63714 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 198 / Thursday, October 13, 2011 / Notices 

as those air carriers that operate fewer than 

five percent of the slots at DCA and LGA. 

Frontier urges the Department to allocate the 

divested slots into smaller bundles than what 

was proposed in the Notice of the revised 

Petition and prohibit an air carrier from 

acquiring all of the slots. Additionally, 

Frontier argues that divested LGA slots 

should not be transferable to EWR, and that 

exempting Frontier from the ‘‘no 

subsidiaries’’ requirement is fully justified 

and in the public interest. 

Southwest submitted responsive comments 

supporting the Department’s definition of 

‘‘limited incumbent’’ in this proceeding, 

pointing out that any other definition would 

be inconsistent with the May 2010 Notice 

regarding the previous, similar transaction, 

and arguing that the proposed definition 

ensures that the divested slots are ‘‘put to 

their best competitive use * * * to produce 

the maximum public benefits and partially 

offset the anticompetitive effects of the slot 

swap.’’ Southwest further argues that this 

definition is justified in order to ensure that 

the transaction is in the public interest. It 

also claimed that smaller bundles of slots 

would provide only ‘‘weak and diffuse’’ 

competition by low-fare carriers. Southwest 

also supported a simple auction format in 

which the highest bidder won each bundle of 

slots. 

Continental Airlines, Inc. and United Air 

Lines, Inc. submitted responsive comments 

opposing Virgin America’s suggestion that 

divested LGA slots should be transferable to 

EWR. 

In a September 13, 2011 submission, 

JetBlue reiterated its position that additional 

slot divestitures are required to ameliorate 

the anticompetitive effects of the proposed 

transaction. It also continued to argue that 

‘‘limited incumbent’’ was defined in statute 

by the Wendell H. Ford Aviation Investment 

and Reform Act for the 21st Century (AIR– 

21), and that implementation of AIR–21 is 

the core issue in this proceeding. 

ACAA responded to these comments in a 

September 21, 2011 filing, and restated the 

benefits it believes accrue to the public from 

allowing carriers with more than five percent 

of the slots at either airport to participate in 

the auction. 

[FR Doc. 2011–26465 Filed 10–11–11; 4:15 pm] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

Technical Standard Order (TSO)– 

C129a, Airborne Supplemental 

Navigation Equipment Using the 

Global Positioning System (GPS) 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT 

ACTION: Notice of cancellation of TSO– 

C129a, Airborne Supplemental 

Navigation Equipment Using the Global 

Positioning System (GPS). 

SUMMARY: This notice announces the 

FAA’s cancellation of TSO–C129a, 

Airborne Supplemental Navigation 

Equipment Using the Global Positioning 

System (GPS) effective October 21, 

2011. TSO cancellation will not affect 

production according to an existing TSO 

authorization (TSOA). Articles 

produced under an existing TSOA can 

still be installed according to existing 

airworthiness approvals and 

applications for new airworthiness 

approvals will still be processed. 

The effect of the cancelled TSO will 

result in no new TSO–C129a design or 

production approvals. However, we will 

accept applications for new TSO–C129a 

TSO Authorizations (TSOA) until 

October 21, 2012 if we know that you 

were working toward a TSO–C129a 

approval prior to October 21, 2011. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before October 20, 2011. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. 

Kevin Bridges, AIR–130, Federal 

Aviation Administration, 470 L’Enfant 

Plaza, Suite 4102, Washington, DC 

20024. Telephone (202) 385–4627, fax 

(202) 385–4651, e-mail to: 

kevin.bridges@faa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FAA 

published a Federal Register notice on 

August 16, 2011 (76 FR 50808) 

describing our intent to cancel TSO– 

C129a to solicit feedback. We received 

a total of six comments from three 

parties with questions or concerns about 

the cancellation. For example, there was 

a comment to provide a transition 

period for applicants working toward a 

TSO–C129a approval prior to the 

cancellation date. The FAA agreed with 

this comment and has included a 

transition period in this notice. Another 

comment expressed concern regarding 

how an existing TSO–C129a technical 

standard order authorization (TSOA) 

would be addressed on an article with 

multiple TSOAs that has a change not 

affecting TSO–C129a. The FAA agrees 

to address this issue through a policy 

revision and/or policy memo. However, 

none of the parties providing comments 

expressed an objection to TSO–C129a 

being cancelled or provided reasons to 

not cancel the TSO. 

Comments Invited 

You are invited to comment on the 

cancellation of the TSO by submitting 

written data, views, or arguments to the 

above address on or before October 14, 

2011. The Director, Aircraft Certification 

Service, will consider all comments 

post-marked or received before the TSO 

cancellation date. 

Background 

On September 21, 2009, the FAA 

published TSO–C196, Airborne 

Supplemental Navigation Sensors for 

Global Positioning System Equipment 

Using Aircraft-Based Augmentation; an 

updated minimum performance 

standard for GPS sensors not augmented 

by satellite-based or ground-based 

systems (i.e., TSO–C129a Class B and 

Class C). The FAA has also published 

two TSOs for GPS augmented by the 

satellite-based augmentation system 

(TSO–C145c, Airborne Navigation 

Sensors Using the Global Positioning 

System Augmented by the SatelliteBased Augmentation System; and, TSO– 

C146c, Stand-Alone Navigation 

Equipment Using the Global Positioning 

System Augmented by the SatelliteBased Augmentation System). 

TSO–C145c, TSO–C146c, and TSO– 

C196 incorporate more stringent 

standards and testing requirements that 

make the GPS equipment more accurate 

and robust than sensors built to the 

minimum requirements in TSO–C129a. 

Two examples of these improvements 

are: (1) A requirement for the receiver to 

properly account for satellite range error 

if it is reflected in the User Range 

Accuracy index (commonly referred to 

as being ‘‘Selective Availability aware’’); 

and, (2) requirements to ensure 

performance is not degraded due to an 

increasing radio frequency noise 

environment as other satellite systems 

become available. 

Since 2005, there has only been one 

application for a TSO–C129a TSOA on 

a new article. Many manufacturers 

informally indicate they are 

transitioning, or planning to transition, 

their product lines to the new TSOs. 

Therefore, we believe cancelling TSO– 

C129a is an appropriate way to assist 

the natural phase-out/upgrade cycle 

given the eventual obsolescence of 

TSO–C129a equipment and industry’s 

lack of interest in new TSO–C129a 

designs. 

Issued in Washington, DC, on October 7, 

2011. 

Susan J.M. Cabler, 

Assistant Manager, Aircraft Engineering 

Division, Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2011–26449 Filed 10–12–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Surface Transportation Board 

[Docket No. FD 35553] 

Big Spring Rail System, Inc.;Operation 

Exemption;Transport Handling 

Specialists, Inc. 

Big Spring Rail System, Inc. (BSRS), 

a noncarrier, has filed a verified notice 

of exemption under 49 CFR 1150.31 to 


sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES