77854 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 248 / Wednesday, December 27, 2006 / Notices 

1 Docket FAA–2006–25709. 

2No one commented on the FAA’s statutory 

authority to adopt an Order limiting flights at 

LaGuardia. 

3 Docket FAA–2006–25709. 

4No one commented on the FAA’s statutory 

authority to adopt an Order limiting flights at 

LaGuardia. 

5See 33 FR 17896 (Dec. 3, 1968); 34 FR 2603 

(Feb. 26, 1969); cf. 14 CFR 93.121–93.133, 93.211–

93.227 (2006). 

6 49 U.S.C. 41715(a)(2), enacted by Pub. L. No. 

106–181, § 231, 114 Stat. 61, 106–10 (2000). 

7 49 U.S.C. 41716. 

Members of the public may attend 

this meeting up to the seating capacity 

of the room. Interested persons may 

seek information by writing: Chief, 

Lifesaving and Fire Safety Standards 

Division, Commandant (CG–3PSE–4), 

U.S. Coast Guard Headquarters, Room 

1308, 2100 Second Street, SW., 

Washington, DC 20593–0001, by calling: 

Mr. R. Eberly at (202) 372 -1393, or by 

e-mail at Randall.Eberly@uscg.mil. 

Dated: December 18, 2006. 

Michael Tousley, 

Executive Secretary, Shipping Coordinating 

Committee, Department of State. 

[FR Doc. E6–22167 Filed 12–26–06; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4710–09–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

[Docket No. FAA–2006–25755] 

Operating Limitations at New York 

LaGuardia Airport; Notice of Order 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of order. 

SUMMARY: On September 11, 2006, the 

FAA issued a proposed order, which 

requested written views on the FAA’s 

tentative determination to place 

temporary limitations on flight 

operations at New York’s LaGuardia 

Airport (LaGuardia). The temporary 

limits are intended to prevent the 

congestion-related delays that would 

otherwise occur during the interval 

between the expiration of the High 

Density Rule and the effective date of a 

long-term regulation. In response to 

comments, the FAA is issuing a final 

order (the Order) that adopts the 

proposed limitations with some 

modifications. The limitations will 

permit 75 scheduled and six 

unscheduled operations per hour 

between 6 a.m. through 9:59 p.m., 

Eastern time, Monday through Friday 

and from 12 noon through 9:59 p.m., 

Eastern Time, on Sundays. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Komal K. Jain, Office of the Chief 

Counsel, Regulations Division, AGC–

240, Federal Aviation Administration, 

800 Independence Avenue, SW., 

Washington, DC 20591; telephone (202) 

267–3073. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

LaGuardia’s runway capacity cannot 

accommodate the number of flight 

operations that carriers would like to 

operate without the development of 

significant congestion. Rules adopted by 

the FAA have long limited the number 

of LaGuardia operations during peak 

demand periods. By statute enacted six 

years ago, those rules will terminate as 

of January 1, 2007. The FAA has 

proposed a long-term rule in a separate 

docket that would limit the number of 

scheduled and unscheduled operations 

at LaGuardia.1 We are currently 

soliciting comments on that notice of 

proposed rulemaking. Because the FAA 

will be unable to complete that 

rulemaking by January 1, carrier 

operations at LaGuardia would be 

unrestricted unless the FAA adopts 

temporary limits that will remain in 

place until the rulemaking’s completion. 

Without such operational limitations, 

the FAA expects that severe congestionrelated delays will occur, both at 

LaGuardia and at other airports 

throughout the National Airspace 

System (NAS) as a result of capacity 

constraints at LaGuardia. The FAA 

therefore has proposed to adopt shortterm limitations on LaGuardia flights 

while that rulemaking is completed, 

and, after considering the comments, is 

issuing this final Order limiting 

LaGuardia operations. 

The FAA’s authority to limit the 

number of flight operations at 

LaGuardia is an essential component of 

the FAA’s statutory responsibilities.2

The FAA holds broad authority under 

49 U.S.C. 40103(b) to regulate the use of 

the navigable airspace of the United 

States. This provision authorizes the 

FAA to develop plans and policy for the 

use of navigable airspace and, by order 

or rule, to regulate the use of the 

airspace as necessary to ensure its 

efficient use. 

I. Background 

LaGuardia’s runway capacity cannot 

accommodate the number of flight 

operations that carriers would like to 

operate without the development of 

significant congestion. Rules adopted by 

the FAA have long limited the number 

of LaGuardia operations during peak 

demand periods. By statute enacted six 

years ago, those rules will terminate as 

of January 1, 2007. The FAA has 

proposed a long-term rule in a separate 

docket that would limit the number of 

scheduled and unscheduled operations 

at LaGuardia.3 We are currently 

soliciting comments on that notice of 

proposed rulemaking. Because the FAA 

will be unable to complete that 

rulemaking by January 1, carrier 

operations at LaGuardia would be 

unrestricted unless the FAA adopts 

temporary limits that will remain in 

place until the rulemaking’s completion. 

Without such operational limitations, 

the FAA expects that severe congestionrelated delays will occur, both at 

LaGuardia and at other airports 

throughout the National Airspace 

System (NAS) as a result of capacity 

constraints at LaGuardia. The FAA 

therefore has proposed to adopt shortterm limitations on LaGuardia flights 

while that rulemaking is completed, 

and, after considering the comments, is 

issuing this final Order limiting 

LaGuardia operations. 

The FAA’s authority to limit the 

number of flight operations at 

LaGuardia is an essential component of 

the FAA’s statutory responsibilities.4

The FAA holds broad authority under 

49 U.S.C. 40103(b) to regulate the use of 

the navigable airspace of the United 

States. This provision authorizes the 

FAA to develop plans and policy for the 

use of navigable airspace and, by order 

or rule, to regulate the use of the 

airspace as necessary to ensure its 

efficient use. 

As a result of LaGuardia’s history of 

congestion-related delays, the FAA, over 

the course of nearly forty years, applied 

increasingly detailed rules to govern the 

allocation and use of the limited 

capacity at the airport.5 These 

regulations, collectively known as the 

High Density Rule (HDR) and the BuySell Rule (or slot rules), effectively 

controlled congestion at LaGuardia. In 

2000, however, out of concern with the 

collateral effects of the slot rules at 

LaGuardia on airport access and 

competition, Congress included a 

provision in the Wendell H. Ford 

Aviation Investment and Reform Act for 

the 21st Century (AIR–21) that 

terminates the LaGuardia slot rules as of 

January 1, 2007.6 Congress 

simultaneously directed the U.S. 

Department of Transportation, effective 

immediately, to grant exemptions from 

the HDR for flights that would serve 

small hub and non-hub airports with 

aircraft with less than 71 seats and to 

grant a limited number of applications 

for slot exemptions from new entrant 

and limited incumbent carriers.7

As carriers began using the slot 

exemptions permitted under AIR–21, 

the number of scheduled flight 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 248 / Wednesday, December 27, 2006 / Notices 77855 

8The increase in scheduled operations at 

LaGuardia is described more fully at 66 FR 31731 

(June 12, 2001). 

9 71 FR 51361. 

10Source: FAA’s Aviation System Performance 

Metrics (ASPM). 

11Calculated from FAA’s Air Traffic Operations 

Network Database (OPSNET). 

12 65 FR 69126 (Nov. 15, 2000). This was 

extended through December 31, 2006. 70 FR 36998 

(June 27, 2005). 

13The FAA maintains safe operations through the 

use of air traffic control procedures. Traffic 

management initiatives would be applied as needed 

but would result in significant aircraft and 

passenger delays. 

14 71 FR 51360. 

operations at LaGuardia began to far 

exceed the airport’s capacity even under 

optimal operating conditions.8 By the 

fall of 2000, carriers had already added 

over 300 scheduled flights at LaGuardia 

and planned to add even more.9 With 

no new airport infrastructure or air 

traffic control procedures, overall 

airport capacity remained the same 

while the number of aircraft operations 

and delays soared. The average minutes 

of delay for all arriving flights at 

LaGuardia increased 144% from 15.52 

minutes in March 2000 (the month 

before AIR–21 was enacted) to 37.86 

minutes in September 2000.10 The 

increase in delays at LaGuardia also 

affected flights at other airports and in 

adjacent airspace. By September 2000, 

flight delays at LaGuardia accounted for 

25 percent of the nation’s delays, 

compared to 10 percent for the previous 

year.11

In order to address the growing 

congestion at LaGuardia, the FAA 

intervened in November 2000. The FAA 

reduced the number of daily exemptions 

from the HDR at LaGuardia to 159 

during peak operating hours and 

distributed the exemptions via lottery.12

The 159 daily operations reflected an 

increase of almost eleven hourly 

operations above the limits in place 

before the statutory amendments. Even 

with the FAA’s partial rollback of the 

number of exemption flights, LaGuardia 

is now operating at capacity during 

most hours, and continues to have a 

relatively serious delay problem. 

Although LaGuardia lacks the 

capacity to handle additional flight 

operations beyond the current peak 

hour limits, the expiration of the HDR 

at LaGuardia as of January 1, 2007, will 

eliminate the scheduling and 

reservation mechanisms that currently 

sustain the airport’s operational 

balance.13 Accordingly, on August 29, 

2006, the FAA proposed a new rule to 

maintain the number of operations at 

LaGuardia’s current hourly limits.14 An 

order that temporarily maintains 

LaGuardia’s current operational limits 

during the interval between the High 

Density Rule’s expiration and the 

effective date of the proposed 

replacement rule is necessary to avoid 

any increase in the number of 

operations or a significant rescheduling 

of existing flights that would cause 

unacceptable delay levels, as explained 

below in our discussion of the 

comments. 

After considering the comments 

received on the proposed Order, the 

FAA has determined to adopt this 

Order. Under this Order, the FAA (1) 

Maintains the current hourly limits on 

scheduled (75) and unscheduled (six) 

operations at LaGuardia during peak 

periods; (2) imposes an 80 percent 

minimum usage requirement for 

Operating Authorizations; (3) provides 

for a lottery to reallocate withdrawn, 

surrendered or unallocated Operating 

Authorizations; and (4) allows for trades 

and leases of Operating Authorizations 

for consideration for the duration of the 

Order. The FAA is not allowing carriers 

to buy and sell Operating 

Authorizations during the term of this 

Order. The FAA also is not restricting 

the use of any Operating Authorizations 

for flights to certain destinations or 

flights with aircraft of a particular size. 

II. Discussion of Written Submissions 

and the Final Order 

In response to our request for written 

comments, 18 respondents expressed 

views on the FAA’s proposed Order. 

The respondents included 10 air carriers 

(American Airlines, U.S. Airways, Delta 

Air Lines, Northwest Airlines, Colgan 

Air, United Airlines, Republic Airways 

Group (Republic Airline, Chautauqua 

Airlines, Shuttle America Corp.), and 

AirTran Airways), three air carrier 

organizations (Regional Airline 

Association (RAA), Air Carrier 

Association of America (ACAA) and Air 

Transport Association of America 

(ATA)), two airports (Akron-Canton 

Airport and Newport News/ 

Williamsburg International Airport), the 

Port Authority of New York and New 

Jersey (Port Authority), City of Canton, 

the Medina County Ohio Economic 

Development Corporation, the Stark 

Development Board, Inc, and Indiana 

Senator Richard G. Lugar and 

Congresswoman Julia M. Carson. 

Need for Limits on LaGuardia Flight 

Operations 

As explained in the proposed Order, 

the FAA continues to believe that 

carrier demand for LaGuardia 

substantially exceeds the number of 

flights that can be operated at the airport 

without creating unacceptable delays. 

Commenters generally agreed that 

LaGuardia flights should be limited, and 

no commenter disputed the FAA’s 

tentative conclusion under the proposed 

Order that the existing hourly limits 

should be maintained. The Port 

Authority, for example, stated, ‘‘There is 

a lesson to be learned from the extreme 

congestion, bordering on gridlock, that 

took place after the enactment of AIR–

21 ‘‘ LaGuardia most certainly would 

once again face crippling delays and 

congestion, if no form of operational 

limitation (or other demand 

management tool) is in place when the 

HDR expires at the end of the year.’’

Port Authority Comments at 4. This 

Order accordingly adopts the proposed 

hourly limits on scheduled operations at 

LaGuardia. 

Term of the Order 

By statute, the HDR expires as of 

January 1, 2007. Therefore, the FAA 

proposed the Order take effect on 

January 2, 2007. Multiple air carrier slot 

and slot exemption transactions expire 

on December 31, 2006, as do the FAA 

limits on AIR–21 slot exemptions. If the 

effective date of January 2, 2007, were 

adopted, as proposed, carriers would 

have to enter into one-day slot transfers 

to bridge the break in dates or adjust 

their schedules to meet their slot 

holdings. In order to provide the most 

seamless transition between the HDR 

and AIR–21 slot exemption rules and 

this Order and to avoid additional 

administrative burdens for a one-day 

period, the Order will take effect on 

January 1, 2007. 

The FAA also is modifying the 

Order’s termination date. Based on the 

original rulemaking schedule 

established for the Congestion 

Management Rule for LaGuardia, the 

FAA proposed that the Order terminate 

on September 30, 2007. Several air 

carriers, as well as ATA and RAA, 

commented on the proposed expiration 

date of the Order. They assert that the 

airlines would benefit if the duration of 

the Order were tied directly to the 

effective date of the final rule replacing 

the Order rather than the FAA 

establishing a fixed date, which could 

be subject to extension if the rule is not 

published as planned. Commenters also 

emphasized that the air carriers will 

need time to transition from one 

regulatory regime to another, and any 

transition should occur when the 

carriers make their seasonal schedule 

changes. 

The FAA recognizes that carriers 

require sufficient notice to plan 

schedules, market and sell tickets, and 

allocate aircraft, crew and airport 

resources. The FAA seeks to ensure that 

carriers are afforded adequate time to 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
77856 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 248 / Wednesday, December 27, 2006 / Notices 

15We recognize that the FAA’s proposed rule for 

LaGuardia would begin limits at 6:30 a.m. on 

weekdays. The FAA expects to complete a similar 

review of capacity and possible delay implications 

in the context of that proceeding. 

16Proposed Ordering Paragraph 4 stated that FAA 

would assign identification numbers to each 

Operating Authorization. These numbers would be 

used for administrative purposes such as 

identifying Operating Authorizations for trades and 

transfers and for usage monitoring. Under the HDR 

and the Chicago O’Hare final rule, the FAA also 

used randomly assigned identification numbers for 

potential withdrawal if capacity reduction is 

required to meet FAA’s operational needs. While 

the FAA is not specifically adopting a similar 

withdrawal priority mechanism for the purposes of 

this Order, Operating Authorizations remain subject 

to FAA control and may be withdrawn to meet 

FAA’s operational needs. Should capacity be 

reduced on an on-going basis, the FAA will adopt 

procedures to withdraw Operating Authorizations. 

minimize disruptions caused by 

implementation of a new rule at 

LaGuardia, and we recognize that 

adjusting to a new rule will be more 

difficult for carriers if the adjustment 

must occur in the middle of a 

scheduling season. Thus, as specifically 

requested by United, American, 

Northwest, and ATA, the Order will 

expire at the first change of scheduling 

season, as defined in 14 CFR, part 93, 

subpart B, occurring no less than 90 

days after the issuance of a final rule. 

While the FAA is extending the term 

of this Order, the FAA recognizes the 

need to complete the rulemaking, 

because the final decision in that 

proceeding should establish a more 

rational basis for the regulation of flight 

operations at LaGuardia. The 

rulemaking process will give the FAA 

and the commenters a better 

opportunity to consider and develop a 

better long-term policy on LaGuardia 

operations. 

Hours of the Cap and Hourly Limits 

The FAA proposed a limit of 75 

scheduled operations per hour, the 

current cap on scheduled operations in 

effect under the slot rules. This limit is 

based on the optimal airport runway 

capacity of 81 operations per hour, 

including unscheduled flights. The FAA 

is adopting this limit under the final 

Order, and as discussed later, will 

assign Operating Authorizations for 

arrival and departures on a 30-minute 

basis consistent with current practices. 

The FAA’s Air Traffic Organization may 

adjust the half-hour arrival and 

departure totals within the hourly limit 

based on operating conditions. 

The FAA made a preliminary 

determination to apply the operational 

limits at LaGuardia beginning at 6:30 

a.m. on weekdays rather than at the 

historic 6 a.m. start under the HDR. 

American and U.S. Airways requested 

the Order’s limitations begin earlier, at 

6 a.m., expressing concern that 

additional operations in the 6 to 6:29 

a.m. half-hour, if unrestricted, might 

cause unacceptable delays. The FAA 

reviewed the potential delay scenarios 

with unconstrained operations before 

6:30 a.m. and agrees that starting the 

limitations at 6:30 a.m. each weekday 

would create a risk of serious delays. 

Although overnight aircraft parking 

positions are a constraint, there is the 

potential that greater utilization of 

existing overnight positions or the 

establishment of new ones might 

facilitate additional morning departures. 

Therefore, the FAA concludes that 

beginning the limits at 6 a.m. hour is 

warranted.15 For conformity, the FAA 

also will begin the limits for 

unscheduled operations at 6 a.m. 

The FAA also considered the Port 

Authority’s comment that the limits 

should apply on Saturday mornings 

before noon. We recognize that traffic 

levels have increased on Saturday 

mornings, but our review indicates that 

airport demand remains within the 

airport’s capacity. The FAA will 

continue to monitor operations and 

congestion during the non-controlled 

hours at LaGuardia. Should a problem 

begin to materialize, the FAA believes 

that there will be sufficient time to 

adopt an amendment to this Order that 

would prevent undue congestion. 

Assignment of Operating 

Authorizations 16

Under ordering paragraph 3 of the 

proposed Order, an Operating 

Authorization would be assigned to the 

air carrier that holds the equivalent slot 

or slot exemption authority, or if a nonair carrier holds such authority to the air 

carrier assigned the operational 

authority by the non-air carrier. The 

FAA will use the records of allocations 

under the High Density Rule or FAA 

slot exemptions rules as of January 1, 

2007. 

The FAA has determined to adopt its 

proposal to assign Operating 

Authorizations only to carriers. The 

FAA believes that it can more easily and 

effectively administer the Operating 

Authorization regime if the operating 

rights are held only by carriers. Because 

this provision raised several questions 

of applicability, the FAA provides the 

following clarification. 

Each slot currently has a ‘‘holder’’

status and an ‘‘operator’’ status. The 

same air carrier might be both holder 

and operator of a slot (or Operating 

Authorization). In many cases, however, 

the air carrier holder transfers the 

operator status to another carrier on a 

one-for-one basis for a slot at another 

time, on a lease, or for operation by a 

regional/commuter affiliate air carrier. 

Under the HDR, some slots also are held 

by non-air carrier entities who arrange 

for a carrier to operate the slots. 

Historically, transfer of ‘‘operator’’

status from a non-air carrier holder to an 

air carrier has been for a multi-year 

period. 

If a carrier is using a slot ‘‘held’’ by 

another carrier, the Operating 

Authorization will be assigned to the 

carrier who actually holds the slot, i.e., 

the air carrier that has operational 

authority, assigned by the FAA, to 

conduct scheduled operations at 

LaGuardia on a particular day of the 

week, during a specific time of the day. 

In other words, carriers that currently 

‘‘hold’’ slots or slot exemptions will 

continue to ‘‘hold’’ the equivalent 

Operating Authorizations under the 

Order even if those authorizations are 

currently leased or licensed to other 

airlines for scheduled flight operations 

at LaGuardia. If a non-air carrier holds 

the slot, the FAA will assign the 

Operating Authorization to the carrier 

that was directly authorized by the nonair carrier to operate the slot even if that 

carrier subsequently transferred the slot 

temporarily to another carrier under the 

HDR. As discussed under the following 

‘‘Secondary Market’’ section, the FAA is 

prohibiting the buying and selling of 

Operating Authorizations; therefore, the 

‘‘holder’’ status remains with the 

initially assigned carrier under this 

Order unless an Operating 

Authorization is returned or withdrawn 

by FAA for nonuse. 

