air Carrier Permits Filed 

Under Subpart B (Formerly Subpart Q) 

During the Week Ending March 24, 

2012 

The following Applications for 

Certificates of Public Convenience and 

Necessity and Foreign Air Carrier 

Permits were filed under Subpart B 

(formerly Subpart Q) of the Department 

of Transportation’s Procedural 

Regulations (See 14 CFR 301.201 et 

seq.). The due date for Answers, 

Conforming Applications, or Motions to 

Modify Scope are set forth below for 

each application. Following the Answer 

period DOT may process the application 

by expedited procedures. Such 

procedures may consist of the adoption 

of a show-cause order, a tentative order, 

or in appropriate cases a final order 

without further proceedings. 

Docket Number: DOT–OST–2012– 

0042. 

Date Filed: March 19, 2012. 

Due Date for Answers, Conforming 

Applications, or Motion to Modify 

Scope: April 9, 2012. 

Description: Application of People 

Express Airlines, Inc. (‘‘People 

Express’’) requesting a certificate of 

public convenience and necessity 

authorizing People Express to engage in 

interstate scheduled air transportation 

of persons, property, and mail. 

Renee V. Wright, 

Program Manager, Docket Operations, 

Federal Register Liaison. 

[FR Doc. 2012–8506 Filed 4–6–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–9X–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Office of the Secretary 

Notice of Applications for Certificates 

of Public Convenience and Necessity 

and Foreign Air Carrier Permits Filed 

Under Subpart B (Formerly Subpart Q) 

During the Week Ending March 10, 

2012 

The following Applications for 

Certificates of Public Convenience and 

Necessity and Foreign Air Carrier 

Permits were filed under Subpart B 

(formerly Subpart Q) of the Department 

of Transportation’s Procedural 

Regulations (See 14 CFR 301.201 et 

seq.). The due date for Answers, 

Conforming Applications, or Motions to 

Modify Scope are set forth below for 

each application. Following the Answer 

period DOT may process the application 

by expedited procedures. Such 

procedures may consist of the adoption 

of a show-cause order, a tentative order, 

or in appropriate cases a final order 

without further proceedings. 

Docket Number: DOT–OST–2012– 

0034. 

Date Filed: March 6, 2012. 

Due Date for Answers, Conforming 

Applications, or Motion to Modify 

Scope: March 27, 2012. 

Description 

Application of Dassault Falcon 

Service (‘‘DFS’’) requesting a foreign air 

carrier permit to the full extent 

authorized by the Air Transport 

Agreement Between the United States 

and the European Community and the 

Member states of the European 

Community to enable it to engage in: (i) 

Foreign charter air transportation of 

persons and property from any point or 

points behind any Member State of the 

European Union via any point or points 

in any Member State and via 

intermediate points to any point or 

points in the United States and beyond; 

(ii) foreign charter air transportation of 

persons and property between any point 

or points in the United states and any 

point or points in any member of the 

European Common Aviation Area; (iii) 

other charters, (iv) transportation 

authorized by any additional route 

rights made available to European 

Community carrier in the future. DFS 

further requests exemption authority to 

the extent necessary to enable it to 

provide the service described above 

pending issuance of a foreign air carrier 

permit and such additional or other 

relief as the Department may deem 

necessary or appropriate. 

Docket Number: DOT–OST–2009– 

0351. 

Date Filed: March 9, 2012. 

Due Date for Answers, Conforming 

Applications, or Motion To Modify 

Scope: March 30, 2012. 

Description 

Application of Premium Jet AG 

(‘‘Premium Jet’’) requesting renewal and 

amendment of its exemption and for a 

foreign air carrier permit authorizing 

Premium Jet to conduct: (i) Foreign 

charter air transportation of persons, 

property, and mail from points behind 

Switzerland via Switzerland and 

intermediate points to a point or points 

in the United States and beyond; and (ii) 

other charters. 

Renee V. Wright, 

Program Manager, Docket Operations, 

Federal Register Liaison. 

[FR Doc. 2012–8447 Filed 4–6–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–9X–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Office of the Secretary 

Notice of Applications for Certificates 

of Public Convenience and Necessity 

and Foreign Air Carrier Permits Filed 

Under Subpart B (Formerly Subpart Q) 

During the Week Ending March 3, 2012 

The following Applications for 

Certificates of Public Convenience and 

Necessity and Foreign Air Carrier 

Permits were filed under Subpart B 

(formerly Subpart Q) of the Department 

of Transportation’s Procedural 

Regulations (See 14 CFR 301.201 et 

seq.). The due date for Answers, 

Conforming Applications, or Motions to 

Modify Scope are set forth below for 

each application. Following the Answer 

period DOT may process the application 

by expedited procedures. Such 

procedures may consist of the adoption 

of a show-cause order, a tentative order, 

or in appropriate cases a final order 

without further proceedings. 

Docket Number: DOT–OST–2012– 

0032. 

Date Filed: March 3, 2012. 

Due Date for Answers, Conforming 

Applications, or Motion to Modify 

Scope: March 23, 2012. 

Description: Application of All 

Nippon Airways Co., Ltd. (‘‘ANA’’) 

requesting an exemption and an 

amended foreign air carrier permit ANA 

to operate the following services: (i) 

Scheduled foreign air transportation of 

persons, property, and mail (separately 

or in combination) from points behind 

Japan via Japan and intermediate points 

to a point or points in the United States 

and beyond; (ii) charter foreign air 

transportation of persons, property, and 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
21146 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 68 / Monday, April 9, 2012 / Notices 

mail (separately or in combination) 

between any point or points in Japan 

and any point or points in the United 

States and between any point or points 

in the United States and any point or 

points in any third country; and, (iii) 

other charters. 

Renee V. Wright, 

Program Manager, Docket Operations, 

Federal Register Liaison. 

[FR Doc. 2012–8453 Filed 4–6–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–9X–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

[Docket No. FAA–2011–0361] 

Policy and Procedures Concerning the 

Use of Airport Revenue: Petition of the 

Clark County Department of Aviation 

to Use a Weight-Based Air Service 

Incentive Program 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), Department of 

Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Partial granting of petition; 

Disposition of comments. 

SUMMARY: On April 14, 2011, the FAA 

issued a Notice in the Federal Register 

(76 FR 21,420, April 15, 2011) seeking 

comment on a petition submitted by 

Clark County Department of Aviation 

(CCDOA), owner and operator of Las 

Vegas McCarran International Airport 

(Airport). The petition requested a 

determination by the Federal Aviation 

Administration (‘‘FAA’’) that its 

proposed air service incentives program 

(‘‘Incentives Program’’), intended to 

induce increases in landed weight by air 

carriers at McCarran International 

Airport (the ‘‘Airport’’ or ‘‘LAS’’) in Las 

Vegas, is consistent with Federal law 

and policies on the use of airport 

revenue and on airport rates and 

charges. In its petition, CCDOA 

proposed the FAA amend its 

interpretation of ‘‘new air service’’ to 

include ‘‘increases in landed weight.’’ 

The FAA has interpreted these 

policies, and the underlying Federal 

statutes, to permit a temporary waiver of 

standard airport fees for carriers that 

provide new air service at an airport, as 

an incentive to begin or expand air 

service. In September 2010, the agency 

issued the Air Carrier Incentive Program 

Guidebook to provide specific guidance 

to airport operators on the use of air 

service incentive programs. That 

guidance restates FAA’s previously 

issued opinions regarding what 

constitutes new service as characterized 

in the FAA’s Policy and Procedures 

Concerning the Use of Airport Revenue 

(Revenue Use Policy) (64 FR 7,696 (Feb. 

16, 1999)). Since the inception of the 

Revenue Use Policy in 1999, the FAA 

has defined new air service as: (a) 

Service to an airport destination not 

currently served, (b) nonstop service 

where no nonstop service is currently 

offered, (c) new entrant carrier, and/or 

(d) increased frequency of flights to a 

specific destination. The FAA’s 

interpretation has not permitted an 

airport operator to offer an incentive 

program that provides discounts based 

on increased aircraft weight or an 

increased number of seats on existing 

flights. CCDOA proposes an incentive 

program that would reward air carriers 

for an increase in landed weight. An 

increase in landed weight could result 

from an increase in the size of aircraft 

used, or ‘‘upgauging,’’ on existing 

flights, consolidation of existing flights, 

and/or added flights. CCDOA requests 

that the FAA amend existing guidance 

to make clear that its proposed incentive 

plan is consistent with Federal law and 

existing agency policies on the use of 

airport revenue and on airport rates and 

charges. 

This notice responds to the comments 

received and grants a portion of the 

petition as written. 

ADDRESSES: Comments received on the 

petition [identified by Docket Number 

FAA–2011–0361] are available for 

public review in the Docket Operations, 

Room W12–140 on the ground floor of 

the West Building, 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, 

between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday 

through Friday, except Federal holidays. 

Also, you may review public dockets on 

the Internet at http:// 

www.regulations.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Kevin Willis, Manager, Airport 

Compliance Division, ACO–100, Federal 

Aviation Administration, 800 

Independence Avenue SW., 

Washington, DC 20591, telephone (202) 

267–3085; facsimile: (202) 267–5257. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. The Petition 

On February 14, 2011, the Federal 

Aviation Administration (FAA) received 

a letter and a 13-page memorandum 

from counsel for CCDOA, the owner and 

operator of McCarran International 

Airport in Las Vegas, Nevada, 

requesting a determination from the 

FAA that CCDOAs proposed air service 

incentive program does not conflict 

with Federal obligations 

In brief, CCDOA stated that the 

‘‘objective of the proposed Incentives 

Program is to provide an incentive at the 

margin to promote additions to 

scheduled air service seat capacity.’’ 

The program provides, subject to certain 

terms and exceptions, that: 

* * * all monthly scheduled service 

landed weight, by airline, in excess of that 

operated in the same month of the prior year, 

would receive a credit of up to 100% of the 

landing fee (currently $2.26 per 1,000 pounds 

of landed weight) paid on the incremental 

landed weight. 

In addition to new flights, the credit 

would apply to existing flights for 

which an increase in aircraft size 

resulted in an increase in landed 

weight. 

In its petition, CCDOA makes the 

argument that upgauging should be an 

eligible incentive because it is 

considered new service. CCDOA reasons 

in its petition, ‘‘Air travelers, as well as 

airports, reasonably regard an upgrade 

in the size of equipment used on a flight 

to constitute ‘‘new service(s).’’ CCDOA 

stated the Revenue Use Policy does not 

provide for nor does it exclude 

upgauging as a form of new air service. 

Finally, the CCDOA argued the 

proposed petition is not contradictory to 

statute, grant assurance obligations, and 

the FAA’s Revenue Use Policy. 

The FAA published the Petition and 

sought comments on it prior to issuing 

a determination. 

II. Discussion 

A. Summary of Comments 

In addition to the CCDOA’s 

comments, seven comments were 

received in the docket. Five comments 

generally supported the petition; two 

opposed it. The four airport operator 

commenters generally supported the 

petition or greater flexibility for 

operators to design air service incentive 

programs. Of the two airline 

commenters, ATA opposed the petition, 

while British Airways supported it. One 

citizen opposed the petition because it 

would not result in savings for 

passengers. 

Comments in Support of the Petition 

In its petition, the CCDOA states it is: 

concerned with a temporary, but 

precipitous, drop in air service at (LAS) that 

has not rebounded as quickly as at other 

airports. Landed weight at LAS was down 

approximately 17% from Calendar Year 2007 

through the 12-month period ending in 

September 2010. While some individual 

carriers have expanded operations, these 

initiatives have fallen well short of restoring 

McCarran operations to previous levels. This 

drop-off in operations has meant that the 

Airport’s airside and terminal facilities are 

not optimally utilized. The shortfall in traffic 

has also caused a significant drop in Airport 

revenue, particularly non-aeronautical 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES