Order 2014-12-10

Served: December 15, 2014

 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

 OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

 WASHINGTON, D.C.

Issued by the Department of Transportation

on the 15th day of December, 2014

ORDER REALLOCATING WITHIN-PERIMETER SLOT EXEMPTIONS AT 

RONALD REAGAN WASHINGTON NATIONAL AIRPORT

SUMMARY

By this Order, the Department is reallocating two within-perimeter slot exemptions at Ronald 

Reagan Washington National Airport (DCA) to Southwest Airlines Co. (Southwest) to 

operate one daily nonstop round trip to Kansas City International Airport (MCI) in Kansas 

City, Missouri. 

BACKGROUND

The Wendell H. Ford Aviation Investment and Reform Act for the 21st Century, as amended 

by the Vision 100 Century of Aviation Reauthorization Act of 2003 (Vision 100), directs the 

Department to grant slot exemptions at DCA, both within and beyond the airport’s 1,250-

mile perimeter. These grants are limited in number, and selections of air carriers are made 

through application of specified statutory criteria. See 49 U.S.C. § 41718. 

By Order 2012-3-8 (DOT March 13, 2012), the Department issued two within-perimeter slot 

exemptions to Republic Airline Inc. (Republic) pursuant to 49 U.S.C. § 41718(b) to provide 

Applications of:

SOUTHWEST AIRLINES CO.;

JETBLUE AIRWAYS CORPORATION;

US AIRWAYS INC.; and 

PEOPLE EXPRESS AIRLINES, INC.

For exemptions from 14 C.F.R. Part 93, Subparts 

K and S, pursuant to 49 U.S.C. § 41718(b), 

Special rules for Ronald Reagan Washington 

National Airport (within-perimeter slot 

exemptions)

Docket DOT-OST-2000-7182
-2-

nonstop service between DCA and MCI. Republic provided the service under the brand of 

its then-affiliate Frontier Airlines. On January 24, 2014, Republic informed the Department 

by letter that, due to the sale of Frontier, the service between DCA and MCI would be 

discontinued effective February 1, 2014, and the slot exemptions returned for reallocation. 

After receipt of the notice from Republic, the Department granted a request from Southwest 

Airlines for pendente lite authority to operate nonstop service between DCA and MCI, using 

the two within-perimeter slot exemptions authorized by 49 U.S.C. § 41718(b) and previously 

issued to Republic, from February 1, 2014, until such time as a final selection decision is 

made in this reallocation proceeding and the selected carrier initiates service. As the 

Department stated in the Order Confirming Grant of Temporary Slot Exemption Authority, 

Order 2014-1-6 (January 27, 2014), a grant of pendente lite authority is one of temporary 

character and is intended to minimize any inconvenience to travelers and to ensure that the 

slot exemptions are not idled pending the Department’s decision on longer term authority. 

The Department’s grant to Southwest of temporary authority to operate the slot exemptions 

between DCA and MCI does not give the carrier any benefit or advantage in the 

Department’s application of the statutorily-mandated criteria in this reallocation proceeding. 

All applications receive full and fair comparative consideration of their merits under 49 

U.S.C. § 41718(b).

 

On March 5, 2014, the Department requested applications from air carriers using Stage 3 

aircraft to provide service to DCA from airports that were designated as medium hub, small 

hub, or nonhub airports in 19971 within the 1,250-mile perimeter established for civil 

operations at DCA under Title 49 U.S.C. § 49109.

The selection criteria applicable to granting slot exemptions are found in Title 49 U.S.C. § 

41718(b), which directs the Secretary to distribute within-perimeter slot exemptions in a 

manner that promotes air transportation: (1) by new entrant air carriers and limited 

incumbent air carriers;2 (2) to communities without existing nonstop air transportation to 

DCA; (3) to small communities; (4) that will provide competitive nonstop air transportation 

on a monopoly nonstop route to DCA; or (5) that will produce the maximum competitive 

benefits, including low fares. As the Department explained in Order 2012-7-26 (July 24, 

2012), each case is unique and the Department has the discretion to premise an award of 

within-perimeter slot exemptions on the satisfaction of less than the greatest number of 

criteria, or even one criterion, listed in Section 41718(b), based upon the Department’s 

analysis of the relative merits of each carrier’s proposal when evaluated under these criteria

and the fact and circumstances of the case at hand. 