In the case of AIR–21 slot exemptions 

allocated for service between LaGuardia 

and small hub and non-hub airports, the 

initial allocations were made to 

marketing air carrier groups including 

American/American Eagle, Delta/Delta 

Connection, Northwest/Northwest 

Airlink, and U.S. Airways/US Airways 

Express. The particular air carrier 

providing the service within those 

groups may have changed from time to 

time but the marketing carrier has 

remained the same. Therefore, in these 

cases, the FAA will assign Operating 

Authorizations to the primary marketing 

air carrier, i.e., American Airlines, Delta 

Air Lines, Northwest Airlines, and U.S. 

Airways. 

ATA asked whether the FAA would 

interpret an air carrier holder as 

including subsidiaries or affiliates of 

certificated air carriers that now hold 

slots. ATA provided the following 

example: Calair L.L.C., a wholly-owned 

subsidiary of Continental Airlines, 

currently holds the slots under the HDR 

that are operated by Continental. Calair 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 248 / Wednesday, December 27, 2006 / Notices 77857 

17 71 FR 51382 (August 29, 2006). 

18 71 FR 60600 (October 13, 2006). 

19Because the FAA is adopting this Order 

without a fixed expiration date, the latest reversion 

date of any approved leases, trades, or other 

transfers will coincide with the Order’s expiration. 

is not a certificated air carrier. As 

indicated in the proposed LaGuardia 

Order and similar rulemaking 

proceedings for Chicago O’Hare, the 

FAA believes that the assignment of 

operational authority under FAA 

adopted capacity limitations should be 

restricted to air carriers. In fact, the FAA 

did not assign slots to non-air carriers 

under the HDR’that was accomplished 

solely through carrier transactions in the 

secondary market. However, the FAA 

will look at the chain of ownership and 

see if there is a direct relationship 

between the affiliate or subsidiary to a 

certificated air carrier. Thus, in this 

example and under the provisions of 

this Order, Calair cannot receive the 

initial assignment of Operating 

Authorizations because it is not a 

certificated air carrier; rather the 

Operating Authorizations would be 

given to Continental because it would 

be the air carrier with the most direct 

relationship with Calair. In instances 

where the affiliate or subsidiary 

organization is owned by more than one 

air carrier, the air carriers will have to 

notify the FAA prior to the assignment 

of Operating Authorizations whom they 

want designated as the ‘‘holder’’. 

Alternatively, if a carrier is operating 

a slot that is held by an entity that is not 

a certificated carrier, and the holder has 

no direct relationship with a parent 

airline company, the Operating 

Authorization will be assigned to the 

carrier designated as the operator by the 

non-air carrier holder under the HDR. 

This recognizes that a non-air carrier 

slot holder cannot operate the slots 

because actual flight operations must be 

by an air carrier. The FAA does not 

agree with certain commenters’claims 

that this allocation of Operating 

Authorizations will interfere with ongoing business relationships. Carriers 

and other persons have long known that 

any rights held under the slot rules 

would end on December 31, 2006. The 

statutory termination date for the slot 

rules has meant that all financial and 

security interests in slots will inevitably 

end on that date, so no one could have 

reasonably expected that existing 

business and financial arrangements 

based on the slot rules could continue 

after this year. In any event, this Order 

is not intended to prohibit an air carrier 

from contractually arranging to pledge 

an interest in an Operating 

Authorization to a person, for use as 

collateral or otherwise, for the duration 

of the Order. 

The Republic Group asked that trusts 

be recognized under the Order. 

Specifically, we were asked to allow for 

Operating Authorizations to be held by 

trust so long as the beneficial ownership 

of the Operating Authorizations is held 

by an air carrier. The FAA is unsure 

how these types of trust operate in the 

market place, how they would differ 

from other arrangements whereby nonair carriers might seek to hold Operating 

Authorizations, what documentation 

might be required in order to meet any 

standards adopted by the FAA, and 

whether alternative agreements could 

readily be crafted to replace a trust. The 

Republic Group did not provide 

sufficient background information in 

order for us to make an educated 

decision distinguishing the requested 

beneficial trust scenario from other 

potential non-air carrier holders. 

Secondary Market 

The slot rules have a buy-sell 

provision that allows carriers to buy and 

sell slots for consideration. The 

recently-adopted rules limiting 

operations at O’Hare permit buying and 

selling of operating rights (‘‘arrival 

authorizations’’), but only under a 

blind-auction procedure overseen by the 

FAA.17 Our proposal on long-term rules 

for LaGuardia proposed a similar blindauction requirement but also asked for 

comment on whether carriers should be 

able to buy and sell operating rights 

directly, as they have been able to do 

under the slot rules. Our order, 

however, proposed to allow carriers 

only to engage in one-for-one trades of 

Operating Authorizations and to lease 

Operating Authorizations, but stated 

that any such trade or lease would 

terminate when the Order terminated. 

All air carriers and carrier 

associations, except for AirTran and 

ACAA, requested that the FAA permit 

the transfer and trading of Operating 

Authorizations without restriction. 

Commenters pointed to the FAA rules 

permitting such exchanges under the 

HDR and a recent amendment to the 

FAA Order on scheduling limitations at 

Chicago O’Hare.18 AirTran and ACAA, 

on the other hand, supported limits on 

the buying/selling and leasing of 

Operating Authorizations because they 

believe it would increase competition. 

At a minimum, they argued that any 

sales of Operating Authorizations must 

be made through a blind-auction 

process similar to the procedures 

required under the secondary market for 

arrival authorization at Chicago O’Hare 

and the proposed rule for LaGuardia. 

The FAA has considered a secondary 

market that permitted the purchase and 

sale of Operating Authorizations. We 

have assessed whether we should allow 

leases, trades, and transfers to extend 

beyond the duration of the Order. We 

also have considered whether a blind 

transfer mechanism similar to the one 

adopted for Chicago O’Hare would 

address the concerns raised by ACAA 

and AirTran even if Operating 

Authorizations were not subject to 

expiring lives under the Order. 

The FAA has decided to permit leases 

and trades of Operating Authorizations 

provided that all Operating 

Authorizations revert no later than the 

expiration of this Order.19 Permanent 

sales, purchases, or transfers of 

Operating Authorizations will not be 

permitted. We also are clarifying that 

carriers may offer any form of 

consideration in the lease and trade 

transactions negotiated under this 

Order. 

This Order is not intended to create 

a long-term solution for LaGuardia 

congestion. Because the Operating 

Authorizations established under this 

Order should not create long-term rights 

at LaGuardia, the FAA does not wish to 

allow or encourage carriers to engage in 

transactions that assume that a carrier 

purchasing Operating Authorizations, or 

leasing them under a long-term lease, 

will acquire potential rights to continue 

operating flights after this Order is 

replaced by a new rule. The FAA 

determined that only through a limited 

secondary market permitting temporary 

transfers of Operating Authorizations 

could we protect various aspects of the 

proposed rule for LaGuardia, including 

the various proposals regarding small 

community access and the initial 

assignment of Operating Authorizations. 

The FAA is aware there is potential for 

changes to small community service 

levels during the life of the Order. 

Although the FAA proposed in the 

NPRM a category of Operating 

Authorizations reserved for use to small 

communities based on October 2006 

services, we believe the likelihood of 

small community service change 

increases if we were to permit the 

permanent buying and selling of 

Operating Authorizations. While 

prohibiting the permanent or long-term 

transfer of Operating Authorizations 

under the Order does not prevent small 

community impacts, it does reduce the 

likelihood. 

Minimum Use Requirements 

The FAA proposed that Operating 

Authorizations be subject to a minimum 

use requirement of 80 percent over a 

consecutive two-month reporting 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
77858 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 248 / Wednesday, December 27, 2006 / Notices 

20The FAA recognizes this conflicts with the 

proposed rule for LaGuardia which uses slot 

holdings and operations during October 1–6, 2006, 

as the base for initial assignment of Operating 

Authorizations at the effective date of the rule. 

Similarly, the FAA recognizes that a carrier that has 

an Operating Authorization withdrawn for nonuse 

during the duration of the Order should not be 

assigned an equivalent Operating Authorization at 

the effective date of the rule. The FAA will resolve 

these issues during our rulemaking proceedings. 

period. Operating Authorizations not 

meeting this minimum would be 

withdrawn by the FAA and would be 

reallocated using a lottery. Most 

commenters supported an 80 percent 

use or lose requirement in order to 

ensure the use of the airport’s capacity. 

No one opposed having a minimum-use 

requirement. The Port Authority, 

however, supported increasing the 

minimum usage to 90 percent. 

Otherwise the FAA would be allowing 

a carrier to keep an afternoon Operating 

Authorization that it used for only 4.8 

flights per week when the slot rules now 

require that the equivalent slot be used 

for 5.6 flights per week. 

The FAA has decided to adopt the 

proposed 80 percent minimum usage 

requirement. Our experience in 

applying the HDR, as well as 

information on cancellations presented 

by the Port Authority, is that carriers 

typically operate slots well in excess of 

80 percent. In particular, weekday slots 

under the HDR have historically been 

used more than weekend ones. We have 

no reason to believe carrier usage 

patterns will not continue for the 

duration of this Order. Therefore, absent 

any demonstrated changes in service 

patterns, we are reluctant to increase the 

usage requirement beyond the proposed 

80 percent for the duration of this 

Order. We note that the FAA’s 

minimum-use requirement in its O’Hare 

rules adopted the 80 percent level and 

that level is prescribed at slot-controlled 

airports throughout much of the world. 

United Airlines requested 

clarification on whether a carrier 

holding an Operating Authorization for 

scheduled service could use it for 

unscheduled service, and if so, report it 

on use or lose reports. The FAA clarifies 

that an air carrier may do as United 

seeks’operate charters and other 

unscheduled services and have it count 

toward minimum usage. 

The FAA also proposed that any 

Operating Authorizations withdrawn for 

failing to meet the minimum usage 

requirements would be reallocated by 

lottery using the procedures in 14 CFR 

93.225. The FAA is adopting this 

procedure with one change to provide 

that any Operating Authorizations 

assigned by lottery to new entrants and 

limited incumbents under the Order 

would not automatically revert to the 

FAA at the expiration of this Order.20 A 

new entrant/limited incumbent carrier 

might choose not to initiate service 

under the Order if it could not continue 

that service after a final rule. This 

would be contrary to past FAA actions 

to promote new entry and competition. 

Finally, the proposed Order provided 

that the Administrator could waive the 

80 percent usage requirement in the 

event of a highly unusual and 

unpredictable condition beyond the 

control of the carrier and which exists 

for a period of 5 consecutive days or 

more. We adopt the proposal to permit 

usage waivers based on unusual 

circumstances. 

Provisions for New Entrants and Limited 

Incumbents 

AirTran and ACAA requested several 

modifications to the proposed Order 

that would give limited incumbent air 

carriers and new entrants a better 

opportunity to obtain Operating 

Authorizations. As discussed elsewhere 

in this Order, they also urged the FAA 

to adopt other provisions, such as a 

blind-auction procedure for any sales of 

Operating Authorizations that would 

give airlines with a smaller presence at 

LaGuardia a better chance to compete 

with the airport’s dominant carriers. 

Insofar as awarding additional 

Operating Authorizations to smaller 

carriers is concerned, ACAA asked that 

the FAA: 

• Withdraw ten percent of all slots 

held by carriers holding more than forty 

(40) slots and distribute those slots to 

limited incumbents operating aircraft 

with at least 110 seats; 

• Allow limited incumbent carriers 

that operated slots held by other carriers 

during the October 1–6, 2006, period for 

full-size aircraft service to small 

communities to continue using those 

slots until a final rule is issued. 

ACAA argued that its reallocation 

proposal was reasonable, because, 

among other things, the Order proposed 

to end the requirements that the major 

carriers use their slot exemptions only 

for flights operated to smaller 

communities with smaller aircraft. 

AirTran further asks that the FAA 

provide at least ten additional Operating 

Authorizations to each limited 

incumbent carrier to operate full-size 

jets. AirTran did not indicate how the 

FAA would create these authorizations 

while maintaining our cap on 

operations. Alternatively, they asked 

that we withdraw Operating 

Authorizations from other larger 

carriers. Senator Richard G. Lugar and 

Congresswoman Julia M. Carson 

supported an allocation of additional 

operating authority to permit AirTran to 

serve the LaGuardia/Indianapolis 

market. 

The reallocations proposed for by 

ACAA and AirTran incorporate 

elements of the NPRM that are currently 

subject to comment. The rulemaking, 

not this Order, is intended to establish 

flight restrictions for the long term at 

LaGuardia. In the rulemaking the FAA 

has proposed that Operating 

Authorizations expire in a periodic 

fashion and be subject to reallocation. 

The pending rulemaking will give 

interested persons a better opportunity 

to present their economic and policy 

views on potential reallocation and 

withdrawal issues, and enable the FAA 

to consider such matters more fully on 

the basis of a better record. The FAA 

accordingly prefers to consider in that 

proceeding whether LaGuardia 

operating rights should be reallocated. 

Small Community Service 

The Order did not propose to 

designate Operating Authorizations that 

would be restricted to small community 

service or limited to smaller aircraft. 

The HDR air carrier and commuter slot 

categories would be merged into a single 

category of Operating Authorizations. 

Likewise, AIR–21 restrictions granting 

certain slot exemptions for services to 

small hub and non-hub airports using 

smaller aircraft would expire along with 

the HDR. Therefore, carriers could 

choose to adjust existing schedules and 

markets during the duration of this 

Order without regard to the market and 

aircraft restrictions that existed under 

the HDR. In addition to several 

proposals that urge the FAA to grant 

Operating Authorizations for service to 

specific communities, as discussed 

below, several commenters—AirTran, 

Colgan Air, ACAA, and the Port 

Authority—argued that the FAA should 

adopt provisions that would protect 

service to small community airports 

while the Order is in effect. Their 

comments included suggestions such as 

retaining the restrictions requiring AIR–

21 slot exemptions to be used for flights 

to small hub and non-hub airports. 

The FAA shares the concerns about 

continuing LaGuardia service to smaller 

communities. The commuter slot pool 

under the HDR was established, in part, 

to recognize historic service to small 

communities and provide a level of 

protection for that service by restricting 

the use of the slots with larger turbojet 

aircraft typically used for larger 

communities. The AIR–21 slot 

exemption authority reflected 

congressional interest for increased 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 248 / Wednesday, December 27, 2006 / Notices 77859 

21The City of Canton, the Medina County 

Economic Development Corporation, and the Stark 

Development Board, Inc. among others also support 

the request. 

22 49 U.S.C. 41718 (a) and (b). 

service opportunities to small 

communities seeking access to 

LaGuardia, and the FAA’s lottery system 

for allocating those exemptions 

provided for an equitable distribution of 

exemptions between carriers serving 

small communities and new entrants. 

The pending rulemaking includes 

three options for ensuring that small 

communities will continue to have 

service to LaGuardia. The number and 

timing of operations conducted by air 

carriers to the various small hub and 

non-hub airports during October 1–6, 

2006, would be the base period for 

establishing the small community pool 

under the final rule. We expect to 

receive comments under that 

proceeding as to the appropriate level of 

protection for small communities served 

from LaGuardia Airport. Therefore, the 

FAA did not propose a specific set-aside 

for small communities under the Order 

since the appropriateness and make-up 

of such a designation was already the 

subject of a rulemaking that is intended 

to be more comprehensive and longterm. Some of the comments on the 

proposed Order suggest the FAA should 

continue the AIR–21 limits on small 

hub and non-hub airport slot 

exemptions while the comments on the 

NPRM are considered. Absent those 

restrictions, carriers would be free to 

use larger aircraft to serve larger size 

airports and might discontinue the 

small community services gained under 

AIR–21. While the FAA understands 

there is a potential for this to occur, the 

final rule, in all probability, would use 

for its initial assignment of Operating 

Authorizations a base period when 

various protections existed for small 

community service. Thus, carriers might 

alter service plans to small hub and 

non-hub airports during the Order only 

to face a final rule designating certain 

Operating Authorizations for historic 

small community service levels. Carriers 

may consider the benefits of schedule 

stability at smaller airports during the 

duration of this Order. Furthermore, the 

FAA agrees with the Port Authority’s 

suggestion that it should monitor 

changes in small community service 

during the term of this Order. The FAA 

intends to do so. 

Finally, as indicated earlier, the FAA 

is not increasing the proposed hourly 

limits on flight operations in order to 

ensure that small communities would 

continue to have all of the service at 

LaGuardia that they have had in the 

past. Such an accommodation would 

increase delays and fail to meet the 

congestion management objectives of 

this Order. The airport’s capacity 

limitations prevent us from authorizing 

additional flights, even when they 

would serve a worthy purpose. 

Flights to Specific Communities 

Several commenters urged the FAA to 

adopt provisions that would protect 

service to small community airports 

while the Order is in effect. Newport 

News/Williamsburg Airport and AkronCanton Airport each filed comments 

requesting that the FAA allocate two 

Operating Authorizations to each 

airport. They would allow AirTran to 

reinstate roundtrip flights that it can no 

longer operate because it does not hold 

or lease the necessary slots, and 

accordingly, will not be assigned 

operating authorizations for such 

operations under this Order.21

The FAA is unwilling in this Order to 

create additional Operating 

Authorizations to ensure that specific 

communities obtain additional service 

to LaGuardia. While the FAA 

understands the desire of the AkronCanton and Newport News/ 

Williamsburg groups to maintain the 

recent air service levels between 

LaGuardia and their respective airports, 

the FAA has not used congestion 

management rules to provide service to 

specific communities. Like a slot under 

the HDR, an Operating Authorization 

under the Order is the operation 

authority assigned by the FAA to a 

carrier to conduct a scheduled arrival or 

departure operation and has no specific 

city-pair limitations. To honor the 

request made by these airports would be 

tantamount to a radical change in the 

congestion management program. 

Further, unlike the situation at Ronald 

Reagan Washington National Airport, 

where the Department of Transportation 

is directed to grant certain slot 

exemptions for ‘‘selected routes’’

beyond the perimeter and to airports 

within the perimeter,22 there is not such 

statutory basis for the FAA to require 

that a carrier operate to a certain market 

from LaGuardia. The FAA therefore 

declines to do adopt the suggestion of 

Akron-Canton and Newport News/ 

Williamsburg. 

Unscheduled Operations 

In addition to limits on scheduled 

operations, the FAA proposed adopting 

limits for unscheduled operations to 

ensure that demand is spread 

reasonably throughout the day. The 

FAA proposed the same hourly limits 

that applied under the HDR using 

similar reservation procedures 

described in FAA Advisory Circular 93–

1, ‘‘Reservations for Unscheduled 

Operations at High Density Traffic 

Airports.’’ The FAA’s Airport 

Reservation Office at the David J. Hurley 

Air Traffic Control System Command 

Center would manage the reservation 

process using the existing e-CVRS 

system. 

No comments were received opposing 

the establishment of the reservation 

requirements and proposed procedures 

for allocating reservations for 

unscheduled flights. United Airlines 

commented that the number of hourly 

reservations established for 

unscheduled operations conflicts with 

other stated agency objectives of 

ensuring efficient utilization of limited 

airport resources and increasing 

passenger throughput. We proposed the 

historic set aside of six reservations for 

unscheduled operations and adopt this 

allocation under this final Order, 

because it is consistent with the 

treatment of the scheduled operations 

during the time this order will be 

temporarily in place. As a result, the 

FAA is adopting the proposed allocation 

for unscheduled flights. 

United Airlines also requested 

clarification that it could conduct 

charters and other unscheduled 

operations using its Operating 

Authorizations for scheduled service. 

We agreed and addressed United’s 

comment in the section on Minimum 

Use. 

The FAA is adopting the proposed 

limits and reservation procedures with 

minor editorial changes. Information on 

procedures for obtaining the appropriate 

reservations for unscheduled flights will 

be available prior to the effective date of 

this Order via the Internet on the FAA’s 

Web site at http://www.fly.faa.gov/ecvrs. 

