CORRECTED COPY

Order 2010-11-19

Served: November 17, 2010

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

WASHINGTON, D.C.

Issued by the Department of Transportation

on the 17th day of November, 2010

Joint Application of

ASTAR AIR CARGO, INC. 

and ASTAR USA, LLC

for a pendente lite exemption and for approval of a 

transfer of certificate authority under 49 U.S.C. 41105

 Docket DOT-OST-2010-0223

 

ORDER 

Summary

By this order, we (1) find ASTAR USA, LLC (“AUSA”), fit willing, and able to conduct

interstate scheduled all-cargo operations; (2) issue to AUSA a certificate of public convenience 

and necessity to provide interstate scheduled air transportation of property and mail, subject to 

conditions; (3) grant AUSA exemption authority to provide foreign scheduled air transportation 

of property and mail between Cincinnati, Ohio, and Mexico City, Mexico; and (4) defer action 

on the application of ASTAR Air Cargo, Inc. (“ASTAR”), to transfer its interstate and foreign 

certificates and other operating authorities to AUSA. 

Background

On September 3, 2010, ASTAR and AUSA (hereinafter referred to as the “Joint Applicants”) 

filed an application in Docket DOT-OST-DOT-2010-0223 to transfer ASTAR‟s certificates of 

public convenience and necessity and related operating authorities to AUSA. In that application, 

the Joint Applicants state that ASTAR intends to merge into AUSA, with AUSA remaining as 

the surviving entity.

Subsequently, on October 15, 2010, the Joint Applicants filed in the docket a request for a 

pendente lite exemption pursuant to 49 U.S.C. § 41105 to the extent necessary to permit AUSA 

to close its merger transaction with ASTAR and to conduct the operations currently performed 

by ASTAR in domestic and foreign air transportation while its route transfer application remains 

pending with the Department.

1

 

 

1 The Joint Applicants supplemented their pendente lite exemption request on November 1, 3, and 9, 

2010.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
2

Interested parties were given 21 days to file answers in response to transfer application and the 

pendente lite exemption request. No answers were received. 

FITNESS

In making fitness findings, the Department uses a three-part test that reconciles the Airline 

Deregulation Act's liberal entry policy with Congress' concern for operational safety and 

consumer protection. The three areas of inquiry that must be addressed in order to determine a 

company's fitness are whether the applicant (1) will have the managerial skills and technical 

ability to conduct the proposed operations, (2) will have access to resources sufficient to 

commence operations without posing an undue risk to consumers or their funds, and (3) will 

comply with 49 U.S.C. § 41102 and regulations imposed by Federal and State agencies. We 

must also find that the applicant is a U.S. citizen.

The Company

A limited liability company organized on November 23, 2009, under the laws of the State of 

Delaware, AUSA is a wholly-owned subsidiary of New ASTAR Holdings, LLC (“New 

Holdings”), a company formed by Messrs. Richard Blum, John Dasburg, and Michael Klein, the 

majority shareholders of ASTAR. Messrs. Blum, Dasburg, and Klein, each of whom is a U.S. 

citizen, created AUSA to facilitate an ownership change for ASTAR. Currently, ASTAR is a 

wholly-owned subsidiary of ASTAR Air Cargo Holdings, LLC (“ASTAR Holdings”), and 

Messrs. Blum, Dasburg, and Klein own 51 percent of the economic interest and 75.01 percent of 

the voting interest in ASTAR Holdings. DHL Express (USA), Inc. (“DHL Express”), an Ohio 

corporation, holds 49 percent of the economic interest in ASTAR Holdings and 24.99 percent of 

the voting interest. The Joint Applicants state that upon closing their proposed transaction, 

ASTAR‟s operations will be merged into AUSA, and DHL Express will not hold an equity 

interest in AUSA.

Managerial Competence 

Messrs. Richard Blum, John Dasburg, and Michael Klein, all U.S. citizens, serve as AUSA‟s 

managing members. Also, the following individuals, all U.S. citizens, currently work for 

ASTAR but will serve as AUSA‟s key management and technical personnel following the 

merger:

Mr. John Dasburg – Chairman and Chief Executive Officer (“CEO”)

Mr. Steve Doyle – President, General Counsel, and Secretary

Mr. Gary Hammes – Senior Vice President and Chief Operating Officer

Mr. Stephen Dodd – Vice President and Chief Financial Officer

Mr. Rob Miller – Vice President, Employee Relations

Mr. Peter Blessing – Director of Operations

Mr. James Kennedy – Director of Aircraft Maintenance

Mr. Kenneth Young – Director of Safety

Mr. Arthur Kegel – Chief Pilot

Mr. Nils Johnson – Chief Inspector
3

Mr. Richard Blum is the Chairman of Blum Capital Partners, L.P., which he founded in 1975. 

He is also Co-Founder of Newbridge Capital, LLC, which is now part of TPG Capital. 

Mr. Blum has served on the boards of several prominent companies, including Northwest 

Airlines Corporation, Playtex Products, Glenborough Realty Trust, and URS Corporation. He 

also serves as Co-Chairman of the World Conference on Religion and Peace, and is Founder and 

Chairman of the American Himalayan Foundation. Mr. Blum is also a board member of the 

World Wildlife Fund and the Wilderness Society. He holds a Bachelor of Arts degree and a 

Master of Business Administration degree, both from the University of California, Berkeley.

Mr. John Dasburg currently serves as the Chairman, CEO, and co-owner of ASTAR. 

Mr. Dasburg has more than 30 years of experience in executive leadership. Prior to coming to 

ASTAR, he was the Chairman, President, and CEO of Burger King Corporation, and before that, 

he served for 10 years as President and CEO of Northwest Airlines Corporation. Mr. Dasburg 

also served as Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Marriott Corp., as well as 

President of Marriott‟s Lodging Group. Mr. Dasburg holds a Bachelor of Science degree in 

Engineering, a Master‟s degree in Business Administration, and a Law degree, all from the 

University of Florida.

Mr. Michael Klein is the Chairman and CEO of The Sunlight Foundation, which he co-founded 

in 2005. He also serves on several other boards as either Chairman or Vice Chairman, including 

the Shakespeare Theatre Company, CoStar Group, Inc., and Tutor Perini Corporation. From 

1974 to 2005, Mr. Klein was a partner in the law firm Wilmer, Cutler & Pickering in 

Washington, DC.

Mr. Steve Doyle is the President, General Counsel, and Secretary of ASTAR. Before joining 

ASTAR in August 2008, Mr. Doyle practiced corporate law for 31 years at Wilmer, Cutler & 

Pickering and Hale and Dorr in Washington, DC. Mr. Doyle‟s legal experience included 

extensive aviation-related matters. He advised both Lufthansa and United Airlines on major 

transactions. He also served as principal legal architect for the Star Alliance of major 

international passenger airlines. Mr. Doyle also represented ASTAR‟s current non-DHL Express 

owners when they purchased the company in 2003. Mr. Doyle graduated from Harvard 

University and the University of Texas Law School.

Mr. Gary Hammes is ASTAR‟s Senior Vice President and Chief Operating Officer. He has been 

with the company since 2002, and previously served as Senior Director of Aircraft Maintenance 

and Engineering. Prior to joining ASTAR, Mr. Hammes served as the Director of Component 

Maintenance for Northwest Airlines, 737 Fleet Operations Manager for United Airlines, and 

Director of Maintenance for Evergreen International Aviation.

Mr. Stephen Dodd serves as Vice President and Chief Financial Officer for ASTAR. Over the 

past 7 years, Mr. Dodd has held several positions with the company, most recently as Vice 

President, Treasurer, and Chief Information Officer. Prior to joining ASTAR, Mr. Dodd was the 

regional project and business development manager for a management and IT consulting firm. 

Mr. Dodd holds a Bachelor of Science degree from the University of Pennsylvania and Master of 

Business Administration degree from the University of Florida.

Mr. Rob Miller serves as Vice President, Employee Relations, for ASTAR. He has been with the 

company since 2003, and has held various positions within the finance and employee relations 

organizations. Prior to joining ASTAR, Mr. Miller worked as an engineer for Kinetics in the 
4

pharmaceutical and biotech industries. He received his Bachelor of Science degree from 

Clemson University and his Master of Business Administration degree from the University of 

Florida.

Mr. Peter Blessing serves as Vice President of Flight Operations, which includes Safety and 

Security for ASTAR. He has been with the company since 1990 and has held various positions 

to include Managing Director of Flight Operations, Manager of Flight Crew Training, and DC-8 

Training Supervisor. Mr. Blessing has more than 40 years of aviation experience, including 

pilot experience with Eastern Airlines and active duty military service with the U.S. Navy. Mr. 

Blessing received a Bachelor of Science degree from the University of Scranton.

Mr. James Kennedy, an Airframe and Powerplant Mechanic, has been with ASTAR since 2000 

and currently serves as the air carrier‟s Director of Aircraft Maintenance. Before coming to 

ASTAR, Mr. Kennedy worked for Air Transport International for 7 years holding various 

positions, including Manager of Maintenance Control and Manager of Line Maintenance. 

Before that, he held aircraft mechanic positions with Zantop International Airlines and Eastern 

Airlines.

Mr. Kenneth Young is the Director of Safety at ASTAR. Mr. Young joined the company in 

1999, initially working as a pilot. Prior to joining ASTAR, he worked for Comair Jet Express 

and Miami Valley Aviation where he was a flight and ground training instructor. Before 

pursuing a career in aviation, Mr. Young was a State Highway Patrolman for the State of Ohio.

Mr. Arthur Kegel, an Airline Transport Pilot, serves as Chief Pilot for ASTAR. Before joining 

the air carrier in 2001, Mr. Kegel had been working as a pilot for DHL Airways since 1987.

Mr. Nils Johnson joined ASTAR in 2003. He currently serves as the company‟s Senior 

Manager, Quality Control/Quality Assurance and Chief Inspector. Before coming to ASTAR, 

Mr. Johnson spent 8 years at Miami International, United Airlines, and Northwest Airlines in 

various management roles within the quality, engineering, and maintenance organizations. 

Considering that AUSA‟s management team will be the same management team that has 

operated ASTAR, and in view of the experience and background of individuals listed above, we 

conclude that AUSA‟s team of key management and technical personnel possess the managerial

skills and technical ability to conduct the proposed service.

Operating Plans and Financial Condition

For nearly a decade, ASTAR‟s principal line of business has been to provide air freight 

transportation services for DHL Express pursuant to an aircraft, crew, maintenance, and 

insurance service agreement (“ACMI Agreement”) under a cost-plus fee structure. Upon closing 

of the merger, AUSA will provide air carrier services for DHL Express or one of its affiliates in 

lieu of ASTAR pursuant to a new fee-for-service air transportation services agreement (“ATS 

Agreement”).2

 

2 On September 3, 2010, the Joint Applicants filed a Motion to withhold from public disclosure the 

ATS Agreement, which we will grant. See the CONFIDENTIAL TREATMENT section of this order.
5

AUSA intends to continue flying the same routes and conducting the same level of operations for 

DHL Express that ASTAR currently operates using 8 DC-8 freighter aircraft that are currently 

operated by ASTAR.3 AUSA also intends to continue operating charter flights pursuant to a 

service agreement with the U.S. Transportation Command, which is a part of the U.S. 

Department of Defense.

The Joint Applicants provided first-year operating expense forecasts for AUSA, as well as 

financial information for ASTAR, filed confidentially.4 In the transfer application, the Joint 

Applicants argue that the Department should not apply its standard financial fitness criteria in 

determining AUSA‟s fitness.5 The Joint Applicants believe that this criteria is not relevant to 

AUSA considering that all operating expenses incurred by AUSA during its first year of 

operations will be covered in full by AUSA‟s contracts.6 It has been the Department‟s practice, 

with respect to fitness based on fee-for-service agreements with major U.S. air carriers, not to 

apply its standard financial fitness criteria in determining the company‟s fitness.7 We see no 

reason not to follow the same practice here. 

In light of the foregoing, we conclude that AUSA has access to sufficient financial resources to 

enable it to commence its proposed operations without posing an undue risk to consumers or 

their funds.

Compliance Disposition

AUSA states that there are no actions or outstanding judgments against it, its owners, or its key 

personnel, nor have there been any charges of unfair, deceptive or anti-competitive business 

practices, or of fraud, felony or antitrust violations brought against any of these parties. AUSA 

also states that there are no pending investigations, enforcement actions, or formal complaints 

filed by the Department against it, its key personnel, or persons having a substantial interest in it 

with respect to compliance with the Transportation Code or the Department‟s regulations. 

Further, a review of our records and other information available to us has uncovered no 

information which would reflect negatively on AUSA, its owners, or its key personnel. 

Under these circumstances, we find that AUSA has the proper regard for the laws and 

regulations governing its services to ensure that its aircraft and personnel conform to applicable 

safety standards and that acceptable consumer relations practices will be followed.

 

3 AUSA will operate 8 DC-8 aircraft in its initial year of service, 5 of which will be owned by AUSA 

with the remaining to be leased by AUSA from DHL Express or one of its affiliates.

4

See the CONFIDENTIAL TREATMENT section of this Order. 

5

 In evaluating an applicant's financial fitness, the Department generally asks that the company have 

available to it sufficient resources to cover all pre-operating costs plus a working capital reserve equal to 

the operating costs that would be incurred in three months of “normal” certificated operations. Also, in 

calculating available resources, projected revenues generally may not be used.

6 The Joint Applicants note that in addition to its proposed fee-for-service agreements with DHL 

Express, it will provide service pursuant to two other service agreements with the U.S. Transportation 

Command for services that will be operated by subcontractors. AUSA bears none of the operating costs 

associated with these contracts. 

7

See, for example, Order 2000-1-25, Atlantic Coast Jet, Inc., and Order 2000-11-22, Potomac Air, Inc. 
6

CITIZENSHIP

Section 41102 of the Transportation Code requires that certificates to engage in air transportation 

be held only by citizens of the United States as defined in 49 U.S.C. 40102(a)(15). That section 

requires that the president and two-thirds of the Board of Directors and other managing officers 

be U.S. citizens, that at least 75 percent of the outstanding voting interest be owned by U.S. 

citizens, and that the applicant must be under the actual control of U.S. citizens.

As mentioned previously, AUSA is a wholly-owned subsidiary of New Holdings, a company 

created and owned by Messrs. Blum, Dasburg, and Klein, all U.S. citizens. Messrs. Blum, 

Dasburg, and Klein, hold an economic interest in New Holdings of 29.8 percent, 32.9 percent, 

and 27.4 percent, respectively, totaling approximately 90.1 percent. The remaining 9.9 percent is 

held by 12 other members, all U.S. citizens. 

Further, the company‟s president, managing members, and other key personnel are all U.S. 

citizens and the company has provided an affidavit attesting that it is a citizen of the United 

States within the meaning of the Transportation Code and that it is actually controlled by U.S. 

citizens. Finally, we have found nothing in the record to suggest that control of AUSA rests with 

non-U.S. citizens.

 

CONFIDENTIAL TREATMENT

On September 3, 2010,8the Joint Applicants filed a Motion requesting that the following 

transaction-related material be afforded confidential treatment under 14 CFR § 302.12 (“Rule 

12”): (1) Agreement and Plan of Merger; (2) Certificate of Merger to be filed with the Secretary 

of the State of the State of Delaware; (3) Asset Transfer and Legacy Cost Agreement; 

(4) Redemption and Unit Purchase Agreement; (5) Contribution Agreement; (6) Air 

Transportation Services Agreement; (7) Guaranty; and (8) Teaming Agreement. Additionally, 

the Joint Applicants request that AUSA‟s first-year financial projections and ASTAR‟s current 

and historical financial statements be afforded confidential treatment.

In support of the request for confidential treatment, the Joint Applicants state that the documents 

to be withheld from public disclosure are (1) commercial or financial; (2) obtained from a person 

outside the government; and (3) privileged or confidential. The Joint Applicants maintain that 

the release of such information would cause material competitive harm, arguing that these 

documents contain sensitive financial and business information of a type not usually disclosed to 

the public. Additionally, the Joint Applicants contend that release of such information would 

competitively harm AUSA in its ability to compete for business with DHL Express. Further, the 

Joint Applicants add that the documents to be withheld from public disclosure are the kinds of 

information that are typically afforded confidential treatment in commercial contexts.

 

8 On September 8, 2010, the Joint Applicants filed a correction to the September 3, 2010, Motion. The 

Joint Applicants noted that in filing the documents referenced in the Motion, they had inadvertently 

omitted some material. 
7

Rule 12 instructs us to evaluate requests for confidential treatment in accordance with the 

standards of disclosure found in the Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. § 552). By this 

standard, information may be withheld from disclosure if it is “(1) commercial or 

financial, (2) obtained from a person outside the government, and (3) privileged or 

confidential.”9

The information sought to be withheld from disclosure clearly meets the first two requirements. 

The only question, therefore, is whether the information is privileged or confidential--whether 

“disclosure of the information is likely to have either of the following effects: (1) to impair the 

government‟s ability to obtain necessary information in the future; or (2) to cause substantial 

harm to the competitive position of the person from whom the information was obtained.”10

Furthermore, to be privileged or confidential, the information must not be of the type that is 

usually released to the public.11 

We have decided to grant in its entirety the Joint Applicants‟ Motion to withhold the materials 

described above from public disclosure. The Department has granted confidential treatment to 

similar transaction agreements in the past and we see no reason not to do so here. Regarding the 

financial information provided, while it is generally not the Department‟s practice to grant 

confidential treatment to such information, we agree with the Joint Applicants that the nature of 

the information reflected in the financial statements could well provide commercially sensitive 

information to competitors of AUSA that would otherwise not be publicly available. Further, 

release of the applicant‟s first-year expense forecast could harm its ability to compete by 

providing competitors with information on the cost structure upon which its agreement with 

DHL Express is based. 

DECISION

To provide the Joint Applicant‟s with the desired relief, it is necessary to find AUSA fit, willing, 

and able to provide air transportation and to issue to it the appropriate economic authority. 

Based on the above, we conclude that AUSA is a U.S. citizen and is fit, willing, and able to 

provide the interstate scheduled all-cargo operations air transportation proposed, subject to 

certain conditions. We find it appropriate to issue a Final Order in this matter; the application is 

unopposed and there are no material issues of fact that warrant further procedures for their 

resolution. 

In providing the relief desired by the Joint Applicants, we will issue to AUSA an interstate 

scheduled all-cargo certificate and an exemption to provide foreign scheduled air transportation. 

 

9

 Gulf & Western Industries, Inc. v. U.S., 615 F.2d 527, 529 (D.C. Cir. 1979).

10

 National Parks and Conservation Association v. Morton, 498 F.2d 765, 770 (D.C. Cir. 1974).

11

 Gulf & Western Industries, Inc., 615 F.2d at 530.
8

EXEMPTION REQUEST AND DEFERRAL OF ACTION

As mentioned previously, on October 15, 2010, the Joint Applicants filed a request for an 

immediate pendente lite exemption to permit the Joint Applicants to close their proposed merger. 

In that filing, the Joint Applicants request authority to permit AUSA to conduct scheduled 

all-cargo service between Cincinnati, Ohio, and Mexico City, Mexico, and charter all-cargo 

service between Cincinnati, Ohio, and Belgium, Canada, and the United Kingdom, as well as 

certain points in Mexico,12 pending Department action on the Joint Applicants‟ September 3, 

2010, transfer application. In the request, the Joint Applicants state that ASTAR is currently 

designated to provide scheduled service between Cincinnati and Mexico City pursuant to the 

U.S.-Mexico Air Transport Agreement, as amended, and request that the United States designate 

AUSA in ASTAR‟s place which will not affect the number of U.S. air carriers designated to 

Mexico on this route.

Having found AUSA fit to conduct interstate scheduled all-cargo air transportation, as discussed 

above, we also find that AUSA is qualified to provide the proposed foreign scheduled all-cargo 

air transportation under the authority of an exemption. Thus, we will issue the company the 

immediate exemption authority it seeks to conduct all–cargo foreign scheduled service as 

described above.13 

With respect to AUSA‟s proposed foreign charter operations, the Departments notes that a U.S. 

certificated air carrier authorized to conduct interstate scheduled air transportation is also 

authorized to conduct charter flights in interstate and/or foreign air transportation in accordance 

with the provisions of 14 CFR Part 212. Because no additional authority is needed for AUSA to 

conduct is proposed foreign charter flights, we will dismiss that portion of the exemption request 

as moot. 

Under these circumstances, we find that AUSA is qualified for and that it is in the public interest 

to issue the requested exemption. We are deferring action on the Joint Applicants‟ certificate 

transfer request, and we will address the matter in a separate order.

CERTIFICATE CONDITIONS & LIMITATIONS

While we are making AUSA‟s interstate certificate and U.S.-Mexico exemption authority 

effective immediately, AUSA‟s ability to conduct its proposed all-cargo operations under these 

authorities remains subject to our receipt, among other things, of evidence that AUSA has been 

certificated by the Federal Aviation Administration to engage in the subject operations and a 

fully executed OST Form 6410 evidencing liability insurance coverage that meets the 

requirements of section 205.5(b) of our rules.

We also remind AUSA of the requirements of 49 U.S.C. § 41110(e). Specifically, that section 

requires that once an air carrier is found fit initially, it must remain fit in order to hold its 

authority. To be assured that U.S. certificated air carriers continue to be fit after effective 

 

12 The Joint Applicants state that AUSA intends to provide “ad hoc non-scheduled „recovery‟ flights” 

for DHL Express between Cincinnati, Ohio, and Monterrey and Guadalajara, Mexico.

13 We note that prior to the commencement of Cincinnati-Mexico City service by AUSA, the Joint 

Applicants must advise the Department of a date certain for ASTAR to relinquish the designation it holds 

to provide service in that market and for AUSA to be so designated.
9

authority has been issued to them, we require that they supply information describing any 

subsequent substantial changes they may undergo in areas affecting fitness. 

Further, should AUSA propose other substantial changes affecting its fitness (i.e., ownership, 

management, or operations), it must first comply with the requirements of section 204.5 of our

rules.14 The compliance of the company with this requirement is essential if we are to carry out 

our responsibilities under the section 41110(e).15

Finally, to aid the Department in monitoring the fitness of new air carriers, we ask that all newly 

certificated air carriers submit a detailed progress report within 45 days following the end of the 

first year of certificated operations, to the Air Carrier Fitness Division. The report should 

include a description of the air carrier‟s current operations (number and type of aircraft, principal 

markets served, total number of full-time and part-time employees), a summary of how these 

operations have changed during the year, a discussion of any changes it anticipates from its 

current operations during its second year, current financial statements,16 and a listing of current 

senior management and key technical personnel. The air carrier should also be prepared to meet 

with staff members of the Fitness Division to discuss its current and future operations. 

ACCORDINGLY,

1. We find that ASTAR USA, LLC, is fit, willing, and able to engage in interstate scheduled 

air transportation of property and mail, subject to conditions. 

2. We issue a certificate of public convenience and necessity to ASTAR USA, LLC, to 

engage in interstate scheduled air transportation of property and mail in the form attached and 

subject to the Terms, Conditions, and Limitations attached. 

3. We find ASTAR USA, LLC, qualified and grant it exemption authority under 49 U.S.C. 

§ 40109 to provide foreign scheduled air transportation of property and mail between Cincinnati, 

Ohio, and Mexico City, Mexico.

17, 18

 

14 The air carrier may contact our Air Carrier Fitness Division to report proposed substantial changes in 

its operations, ownership, or management, and to determine what additional information, if any, will be 

required under section 204.5. If the air carrier fails to file this updated information or if the information 

fails to demonstrate that the air carrier will continue to be fit upon implementation of the substantial 

change, the Department may take such action as is appropriate, including enforcement action or steps to 

modify, suspend, or revoke the air carrier's certificate authority.

15 We also remind AUSA about the requirements of section 204.7 of our rules. This section provides, 

among other things, that (1) if the company ceases all operations for which it was found fit, it may not 

resume such operations unless its fitness has been redetermined, and (2) if the company does not resume 

operations within one year of its cessation, its authority shall be revoked for dormancy.

16 These financial statements should include a balance sheet as of the end of the company‟s first full 

year of actual certificated operations and a twelve-month income statement ending that same date.

17

 The authority granted is consistent with the aviation agreement between the United States and 

Mexico. On the basis of data officially noticeable under Rule 24(g) of the Department‟s regulations

(14 CFR §302.24(g)), we find the applicant qualified to provide the services authorized. We further find 

that (1) our action is consistent with Department policy; (2) grant of the application is consistent with the 

public interest; and (3) grant of the authority does not constitute a major regulatory action under the 

Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975. 

18 Under the U.S.-Mexico aviation agreement, up to a total of five U.S. carriers may be designated to 

provide all-cargo service at Mexico City and five U.S. carriers are already designated, or approved for 
10

4. The U.S.-Mexico exemption authority granted will be effective immediately, for a period 

of two years from the issue date of this order, or until the effectiveness of a certificate for such 

service, whichever occurs earlier.

5. The U.S.-Mexico exemption authority granted is subject to the conditions attached in 

Attachment A to this order and to the dormancy notice requirements set forth in condition 7 of 

Appendix A of Order 88-10-2.

6. We may amend, modify, or revoke the U.S.-Mexico exemption authority granted at any 

time without hearing at our discretion.

7. We dismiss as moot the request of ASTAR USA, LLC, for exemption authority to conduct 

foreign charter air transportation of property and mail.

8. We grant the September 3, 2010, Motion, as amended, for confidential treatment filed by 

ASTAR Air Cargo, Inc., and ASTAR USA, LLC.

9. We direct ASTAR USA, LLC, to submit to the Air Carrier Fitness Division a first year 

progress report within 45 days following the end of its first year of certificated operations.19

10. We will serve a copy of this order on the persons listed in Attachment B to this order. 

By:

SUSAN L. KURLAND

Assistant Secretary

for Aviation and International Affairs

An electronic version of this document is available on the World Wide Web at:

http://www.regulations.gov

 

designation, for such service with ASTAR holding one of these designations. Given the circumstances 

presented here, we will notify the Government of Mexico of the impending designation of AUSA to serve 

the Cincinnati-Mexico City market, but will not formally designate AUSA in this market until such time 

as AUSA provides us with a date certain for the commencement of its operations. Accordingly, upon 

notification of AUSA of a date certain, we will withdraw the designation of ASTAR effective upon the 

departure of its last scheduled Cincinnati-Mexico City flight and designate AUSA for Cincinnati-Mexico 

City services effective at that time.

19 The report shall include a description of the air carrier‟s current operations (number and type of 

aircraft, principal markets served, total number of full-time and part-time employees), a summary of how 

these operations have changed during the year, a discussion of any changes it anticipates from its current 

operations during its second year, current financial statements, and a listing of current senior management 

and key technical personnel.
Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity 

for

Interstate Air Transportation

This Certifies That

ASTAR USA, LLC

is authorized, subject to the provisions of Subtitle VII of Title 49 of the 

United States Code, the orders, rules, and regulations issued thereunder, 

and the attached Terms, Conditions, and Limitations, to engage in 

interstate air transportation of property and mail.

This Certificate is not transferable without the approval of the Department 

of Transportation.

 

 

 By Direction of the Secretary

 

 

Issued by Order 2010-11-19 Susan L. Kurland

On November 17, 2010 Assistant Secretary 

Effective on November 17, 2010 for Aviation and International Affairs 
Terms, Conditions, and Limitations

ASTAR USA, LLC

is authorized to engage in interstate air transportation of persons, property, and mail between 

any point in any State, territory, or possession of the United States or the District of Columbia, 

and any other point in any of those entities.

This authority is subject to the following provisions:

(1) The holder shall at all times conduct its operations in accordance with the regulations 

prescribed by the Department of Transportation for the services authorized by this certificate, 

and with such other reasonable terms, conditions, and limitations as the Department of 

Transportation may prescribe in the public interest.

(2) The holder's authority under this certificate is effective only to the extent that such 

operations are also authorized by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), and comply with 

all U.S. Government requirements concerning security, including, but not limited to 49 CFR Part 

1544.



(3) The holder shall at all times remain a "Citizen of the United States" as required by 49 

U.S.C. 40102(a)(15).

(4) The holder shall maintain in effect liability insurance coverage as required under 14 

CFR Part 205. Failure to maintain such insurance coverage will render a certificate ineffective, 

and this or other failure to comply with the provisions of Subtitle VII of Title 49 of the United 

States Code or the Department's regulations shall be sufficient grounds to revoke this certificate.

(5) The holder is authorized to conduct charter flights in interstate and/or foreign air 

transportation in accordance with the provisions of 14 CFR 212. 

(6) The holder may reduce or terminate service at any point or between any two points, 

subject to compliance with the provisions of 49 U.S.C. 41734 and all orders and regulations 

issued by the Department of Transportation under that section.

(7) The holder may not provide scheduled passenger air transportation to or from Dallas 

(Love Field), Texas, except within the limits set forth in section 29 of the International Air 

Transportation Competition Act of 1979, as amended or as modified by any future legislation 

addressing access restrictions to or from Love Field.

 



To assure compliance with all applicable U.S. Government requirements concerning security, the 

holder shall, before commencing any new service (including charter flights) to or from a foreign airport, 

contact its Principal Security Inspector (PSI) to advise the PSI of its plans and to find out whether the 

Transportation Security Administration has determined that security is adequate to allow such airport(s) 

to be served.
2

(8) Should the holder propose any substantial change in its ownership, management, or 

operations (as defined in 14 CFR 204.2(l)), it must first comply with the requirements of 14 CFR 

204.5.

(9) In the event that the holder commences but subsequently ceases all operations for which 

it was found “fit, willing and able,” its authority under this certificate shall be suspended under 

the terms of 14 CFR 204.7 and the holder may neither recommence nor advertise such 

operations unless its fitness to do so has been redetermined by the Department. Moreover, if the 

holder does not resume operations within one year of its cessation, its authority shall be revoked 

for dormancy.
Attachment A

U.S. Carrier Exemption Conditions

In the conduct of the operations authorized, the U.S. carrier applicant(s) shall:

(1) Hold at all times effective operating authority from the government of each country served;

(2) Comply with applicable requirements concerning oversales contained in 14 CFR 250 (for scheduled operations, if 

authorized);

(3) Comply with the requirements for reporting data contained in 14 CFR 241;

(4) Comply with requirements for minimum insurance coverage, and for certifying that coverage to the Department, 

contained in 14 CFR 205;

(5) Except as specifically exempted or otherwise provided for in a Department Order, comply with the requirements of 14 

CFR 203, concerning waiver of Warsaw Convention liability limits and defenses;

(6) Comply with all applicable requirements of the Federal Aviation Administration, the Transportation Security 

Administration, and with all applicable U.S. Government requirements concerning security, including, but not limited to, 

49 CFR Part 1544. To assure compliance with all applicable U.S. Government requirements concerning security, the 

holder shall, before commencing any new service (including charter flights) to or from a foreign airport, contact its 

Principal Security Inspector (PSI) to advise the PSI of its plans and to find out whether the Transportation Security 

Administration has determined that security is adequate to allow such airport(s) to be served; and

(7) Comply with such other reasonable terms, conditions, and limitations required by the public interest as may be 

prescribed by the Department of Transportation, with all applicable orders and regulations of other U.S. agencies and 

courts, and with all applicable laws of the United States.

The authority granted shall be effective only during the period when the holder is in compliance with the conditions 

imposed above.

 1/08
Attachment B

Service List for ASTAR USA, LLC

MR STEPHEN DOYLE

PRESIDENT

ASTAR AIR CARGO INC

ASTAR USA LLC

1200 BRICKELL AVENUE

MIAMI FL 33131

MR ELLIOTT SEIDEN

COUNSEL FOR ASTAR AIR CARGO INC 

AND ASTAR USA LLC

BOIES, SCHILLER & FLEXNER LLP

5301 WISCONSIN AVENUE NW

WASHINGTON DC 20015

MR PETER LYNCH AGC-300

ASST CHIEF COUNSEL FOR 

ENFORCEMENT

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION

800 INDEPENDENCE AVE SW

WASHINGTON DC 20591

MR WILLIAM J WEBER

CERTIFICATION SECTION MANAGER

FAA AFS-900

45005 AVIATION DRIVE SUITE 131

DULLES VA 20166

MS ANNE SUISSA RTS-42

OFFICE OF AIRLINE INFORMATION

DOT/RITA/BTS E-34

1200 NEW JERSEY AVE SE

WASHINGTON DC 20590

MR BERNARD STANKUS RTS-42

OFFICE OF AIRLINE INFORMATION

DOT/RITA/BTS E-34

1200 NEW JERSEY AVE SE

WASHINGTON DC 20590

MR. BRIAN BAZEMORE

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION

4358 FERGUSON DRIVE

CINCINNATI OH 45245