With respect to airport size, Title 49 U.S.C. § 41718(c)(3) specifies additional requirements 

governing the grant of within-perimeter slot exemptions, requiring that “[o]f the exemptions 

granted under 49 U.S.C. § 41718: (A) without regard to the criteria contained in subsection 

 

1 Definitions of nonhub, small hub, and medium hub airports are provided under Title 49 U.S.C. §§

41714(h)(7), (8), and (9), which require that hub classifications be based on the Federal Aviation 

Administration’s Primary Airport Enplanement Activity Summary for Calendar Year 1997.

2 A new entrant carrier or limited incumbent carrier is an air carrier that holds or operates fewer than 40 slots or 

slot exemptions at DCA. See 49 U.S.C. §§ 41714(h)(3) and (5), as amended by the FAA Modernization and 

Reform Act of 2012, Pub. L. No. 112-95, 126 Stat. 11 (Feb. 14, 2012).
-3-

(b)(1), six shall be for air transportation to small hub airports and nonhub airports; (B) ten 

shall be for air transportation to medium hub and smaller airports; and (C) four shall be for 

air transportation to airports without regard to their size.” Under this provision, then, a 

maximum of four slot exemptions may be used to serve large hubs. Currently, all large hub 

opportunities have been allocated, as have the six exemptions specifically for small and 

nonhub airports. Therefore, to be eligible for an award under this proceeding, carriers must 

have proposed service with Stage 3 aircraft to a medium hub or smaller airport within the 

1,250-mile perimeter.

APPLICATIONS

As summarized below, the Department received applications from Southwest, JetBlue 

Airways Corporation (JetBlue), American Airlines, Inc. (American), and People Express 

Airlines, Inc. (People Express). The entire public record for this proceeding, including 

applications and responses, may be accessed online through the Federal Docket Management 

System at www.regulations.gov by performing a search for docket number DOT-OST-2000-

7182.

Southwest: Washington DCA-Kansas City, Missouri3

Southwest applied for the two available within-perimeter DCA slot exemptions for service 

between DCA and MCI. Southwest proposes to operate the route with a 143-seat Boeing 

737-700 aircraft. Southwest asserts that its proposed service would advance the statutory 

goals of Vision 100 by providing low-fare competition on what would otherwise be a 

monopoly route, significantly increasing capacity on an underserved route, and providing 

continuing one-stop, same-plane service to Oakland, California.

Currently, aside from Southwest’s service provided on a pendente lite basis, American

provides the only other nonstop service between DCA and MCI. Southwest contends that the 

average American one-way nonstop fare between DCA and MCI is $188, or about 28 percent

higher than the average Southwest DCA-MCI fare. Southwest also asserts that, by utilizing 

143-seat Boeing 737-700 aircraft, it would provide almost 50 percent of the seats in the 

market with just one daily roundtrip flight.

JetBlue: Washington DCA-Jacksonville, Florida4

JetBlue applied for the two available within-perimeter DCA slot exemptions for service

between DCA and the Jacksonville International Airport in Jacksonville, Florida (JAX). 

JetBlue would operate the route with a 100-seat Embraer E-190 aircraft. JetBlue claims that 

the DCA-JAX market is currently underserved and suffers as a result of American’s

monopoly in the market. American currently operates the route with a mixture of 50 to 80-

seat jets.5 JetBlue points to previous competition on the route by Delta Air Lines, a legacy 

carrier, which served to reduce fares and increase traffic. JetBlue claims that it would 

provide the maximum consumer benefits through increased service and lower fares. JetBlue 

asserts that its proposed one-way average fare of $110 would be 41 percent lower than the 

current American one-way fare of $185, resulting in $14.8 million in annual fare savings.

 3 Application of Southwest Airlines Co., DOT-OST-2000-7182-1989, March 25, 2014. 4 Application of JetBlue Airways Corporation, DOT-OST-2000-7182-1991, March 25, 2014. 5 According to September, 2014 published schedules (including weekend operations). 
-4-

American: Washington DCA-Islip, NY6

American applied for the two available within-perimeter DCA slot exemptions for service

between DCA and the Long Island MacArthur Airport in Islip, New York (ISP). American 

would operate the route with a Bombardier CRJ-200 aircraft with 50 passenger seats.7 

American contends that its application presents the Department with an opportunity to 

maintain air service to a small community that would otherwise lose it.8 American asserts

that the service generated approximately 40 passengers per-day, each-way. American states 

that, without DCA service at ISP, Long Island residents seeking air transportation to DCA

would be required to drive to LaGuardia or John. F. Kennedy airports.

People Express: Washington DCA-Myrtle Beach, SC and West Palm Beach, 

FL9

People Express filed an application to serve, on a seasonal basis, Myrtle Beach, South 

Carolina (April-October) and West Palm Beach, Florida (October-April). People Express

asserted that it is a proposed new entrant carrier that plans to begin scheduled operations 

throughout the northeast utilizing Boeing 737-400 aircraft. 

Summary of Comments

Answer of Southwest10

Southwest contends that it should be chosen over both JetBlue and American, claiming its 

proposed service would generate the greatest consumer benefits by serving the largest market 

with the largest aircraft. Southwest argues that the DCA-MCI origin and destination market 

is 29 percent larger than the DCA-JAX market, and the metropolitan population of Kansas 

City is 60 percent larger than that of Jacksonville. In addition, Southwest asserts that it 

would utilize an aircraft with 43 percent more seats than would JetBlue. Southwest also 

argues that the Kansas City market is far more underserved than Jacksonville, which, despite 

its smaller size, has 90 percent more daily seats to DCA than Kansas City would have 

without Southwest’s service. 

Southwest also argues that American’s application for Islip, NY, service should not be 

selected as American proposes to use the slot exemptions inefficiently with small aircraft. 

Additionally, Southwest claims that American, as the largest slot-holder at DCA, could 

choose to operate the service from its existing slot portfolio. Southwest further contends that 

its service would carry over 74,000 more annual passengers than would American’s proposed 

service.

 6 Application of American Airlines, Inc. for an Exemption (Washington, DC Reagan National Airport - Islip, 

Long Island MacArthur Airport, New York), DOT-OST-2000-7182-1990, March 25, 2014. 7 American notes that the flight would ultimately be operated by its regional affiliate American Eagle. In the 

interim, before the final integration of American and US Airways, the flight will be branded as either US 

Airways Express or American Eagle.

8 US Airways began service the route in March, 2012, however, the carrier ceased service on the route in July, 

2014.

9 Application of People Express Airlines, Inc. (Operated as PEOPLExpress by Vision Airlines), DOT-OST2000-7182-1988, March 18, 2014.

10 Answer of Southwest Airlines Co., DOT-OST-2000-7182-1993, April 3, 2014.
-5-

Consolidated Answer of JetBlue11

With regard to American’s application, JetBlue argues that the Department should not award 

additional exemptions to the already dominant carrier at DCA. JetBlue states that such an 

award would serve to reduce competition at DCA and would be contrary to the 

Congressional intent of the slot exemption statute.

JetBlue also claims its proposal is superior to Southwest’s in that JetBlue would best promote 

competition at DCA, provide the greatest consumer benefits, and the most government 

savings, due to the significant level of government and military travel in the market. JetBlue 

argues that Southwest no longer has the impact on fares that it once did. Additionally, 

JetBlue claims that its DCA service competes directly with the dominant carrier, American, 

96 percent of the time, while Southwest competes against American on only 33 percent of its 

DCA routes. JetBlue also claims its service would stimulate 33,259 more annual passengers 

and provide $8.4 million more in annual consumer savings than Southwest.

Consolidated Comments of American Airlines12

American argues that, of the applications in this proceeding, it best meets the statutory 

criteria in the slot exemption statute. American claims that it meets three out of the four 

applicable criteria.13 American contends that Islip would otherwise lose its only nonstop 

DCA service, that Islip is a small community based on the fact that it is a small-hub airport, 

and that American’s application would provide the greatest consumer benefits.

In support of its application, American argues that the Department has sought to maintain air 

service to small communities, particularly from DCA. American also claims that residents of 

Long Island strongly supported their direct DCA service prior to its termination by 

American, consistently choosing ISP over the longer drive to LaGuardia or John F. Kennedy 

airports. American also asserts that both MCI and JAX have existing DCA service and that 

ISP is the only community in the proceeding that would be left without DCA access unless 

awarded these exemptions. American argues that both Kansas City and Jacksonville have 

significantly more existing service than Islip and further argues that Southwest has 

mischaracterized its DCA-MCI fares and that JetBlue overstates its passenger stimulation 

estimates.

Sur-Reply of JetBlue14

JetBlue filed additional comments seeking to rebut Southwest’s claims. JetBlue argues that 

Southwest failed to take into account savings to existing customers when it calculated 

consumer savings. JetBlue further contends that Southwest no longer demonstrates the level

of market competition that it once did, and that JetBlue now has a larger impact on fares than 

 11 Consolidated Answer of JetBlue Airways Corporation, DOT-OST-2000-7182-1994, April 3, 2014.

12 Consolidated Comments of American Airlines, Inc., DOT-OST-2000-7182-1992, April 3, 2014.

13 American argues that the first criterion, new entrants or limited incumbents, is not relevant as none of the 

carriers in the proceeding meet this criterion.

14 Motion for Leave to File Unauthorized Pleading and Consolidated Sur-Reply of JetBlue Airways 

Corporation, DOT-OST-2000-7182-2000, April 14, 2014.
-6-

Southwest. Finally, JetBlue argues that, while it proposes to commence service with a 100-

seat aircraft, it can upgrade the aircraft should demand warrant.

Contingent Answer of Southwest Airlines15

Southwest filed additional comments taking issue with JetBlue’s fare statistics in previous 

filings. Southwest claims that JetBlue selectively presented fare comparisons in an attempt 

to show that Southwest has raised fares faster than other carriers. Southwest claims, 

however, that JetBlue has raised fares more than any other carrier since 2010. Southwest 

also states that it competes vigorously against American across its network.

Additional Comments of American Airlines16

American filed additional comments specifically to rebut a claim by JetBlue that an award to 

American of these slot exemptions would be barred by the settlement agreement in the 

American-US Airways merger.17 American states that its settlement agreement does not 

prohibit it from obtaining new regional slot capacity at DCA.

Comment of the Southwest Airlines Pilots’ Association18

The Southwest Airlines Pilots’ Association (SWAPA) filed comments in support of 

Southwest’s application. SWAPA questions American’s use of small, regional jet aircraft at 

slot-constrained airports, arguing that American could upgauge some of its existing services, 

thereby freeing up other slots to serve ISP. SWAPA makes a similar argument regarding 

JetBlue’s proposal to use 100-seat aircraft in DCA-JAX market. The association further 

contended that Southwest’s application to compete with American on the DCA-MCI route 

would provide the most benefit to the traveling public. 

DECISION

As a threshold matter, the Department has determined that People Express is not eligible to 

seek slot exemptions in this proceeding, as the company is not an air carrier. At the time of 

its application, People Express was seeking a Certificate of Public Convenience and 

Necessity to operate interstate scheduled air transportation, but, within weeks of applying for

slot exemptions in this proceeding, the company withdrew its application to become a 

certificated air carrier.19 In prior slot exemption decisions, the Department has declined to 

grant slot exemptions to entities that have been found fit to engage in interstate scheduled air 

transportation, but have not yet received air carrier certificates from the Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA).20 In this case, People Express lacks both the DOT certificate and the 

 15 Contingent Answer of Southwest Airlines Co. and Motion for Leave to File, DOT-OST-2000-7182, April 16, 

2014.

16 Motion for Leave to File an Otherwise Unauthorized Document and Additional Comments of American 

Airlines, Inc., DOT-OST-2000-7182-1999, April 7, 2014.

17 See Consolidated Answer of JetBlue at 6-7.

18 Comments of the Southwest Airlines Pilots' Association, DOT-OST-2000-7182-1996, April 3, 2014.

19 On May 20, 2014, counsel for People Express notified the Department that People Express wished to 

withdraw its application for a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity to operate interstate scheduled 

air transportation (DOT-OST-2012-0042-0015). On May 23, 2014, the Department issued Order 2014-5-12 

dismissing People Express’s application.

20 See Order 2004-4-2, OST-2000-7182 (April 1, 2004); Order 98-4-22, OST-97-3087 (April 21, 1998).
-7-

FAA certificate and is not currently seeking authority to operate. Accordingly, we will not 

consider the merits of People Express’s application.

The Department has evaluated the eligible applications from Southwest, JetBlue, and 

American under the standard the Department reaffirmed in Order Reallocating WithinPerimeter Slot Exemptions at Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport, Order 2012-7-26 

(DOT July 24, 2012), where we stated that the Department may grant within-perimeter slot

exemptions to an air carrier satisfying the greatest number of criteria, less than the greatest 

number of criteria, or even one criterion listed in Section 41718(b), based upon the 

Department’s analysis of the relative merits of each carrier’s proposal when evaluated under 

the Section 41718(b) criteria. The Department has also carefully reviewed our prior withinperimeter slot exemption decisions. 

After reviewing the record, the Department has determined to award these two slot 

exemptions to Southwest for service to MCI because, based on the Department’s analysis and 

judgment in this proceeding, its application best meets the objectives of the slot exemption 

statute. The reasoning to support this decision is set out below. 

In this proceeding, each applicant proposes service to a medium hub or smaller airport within 

the 1,250-mile DCA perimeter using Stage 3 aircraft, and each application is therefore 

responsive to the solicitation. While each eligible application has merit, based on the eligible 

applications received, and under the Department’s analysis of the relative merits of each air 

carrier’s proposal when evaluated under the Section 41718(b) criteria, the Department is

persuaded that we should allocate these slot exemptions to Southwest for service to MCI. In 

analyzing the applications, the Department has concluded that the criterion set forth in 

Section 41718(b)(5) – promoting service that produces maximum competitive benefits, 

including low fares – carries the most weight in this proceeding and that Southwest’s 

application best satisfies this criterion. 

In evaluating the relative merits of the eligible applications submitted in this proceeding 

under the remaining Section 41718(b) criteria, the Department has concluded that none of the 

air carriers satisfy Section 41718(b)(1), as they all operate more than 40 slots and slot 

exemptions at DCA.21 

American’s application satisfies the Section 41718(b)(2) criterion, promoting service to

communities without existing nonstop transportation to DCA. While at the time of its 

application, American provided service between DCA and ISP, it recently terminated this 

service in July, 2014. The other communities in question, Kansas City and Jacksonville, both 

have existing service to DCA from American.

With respect to the Section 41718(b)(3) criterion, we find that none of the applicants in this 

proceeding would offer service to a small community. All of the communities in question 

have populations well in excess of one million people. As we have held previously, we

 

21 American operates 519 slots and slot exemptions, Southwest operates 92 and JetBlue operates 62. For the 

definition of limited incumbent carrier, see footnote 2.
-8-

generally would not consider a community of well over one million people to meet the small 

community criterion. 22

With respect to the Section 41718(b)(4) criterion, we find that Southwest satisfies the 

criterion of providing competitive nonstop air transportation on a monopoly route. 

Southwest proposes nonstop service from MCI, competing with American’s MCI-DCA 

monopoly service. At the time of its application, JetBlue’s proposed JAX service would 

have competed with American’s monopoly service to Jacksonville. On August 14, 2014, 

JetBlue announced it would serve Jacksonville twice-daily using slots from its existing 

holdings, with service beginning in December, 2014. In a subsequent letter to the 

Department, JetBlue stated that a grant of slot exemptions in this proceeding would allow the 

carrier to introduce a third daily non-stop flight to JAX. While this factor does not 

negatively affect the Department’s analysis of their application, as stated above, we find that, 

in this case, the Section 41718(b)(5) criterion carries the most weight. 

In comparing the merits of the applications under the Section 41718(b)(5) criterion, we find 

that both Southwest and JetBlue would likely offer low-fare service. Both carriers have 

affirmatively asserted their intention to offer low fares in their applications and have wellestablished records of providing competitive, low-fare service upon entering markets. In 

contrast, while American argued that it would offer a range of fares, including discount fares,

American is not considered to be a low-fare carrier. In addition, American proposes to 

operate the DCA-ISP route with 50-seat CRJ-200 aircraft. This is the smallest proposed 

aircraft in this proceeding and would not utilize the limited available capacity at DCA as 

efficiently as the Southwest or JetBlue proposals that would use 143-seat and 100-seat 

aircraft respectively. Given these factors, we do not believe the merits of American’s 

application with respect to Section 41718(b)(5) reach those of either Southwest’s or JetBlue’s 

applications.

Having made this determination, a comparative analysis was conducted of the Southwest and 

JetBlue applications under Section 41718(b)(5). In comparing the applications, we examined 

the patterns of air service between DCA and Kansas City, and DCA and Jacksonville, 

including the average fares in each market. This examination revealed that both Southwest 

and JetBlue offer significant fare discounts relative to their competitors on a system-wide 

basis, at 19 percent and 24 percent respectively.23 However, in markets they serve from 

DCA, additional analysis found that both carriers offer a similar 20 percent discount 

compared to their competitors. 

Given the similar fare levels exhibited by each carrier at DCA, we had to look to other 

differentiating factors. First, Southwest proposes to use an aircraft with 43 more seats than 

does JetBlue. Given the constrained nature of operations at DCA, we find that Southwest 

would use the limited resources that are these slot exemptions more efficiently. 

 22 See Order 2004-12-6, December 6, 2004, where the Department held that Fort Lauderdale, Florida, with a 

population over one million, does not qualify as a small community. 

23 The Department used a statistical process to control for varying market sizes and stage lengths when 

calculating fare premium/discount.
-9-

Moreover, Kansas City is a much larger market than Jacksonville, providing for a larger pool 

of potential passengers. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, the Kansas City Metropolitan 

Statistical Area (MSA) is home to 2,054,473 people, while Jacksonville is home to 1,394,624 

people.24 When examining current schedules, we also found that there is less nonstop air 

service between DCA and Kansas City than between DCA and Jacksonville, even though 

Kansas City is the larger market. The DCA-MCI market has 1,432 weekly nonstop seats 

while the DCA-JAX market has 2,201 weekly nonstop seats.25

MCI also offers more online connecting opportunities for passengers than does JAX. 

According to September, 2014 published schedules, the only connecting service offered by 

JetBlue at JAX is to San Juan, Puerto Rico, which JetBlue already serves directly from 

DCA.26 On the other hand, Southwest offers connecting service from MCI to at least ten 

beyond destinations, including Denver, Phoenix, Los Angeles, Seattle, and others.

While JetBlue’s application has merit, we find that Southwest’s application will likely 

produce greater consumer benefits for a larger pool of passengers in a market with less DCA 

service than would JetBlue’s Jacksonville service. The proposals from both Southwest and 

JetBlue would bring competition to their respective proposed markets, but we conclude that 

the maximum competitive benefits will be realized by the award of these two slot exemptions

to Southwest for service to MCI.

Conditions

Start-up:

Southwest is required to inaugurate full service under the terms of this Order by no later than 

March 15, 2015. If, for any reason, Southwest is not able to use the slot exemptions granted, 

we request that it notify the Department as soon as possible, but no later than 10 days after 

the service date of this Order. 

Assignment of Slot Times:

Southwest is directed to file in the Docket, no later than 10 business days from the date of 

this Order, its proposed flight schedule. 

Section 414(b) of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 201227 allows the Department 

to assign two additional slot exemptions per one-hour period, an increase from the three per 

hour authorized in Vision 100 (for a total of five). There are 15 hourly periods beginning at 

7:00 a.m. and ending at 9:59 p.m., and all slot exemptions must fit into those 75 slot times. 

Applicants were advised of these slot-time constraints. In coordination with FAA’s Slot 

Administration Office, the Department shall assign slot times corresponding with the 

 24 U.S. Census Bureau Annual Estimates of the Resident Population: July 1, 2013 - United States Metropolitan 

and Micropolitan Statistical Areas; and for Puerto Rico.

25 September, 2014 published schedules (excluding Southwest’s DCA-MCI pendente lite service). All figures 

are one way.

26 JetBlue also serves New York-John F. Kennedy and Boston from Jacksonville, but these are unrealistic 

connecting options for DCA-originating travelers.

27 Public Law No. 112-95.
-10-

authority granted in this proceeding, and in accordance with the requirements of the FAA 

Modernization and Reform Act of 2012, in a notice subsequent to this decision.

Environmental Issues:

Although 49 U.S.C. § 41718(e) specifically exempts the action here from review under the 

National Environmental Policy Act,28 the Department remains sensitive to the environmental 

impact of increased operations at DCA. Consistent with the statute, all operations authorized 

by this Order will be required to be conducted with Stage 3 aircraft. Also, under 49 U.S.C. § 

47117(e), the Department will give DCA priority in making grants for airport noise 

compatibility planning and programs.

Administrative Terms:

Under the provisions of 49 U.S.C. § 41714(j), an awardee may not sell, trade, transfer, or 

convey the operating authorities granted by the subject exemptions, except through an air 

carrier merger or acquisition.

Further, granting of these exemptions in no way is to be construed as allowing a carrier to 

operate services that it could not otherwise operate. An awardee must still meet all the 

requirements of the Department and FAA, including but not limited to, use-or-lose 

provisions, and all other statutes and regulations governing air transportation.

This Order is issued under authority delegated in 49 C.F.R. Section 1.25(a).

ACCORDINGLY,

1. The Department reallocates the two slot exemptions to Southwest Airlines Co. for service 

to Kansas City International Airport (MCI) in Kansas City, Missouri;

2. The Department directs Southwest to file in Docket OST-2000-7182 no later than 10 

business days after the service date of this Order its proposed flight schedule and effective 

date for operations authorized by this Order. The slot exemptions granted must be conducted 

with single-aisle Stage 3 aircraft, may not be used for operations between the hours of 10:00 

p.m. and 7:00 a.m., and may not increase the number of operations at Ronald Reagan 

Washington National Airport in any one-hour period during the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 9:59 

p.m. by more than five operations. The air carrier is advised to exercise maximum flexibility 

in proposed operating times to ensure compliance with these limits; 

3. In coordination with the FAA Slot Administration Office, the Department will make the 

final assignment of operating times for these within-perimeter slot exemptions in a separate 

notice, as soon as possible. The Department directs Southwest to contact the FAA Slot 

Administration Office regarding their proposed schedules associated with the slot 

exemptions. FAA will assign slot exemption numbers, effective dates, and operating times 

consistent with statutory limitations;

 28 Section 41718(e) states, "Neither the request for, nor the granting of an exemption, under this section shall be 

considered for purposes of any Federal law a major Federal action significantly affecting the quality of the 

human environment."
-11-

4. The Department prohibits Southwest from selling, trading, transferring, or conveying the 

operating authorities granted by the subject exemptions, except through an air carrier merger 

or acquisition;

5. The Department grants all motions to file otherwise unauthorized documents and denies 

motions to strike such documents;

6. Except as otherwise granted, the Department denies all other applications for exemptions 

from 14 C.F.R. Part 93, Subparts K and S, filed in this docket;

7. The authorities granted under these exemptions are subject to all of the other requirements 

delineated in 14 C.F.R. Part 93, Subparts K and S, including, but not limited to, the reporting 

provisions and use-or-lose requirements;

8. This docket will remain open until further order of the Department; and

9. The Department will serve this Order on all interested parties including MWAA and the 

FAA Slot Administration Office. 

By:

SUSAN L. KURLAND

Assistant Secretary for Aviation

and International Affairs

(SEAL)

An electronic version of this document is available online at

www.regulations.gov