III. Conclusion 

On September 11, 2006, the FAA 

issued a proposed Order, which 

solicited written views on the FAA’s 

tentative determination to place 

temporary limitations on flight 

operations at LaGuardia Airport. After 

considering the responses, the FAA has 

determined to issue a final Order 

adopting operating limitations at New 

York LaGuardia Airport. 

A. Scheduled Operations 

With respect to scheduled operations 

at LaGuardia: 

1. The final Order governs scheduled 

arrivals and departures, except 

helicopters, at LaGuardia from 6 a.m. 

through 9:59 p.m., Eastern Time, 

Monday through Friday and from 12 

noon through 9:59 p.m., Eastern Time, 

Sunday. Seventy-five (75) Operating 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
77860 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 248 / Wednesday, December 27, 2006 / Notices 

23Unscheduled operations are operations other 

than those regularly conducted by an air carrier 

between LaGuardia and another service point. 

Unscheduled operations include general aviation, 

public aircraft, military, charter, ferry, and 

positioning flights. Helicopter operations are 

excluded from the reservation requirement. 

Reservations for unscheduled flights operating 

under visual flight rules (VFR) are granted when the 

aircraft receives clearance from air traffic control to 

land or depart LaGuardia. Reservations for 

unscheduled VFR flights are not included in the 

limits for unscheduled operators. 

Authorizations are available per hour 

and will be assigned by the FAA on a 

30-minute basis. 

2. The final Order takes effect on 

January 1, 2007, and will expire at the 

first change of scheduling season, as 

defined in 14 CFR, part 93, subpart B, 

occurring no less than 90 days after the 

issuance of a final rule regulating 

congestion at LaGuardia. 

3. The FAA will assign operating 

authority to conduct an arrival or a 

departure at LaGuardia during the 

affected hours to the air carrier that 

holds equivalent slot or slot exemption 

authority under the High Density Rule 

or FAA slot exemption rules as of 

December 31, 2006; to the primary 

marketing air carrier in the case of AIR–

21 small hub/non-hub airport slot 

exemptions; or to the air carrier 

operating the flights as of December 31, 

2006, in the case of a slot held by a nonair carrier. If the slot is held by a 

subsidiary or affiliate of an air carrier, 

the FAA will assign the operating 

authority to the carrier that has the most 

direct relationship with that non-air 

carrier holder. The FAA will not assign 

operating authority under the final 

Order to any person or entity other than 

a certificated U.S. or foreign air carrier 

with appropriate economic authority to 

conduct scheduled passenger service 

and FAA operating authority under 14 

CFR part 121, 129, or 135. The Chief 

Counsel of the FAA will be the final 

decision maker regarding the initial 

assignment of Operating Authorizations. 

4. For administrative tracking 

purposes only, the FAA will assign an 

identification number to each Operating 

Authorization. 

5. An air carrier can lease or trade an 

Operating Authorization to another 

carrier for any consideration, not to 

exceed the duration of the final Order. 

Notice of a trade or lease under this 

paragraph would be submitted in 

writing to the FAA Slot Administration 

Office, facsimile (202) 267–7277 or email 7-AWA-Slotadmin@faa.gov, and 

must come from a designated 

representative of each air carrier. The air 

carriers are required to receive written 

confirmation from the FAA prior to 

operating under the traded operating 

authority. 

6. Every air carrier holding an 

Operating Authorization must forward 

in writing to the FAA Slot 

Administration Office a list of all 

Operating Authorizations held by the 

carrier along with a listing of the 

Operating Authorizations actually 

operated for each day of the 2-month 

reporting period within 14 days after the 

last day of the 2-month reporting period 

beginning January 1 and every 2 months 

thereafter. Any Operating Authorization 

not used at least 80 percent of the time 

over a two-month period will be 

withdrawn by the FAA. The FAA 

Administrator can waive the 80 percent 

usage requirement in the event of a 

highly unusual and unpredictable 

condition which is beyond the control 

of the carrier and which exists for a 

period of 5 consecutive days or more. 

7. In the event that Operating 

Authorizations are withdrawn for nonuse, surrendered to the FAA or are 

unassigned, the FAA will determine 

whether any of the available Operating 

Authorizations should be reallocated. If 

so, the FAA will conduct a lottery using 

the provisions specified under 14 CFR 

93.225. The FAA may retime an 

Operating Authorization prior to 

reallocation in order to address 

operational needs. When the final Order 

expires, any Operating Authorizations 

reassigned under this paragraph, except 

those assigned to new entrants or 

limited incumbents, will revert to the 

FAA for reallocation according to the 

reallocation mechanism prescribed in 

the final rule that succeeds the final 

Order. 

8. The FAA will enforce the final 

Order through an enforcement action 

seeking a civil penalty under 49 U.S.C. 

46301(a). An air carrier that is not a 

small business as defined in the Small 

Business Act, 15 U.S.C. 632, would be 

liable for a civil penalty of up to $25,000 

for every day that it violates the limits 

set forth in the final Order. An air 

carrier that is a small business as 

defined in the Small Business Act 

would be liable for a civil penalty of up 

to $10,000 for every day that it violates 

the limits set forth in the final Order. 

The FAA also could file a civil action 

in U.S. District Court, under 49 U.S.C. 

46106, 46107, seeking to enjoin any air 

carrier from violating the terms of the 

final Order. 

B. Unscheduled Operations 23

With respect to unscheduled flight 

operations at LaGuardia: 

1. The final Order applies to all 

operators of unscheduled flights, except 

helicopter operations, at LaGuardia from 

6 a.m. through 9:59 p.m., Eastern Time, 

Monday through Friday and from 12 

noon through 9:59 p.m., Eastern Time, 

Sunday. 

2. The final Order takes effect on 

January 1, 2007, and will expire at the 

first change of scheduling season 

occurring no less than 90 days after the 

issuance of a final rule regulating 

congestion at LaGuardia. 

3. No person can operate an aircraft 

other than a helicopter to or from 

LaGuardia unless the operator has 

received, for that unscheduled 

operation, a reservation that is assigned 

by the David J. Hurley Air Traffic 

Control System Command Center’s 

Airport Reservation Office (ARO). 

Additional information on procedures 

for obtaining a reservation is available 

via the Internet at http:// 

www.fly.faa.gov/ecvrs. 

4. Six (6) reservations are available 

per hour for unscheduled operations at 

LaGuardia. The ARO will assign 

reservations on a 30-minute basis. 

5. The ARO receives and processes all 

reservation requests. Reservations are 

assigned on a ‘‘first-come, first-served’’

basis, determined as of the time that the 

ARO receives the request. A 

cancellation of any reservation that will 

not be used as assigned is required. 

6. Filing a request for a reservation 

does not constitute the filing of an 

instrument flight rules (IFR) flight plan, 

as separately required by regulation. 

After the reservation is obtained, an IFR 

flight plan can be filed. The IFR flight 

plan must include the reservation 

number in the ‘‘remarks’’ section. 

7. Air Traffic Control will 

accommodate declared emergencies 

without regard to reservations. Nonemergency flights in direct support of 

national security, law enforcement, 

military aircraft operations, or publicuse aircraft operations will be 

accommodated above the reservation 

limits with the prior approval of the 

Vice President, System Operations 

Services, Air Traffic Organization. 

Procedures for obtaining the appropriate 

reservation for such flights are available 

via the Internet at http:// 

www.fly.faa.gov/ecvrs. 

8. Notwithstanding the limits in 

paragraph 4, if the Air Traffic 

Organization determines that air traffic 

control, weather, and capacity 

conditions are favorable and significant 

delay is not likely, the FAA can 

accommodate additional reservations 

over a specific period. Unused 

Operating Authorizations can also be 

temporarily made available for 

unscheduled operations. Reservations 

for additional operations are obtained 

through the ARO. 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 248 / Wednesday, December 27, 2006 / Notices 77861 

9. Reservations cannot be bought, 

sold, or leased. 

Issued in Washington, DC, on December 

13, 2006. 

Rebecca Byers MacPherson, 

Assistant Chief Counsel for Regulation. 

[FR Doc. 06–9863 Filed 12–20–06; 3:29 pm] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

Second Meeting, Special Committee 

212, Helicopter Terrain Awareness and 

Warning System (HTWAS) 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of RTCA Special 

Committee 212, Helicopter Terrain 

Awareness and Warning System 

(HTWAS). 

SUMMARY: The FAA is issuing this notice 

to advise the public of RTCA Special 

Committee 212, Helicopter Terrain 

Awareness and Warning System 

(HTWAS). 

DATES: The meeting will be held January 

25, 2007, from 9 a.m.–11 a.m. 

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at 

EADS North America, 1616 N. Fort 

Myer Drive, Suite 1600, Arlington, VA 

22209. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

RTCA Secretariat, 1828 L Street, NW., 

Suite 805, Washington, DC 20036; 

telephone (202) 833–9339; fax (202) 

833–9434; Web site http://www.rtca.org. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant 

to section 10(a)(2) of the Federal 

Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92–

463, 5 U.S.C., Appendix 2), notice is 

hereby given for a Special Committee 

212 meeting. The agenda will include: 

• January 25: 

• Opening Planary Session (Welcome, 

Introductions, and Administrative 

Remarks, Secretary Selection, 

Agenda Overview). 

• Summary of Working Group 

Activities. 

• KSN Server. 

• Presentation on TAWS (Previous 

Terrain Awareness and Warning 

System). 

• Closing Plenary Session (Other 

Business, Establish Agenda, Date 

and Place of Next Meeting, 

Adjourn). 

Attendance is open to the interested 

public but limited to space availability. 

Pre-Registration for this meeting is not 

required for attendance but is desired 

and can be done through the RTCA 

secretariat. With the approval of the 

chairmen, members of the public may 

present oral statements at the meeting. 

Persons wishing to present statements 

or obtain information should contact the 

person listed in the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT section. Members 

of the public may present a written 

statement to the committee at any time. 

Issued in Washington, DC, on December 

14, 2006. 

Francisco Estrada C., 

RTCA Advisory Committee. 

[FR Doc. 06–9859 Filed 12–26–06; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–M 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

RTCA Special Committee 159: Global 

Positioning System (GPS) 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of RTCA Special 

Committee 159 meeting. 

SUMMARY: The FAA is issuing this notice 

to advise the public of a meeting of 

RTCA Special Committee 159: Global 

Positioning System. 

DATES: The meeting will be held January 

9–12, 2007, from 9 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. 

(unless stated otherwise). 

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at 

RTCA, Inc., 1828 L Street, NW., Suite 

805, Washington, DC 20036. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

RTCA Secretariat, 1828 L Street, NW., 

Suite 805, Washington, DC, 20036; 

telephone (202) 833–9339; fax (202) 

833–9434; Web site http://www.rtca.org. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant 

to section 10(a)(2) of the Federal 

Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92–

463, 5 U.S.C., Appendix 2), notice is 

hereby given for a Special Committee 

159 meeting. Note: Specific working 

group sessions will be held January 9–

12. The plenary agenda will include: 

• January 12: 

• Opening Plenary Session (Welcome 

and Introductory Remarks, Approve 

Minutes of Previous Meeting). 

• Review Working Group (WG) 

Progress and Identify Issues for 

Resolution. 

• Global Positioning System 

(GPS)/3rd Civil Frequency (WG–1). 

• GPS/Wide Area Augmentation 

System (WAAS)(WG–2). 

• GPS/GLONASS (WG–2A). 

• GPS/Inertial (WG–2C). 

• GPS/Precision Landing Guidance 

(WG–4). 

• GPS/Airport Surface Surveillance 

(WG–5). 

• GPS/Interference (WG–6). 

• GPS/Antennas (WG–7). 

• GPS/GRAS (WG–8). 

• Review of EUROCAE activities. 

• Closing Plenary Session 

(Assignment/Review of Future 

Work, Other Business, Date and 

Place of Next Meeting). 

Attendance is open to the interested 

public but limited to space availability. 

With the approval of the chairmen, 

members of the public may present oral 

statements at the meeting. Persons 

wishing to present statements or obtain 

information should contact the person 

listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT section. Members of the public 

may present a written statement to the 

committee at any time. 

Issued in Washington, DC, on December 

14, 2006. 

Francisco Estrada C., 

RTCA Advisory Committee. 

[FR Doc. 06–9860 Filed 12–26–06; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–M 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

Eighth Meeting, RTCA Special 

Committee 204: 406 MHz Emergency 

Locator Transmitters 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of RTCA Special 

Committee 204 meeting. 

SUMMARY: The FAA is issuing this notice 

to advise the public of a meeting of 

RTCA Special Committee 204: 406 MHz 

Emergency Locator Transmitters. 

DATES: The meeting will be held on 

January 16–17, 2007, from 8:30 a.m. to 

4:30 p.m. 

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at 

RTCA, Inc., Colson Board Room, 1828 L 

Street, NW., Suite 805, Washington, DC 

20036–533. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

RTCA Secretariat, 1828 L Street, NW., 

Suite 805, Washington, DC 20036–5133; 

telephone (202) 833–9339; fax (202) 

833–9434; Web site http://www.rtca.org. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant 

to section 10(a)(2) of the Federal 

Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92–

463, 5 U.S.C., Appendix 2), notice is 

hereby given for a Special Committee 

202 meeting. The agenda will include: 

• January 16–17: 

• Opening Session (Welcome, 

Introductory and Administrative 

Remarks, Review Agenda, Review 

Terms of Reference/Status). 

• Approval of Summary for the 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES