Source: http://airlineinfo.com/ost7/ost112205.html
Timestamp: 2019-08-20 22:39:39
Document Index: 624161222

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 211', '§ 41301', 'art 212', 'art 298', 'art 121', 'art 121', 'art 135', '§ 41714', 'art 241']

OST Docket Filings for November 22, 2005
Updated: 11/25/05 | 2:33 PM
AeroSvit - Amendment No. 1 to Ukraine-US Application / Certificate of Service
DCA Slots - Petition of ACAA to Withdraw and Reallocate America West and US Airways Slots
Eirjet - Ireland-US
IATA - Approvals of Agreements
United and Swiss - Amending US-Switzerland Blanket Codeshare
Vision Air - Supplement No. 14 to Certificate Application
Delta - Motion for Temporary Dormancy Waiver (US-Cancun/Cozumel City-Pairs) / Dormancy Notice (Salt Lake City/Los Angeles-Cozumel) / Modified Start-Up Plans (Orlando/Los Angeles/New York/Boston/Washington DC/Cincinnati-Cancun)
Horizon Air - Motion to Withhold Information from Public Disclosure - Form 41
Intra-Alaska Bush and Mainline Service Mail Rates - Reply of Consolidated Carriers
LaGuardia Slots - Letter from American Offering Guiding Principles
LAN Airlines - Designation of Agent
Lan Cargo - Designation of Agent
Nolinor - Designation of Agent
Spirit Airlines - Revised Cancun Service Start Dates
United and bmi - Joint Reply of United and bmi (US-UK Codesharing)
United and Swiss - Joint Notice of Additional Codeshare
UPS - Motion for Confidential Treatment - Form 41
EAS at Devils Lake and Jamestown, ND - Reselecting Carrier and Establishing Final Subsidy Rate
EAS at Pueblo, CO - Selecting Carrier and Setting Final Subsidy Rate
The Austrian Group/bmi/Lufthansa/LOT/Scandinavian Airlines System/Swiss International/TAP/United - Providing Access to Documents
OST-2002-12355 - Ukraine-New York
Amendment No. 1 to Application for a Foreign Air Carrier Permit
AeroSvit hereby seeks to amend its application to update certain evidentiary materials required by 14 C.F.R. § 211.20 contained in Exhibits AV-1 through AV-18 that were submitted as part of its initial Application for a Foreign Air Carrier Permit in the above-referenced docket. Specifically, AeroSvit would like to update information contained in Exhibit AV-4, Ownership Information, to reflect a change in the list of its shareholders, as shown in amended Exhibit AV-4 attached hereto. The referenced changes, however, do not in any way impact or change the nationality of AeroSvit as a Ukrainian flag carrier, or its proven fitness and ability to operate the services that are the subject of its Application for a Foreign Air Carrier Permit.
Additionally, AeroSvit requests that Amended Exhibit AV-4 be substituted for the initially submitted Exhibit AV-4 in docket OST-2002-12355.
Counsel: The Wicks Group, Glenn Wicks, 202-457-7790
I hereby certify that I have on this day served a copy of Amendment No. 1 to Application of AeroSvit Airlines for a Foreign Air Carrier Permit upon all persons named on the attached service list via electronic mail.
Counsel: The Wicks Group, Ekaterina Grimes
http://www.aerosvit.ua/eng
Aviation Ventures d/b/a Vision Air
OST-2004-19518 - Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity - Interstate Scheduled Passenger
Supplement No. 14 to Amended Application for a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity
Aviation Ventures, Inc. d/b/a Vision Air hereby supplements its application for a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity to engage in interstate scheduled air transportation of passengers, property and mail using 30 passenger seat aircraft.
Attached is Exhibit A is a list of pending actions against Vision and/or key personnel. This supplement is intended to provide current information concerning actions against Vision and/or personnel and is specifically intended to supplement Exhibit G to the application as originally filed October 26, 2004.
Counsel: Eric Zubel, 206-613-4433, ez@zubelpc.com
OST-2001-10457 - Exemption - Cincinnati-Cancun
OST-2004-18184 - Exemption - Salt Lake City-Cancun
OST-2005-22243 - Exemption - New York/Newark-Cozumel
Motion for a Temporary Dormancy Waiver
Delta Air Lines, Inc. hereby moves for a temporary dormancy waiver with respect to the following U.S.-Cancun/Cozumel city-pairs:
Cincinnati, OH-Cancun, Mexico
Salt Lake City, UT-Cancun, Mexico
New York, NY/Newark, NJ-Cozumel, Mexico
Due to the devastation caused by Hurricane Wilma in Cancun and Cozumel, Delta has been forced to revise its service plans for the identified routes. Delta currently anticipates that it will resume or commence these services on or about June 1, 2006. Accordingly, Delta requests a temporary waiver so that the 90‑day dormancy period for each route will commence on June 1.
OST-2005-22104 - Exemption - Salt Lake City/Los Angeles-Cozumel
In light of the severe damage Hurricane Wilma has inflicted on Cozumel, Delta Air Lines, Inc. no longer plans to introduce service on the Salt Lake City-Cozumel and Los Angeles-Cozumel routes pursuant to exemption authority granted by Notice of Action Taken dated August 31, 2005 (Docket OST-2005-22104). Accordingly, consistent with condition 7 of Appendix A of Order 88-10-2, Delta hereby provides notice of dormancy with respect to these routes. The dormancy notice period begins on March 4, 2006, the date Delta had proposed to introduce service. The 91st day of dormancy will occur on June 3, 2006.
Counsel: Hogan & Hartson, Alexander Van der Bellen, 202-637-8382, sascha.vanderbellen@hhlaw.com
OST-2005-21284 - Delta - Exemption - Orlando-Cancun
OST-2005-22415 - Delta - Exemption - Los Angeles-Cancun
OST-2005-22551 - Delta - Exemption - New York-Cancun
OST-2005-22620 - Delta - Exemption - Atlanta-Acapulco; Boston-Cancun; Los Angeles-Puerto Vallarta/San Jose del Cabo/Zihuatanejo; Washington, DC-Cancun
OST-2005-22737 - Comair - Exemption - Cincinnati-Cancun
Modified Start-Up Plans
In light of the severe damage Hurricane Wilma has inflicted on Cancun, Delta Air Lines, Inc. and its wholly owned subsidiary Comair, Inc. have modified their start-up plans with respect to the above-referenced routes, as described in Attachment A.
Delta anticipates that it will institute service on most of the subject routes by June 1, 2006, and requests that any dormancy condition run from that date. Delta is monitoring the situation in Cancun and hopes that it may be able to institute service sooner in some markets. Accordingly, Delta urges the Department to grant the requested economic authority for the identified routes as soon as possible.
Finally, Delta no longer has active service plans for Orlando-Cancun, and hereby withdraws that application.
US Gateway Applicant Docket No. OST-2005- Original Start Date New Start Date
Los Angeles Delta 22415 December 15, 2005 June 1, 2006
New York Delta 22551 December 15, 2005 June 1, 2006
Boston Delta 22620 February 4, 2006 June 1, 2006
Washington Delta 22620 February 4, 2005 June 1, 2006
Cincinnati Comair 22737 December 15, 2005 June 1, 2006
Orlando Delta 21284 December 15, 2005 Application Withdrawn
Eirjet Limited
OST-2005-23124 - Exemption - Ireland-United States
Application for Grant of Exemption Authority | Word
Eirjet Limited hereby applies for initial granting of exemption from 49 U.S.C. § 41301 to authorise Eirjet to engage in charter foreign air transportation of persons, property and mail between Ireland and the United States, and other passenger charter operations in accordance with 14 C.F.R. part 212. Eirjet also requests stopover privileges and relief from the Department’s requirement to provide prior notice of each flight, or series of flights, between Ireland and the United States.
Since commencement of operations in December 2004, Eirjet has carried 294,575 passengers on 2565 flights. The airline operates three Airbus A320 aircraft and has operated for 6625 flying hours since start of operations. The flight operations have been within Europe principally on charter flights. Eirjet has also operated for a number of scheduled European airlines on a series of short-term contracts. Eirjet is based in Shannon Airport, Ireland and has also has an operating base in Dublin, Ireland.
Eirjet is seeking underlying exemption authority to operate one Airbus A320 aircraft on charter flights between Ireland and the United States, and other passenger charter operations for a period of 180 days commencing on November 24 2005.
Counsel: Eirjet, Paul Schutz, 011-353-61-771858, paul.schutz@eirjet.com
http://www.eirjet.com/
Essential Air Service at Devils Lake and Jamestown, North Dakota
Order 2005-11-17
OST-1997-2785
Issued November 22, 2005 | Served November 28, 2005
Order Reselecting Carrier and Establishing Final Subsidy Rate - Bookmarked
The Department selects Mesaba Aviation, Inc., d/b/a Mesaba Airlines, to provide essential air service at Devils Lake and Jamestown, North Dakota, as described in Appendix B, effective October 1, 2005, through September 30, 2007.
The Department sets the final subsidy rates for Mesaba Aviation, Inc., d/b/a Mesaba Airlines, for the provision of essential air service at Devils Lake and Jamestown, North Dakota, as described in Appendix B, to be payable as follows: for each calendar month during which essential air service is provided, the amount of compensation shall be subject to the weekly ceilings set forth in Appendix C, and shall be determined by multiplying the subsidy-eligible flights completed during the month to Minneapolis/St. Paul by $1,089.15 for Devils Lake and by $1,116.17 for Jamestown.
http://www.devilslakeairport.com/ - Devils Lake Municipal Airport
http://www.jamestownnd.com/Airport/index.html - Jamestown Regional Airport
Essential Air Service at Pueblo, Colorado
Order 2005-11-16
OST-1999-6589
Order Selecting Carrier and Setting Final Subsidy Rate
The Department selects Great Lakes Aviation, Ltd., to provide essential air service at Pueblo, Colorado, as described in Appendix C, for the period beginning on the date the carrier inaugurates service through January 31, 2008.
The Department sets the final subsidy rate for Great Lakes Aviation, Ltd., for the provision of essential air service at Pueblo, Colorado, as described in Appendix C, to be payable as follows: for each calendar month during which essential air service is provided, the amount of compensation shall be subject to the weekly ceiling set forth in Appendix C and shall be determined by multiplying the subsidy-eligible flights completed during the month to Denver by $639.64.
Effective Period: Date of inauguration of nonstop turnaround service between Pueblo and Denver through January 31, 2008.
Scheduled Service: Two round trips each weekday and each weekend to Denver.
Intermediate stops and upline service: No service to any intermediate or upline points is contemplated under the terms of the carrier's proposal; accordingly, no such service may be provided on subsidized flights without prior Department approval.
Aircraft type: Beech 1900D (19 passenger seats)
Timing of flights: Flights must be well-timed and well-spaced in order to ensure full compensation.
Annual compensation: $780,997.
This rate assumes an annual completion factor of 98 percent. A compensation ceiling is to be applied per calendar week such that service above that ceiling in one week cannot make up for service shortfalls in another week.
Subsidy Rate per Denver Flight: $639.64
Weekly Compensation Ceiling: $15,351.36
http://pueblo.us/cgi-bin/gt/tpl_page.html,template=1&content=831&nav1=1& - Pueblo Memorial Airport
http://www.greatlakesav.com/
Horizon Air Industries, Inc. d/b/a Horizon Air
OST-1996-1575 - Form 41 Schedule B-7
Rule 12 Motion to Withhold Information from Public Disclosure
Horizon Air Industries, Inc. d/b/a Horizon Air respectfully requests that its DOT Form 41 Schedule B-7 filed with the Department on or about November 8, 2005, be withheld from public disclosure, insofar as such forms relate to small aircraft as defined in Part 298 of the Department's Regulations.
Counsel: Myers & Alterman, Yvette Rose, 202-293-1030
http://www.horizonair.com/
OST-2005-23125
Application for Approval of Agreements
TC23/TC123 Passenger Tariff Coordinating Conference (SP-4120) Geneva, 5-9 September 2005 TC23/123 Europe-Japan/Korea Resolutions (Memo 0131) TC23/TC123 Passenger Tariff Coordinating Conference (SP-4185) Geneva, 5-9 September 2005 TC23/123 Europe-Japan/Korea Resolutions (Memo 0134) Minutes: TC23/TC123 Passenger Tariff Coordinating Conference Geneva, 5-9 September 2005 (Memo 0136) Tables: TC23/TC123 Passenger Tariff Coordinating Conference (SP-4185) Geneva, 5-9 September 2005 specified Fares Tables (Memo 0069 and Memo 0071) Technical Correction: TC23/TC123 Passenger Tariff Coordinating Conference (SP-4185) Geneva, 5-9 September 2005 Specified Fares Tables (Memo 072) Intended effective date: 1 April 2006.
Counsel: IATA, Doulas Lavin
OST-2005-23126
PTC3 Mail Vote 468 Special Passenger Amending Resolution 010b From Singapore to Brunei, Macao SAR, Philippines Intended effective date: 1 December 2005.
OST-2005-23139
TC123 Passenger Tariff Coordinating Conferences Bangkok, 24 October-1 November 2005 TC123 South Atlantic Resolution 002ce (Memo 0318) Technical Correction: TC123 Passenger Tariff Coordination Conferences Bangkok, 24 October-1 November 2005 TC123 South Atlantic Resolution 002ce (Memo 0320) Intended effective date: 15 December 2005.
OST-2005-23140
PTC23 Mail Vote 467 Special Passenger Amending Resolution 010a From Korea (Rep. of) to Middle East Intended effective date: 1 December 2005.
Intra-Alaska Bush and Mainline Service Mail Rates
OST-2003-14694
Reply of Consolidated Carriers to November 4 Filing of the USPS and November 7 Filing of PenAir | Word
The Postal Service dismisses the arguments raised by the Consolidated Carriers, claiming that the comments were filed “out of time”. The comments of the Carriers filed on July 29, 2005 and modified on August 23, 2005 were accompanied by motions for leave to file an otherwise unauthorized document or alternatively be accepted although filed late. The August 23 document simply corrected the July 29 filing to exclude non-revenue operations. All arguments concerning the outdated information used in Order 2005-6-6 were raised in the July 29 comments overlooked by the Postal Service. Both filings were accepted by the Department and duly docketed. While the Postal Service may disagree with the Carriers’ comments, it cannot argue that the comments have no standing.
The filing of the Carriers clearly proves that the rates proposed in Order 2005-6-6 were out of data, inaccurate and not compensatory as required by law. Even with the temporary but significant downturn in fuel costs during the first quarter of 2005, the rates based on the year ended March 31, 2005 were higher than those based on the year ended in June, 2004. As noted by the Carriers’ comments, the rated proposed in 2005-6-6 were over nine months out of date when first proposed.
The Postal Service is wrong when it states in its footnote 1 that the rates developed by the Carriers were based on “…unaudited data that would not have provided a basis for the revisions sought.” The Carriers never used the word “unaudited”, but simply stated that the data were the raw filings made by the carriers, i.e. submitted originally before the B.T.S. made adjustments and exclusions to create the AKREL file. The AKREL data excludes all nonscheduled operations, even those are included in the terminal charge element of the mail rate. Further, the AKREL files have be modified to include intervillage passenger and freight traffic over longer itineraries between the bush hub and the ultimate destination of the traffic. This adjustment creates inaccurate revenue ton mile totals, and consequently unit costs. The AKIN files have always been used to determine mail rates, and are the appropriate database to be used in this case.
The Carriers take no position on current or proposed Part 121 rate levels except that the rates must be accurate and compensatory. Both Penair and Frontier Flying Service have complained about the losses associated with the new Part 121 mail rates, but only Penair has proposed specific changes or quantified the results of their arguments. No party has met its burden of proof as required by Department regulations. It is incumbent on any party proposing changes in rates or procedure to provide the data upon which it relies, and to show that there is a causal effect between the services it provides and the mail rate.
The theory of a class rate is that it will encourage higher cost operators to become more efficient and subsequently lower mail rates. Penair has simply shown that it and Frontier are higher cost bush carriers. There is no reason that higher costs carriers should be rewarded or lower cost carriers be penalized through rate setting. Penair has not provided any evidence why its operations (or those of Frontier) should cost more at the same hubs as its Part 135 competitors.
The Department and its predecessor agencies have a collective 65 years of mail rate making experience, and the Department is required by law to set rates that are compensatory for the particular service provided. Over the years the Department has used a variety of data and techniques to set mail rates in different jurisdictions. Given the collective experience and precedent of the Department in mail rate making matters, and the requirement that it set compensatory rates for the service provided, the Department should be granted wide latitude in setting rates. Department procedure should not be subordinated to the limited pecuniary interests of individual parties.
Counsel: MTC, Hank Myers, 425-641-8243, hank@mtcworld.com
OST-2002-12556 - Designation of Agent
Counsel: LAN, Juan Mencio
Les Investissements Nolinor, Inc.
Counsel: Nolinor, Jacques Prud'Homme
New York LaGuardia Airport Slots
OST-2000-7175
Letter from American Offering Guiding Principles
As you know, the High Density Rule will expire at New York-LaGuardia effective December 31, 2006. We understand that given the chronic delays already impacting the airport, the FAA is considering some form of congestion management, and may publish a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on this subject later this year. We wish to offer the following guiding principles for the Department and the FAA to consider as the proposed rule is drafted:
Avoid interfering with the normal functioning of a deregulated air transport system that relies on market forces to promote competition among airlines.
Minimize disruptions to existing operations.
Minimize the economic impact to carriers by protecting the proprietary and investment interests of incumbent carriers, while allowing new entrants to compete fairly with incumbents.
Utilize a secondary market system (such as Buy/Sell) to create opportunities for slot acquisitions before attempting to implement a regulated primary market.
To the extent a primary market, such as auctions or posted prices, is created (only if a secondary market fails to operate efficiently), the system should be as simple as possible, treating all carriers equally, and on a revenue neutral basis.
Do not discriminate against any particular type of commercial carrier, service, or aircraft type; and
Strike a balance by giving priority to scheduled operations during congested peak commercial hours, while promoting non-scheduled operations (such as general aviation) during off-peak periods.
American believes that incorporating the guiding principles and components set forth above into the NPRM is consistent with the public interest. Such a rule would reduce congestion and delays, maintain competition and market principles in commercial aviation, and strike a balance between the well-recognized interests of incumbents in maintaining their current operations and the need for new entrants to have a source for acquiring slots through a secondary market system.
By: American, Robert Reding
Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport Slots
OST-2005-23106 - Petition of Air Carrier Association of America to Withdraw and Reallocate America West and US Airways Slots
Petition of The Air Carrier Association of America to Withdraw and Reallocate America West and US Airways Slots - Bookmarked
The facts are simple. America West is no longer a "limited incumbent" at DCA. It is US Airways that has the largest DCA slot holdings. As a result, there is no longer a statutory basis for America West/US Airways to hold outside the perimeter exemption slots. The purpose of AIR-21 and Vision 100 was not to allow the nation's largest DCA slot holder to extend that control. With DCA closed to growth of competition, the Department must take every opportunity possible to promote competition at DCA. Now is such an opportunity.
Furthermore, under 49 U.S.C. § 41714(j), America West may not sell, trade, transfer or convey its AIR-21 and Vision 100 exemption slots. Thus, the new America West/US Airways airline should not have any right to these slots.
Counsel: ACAA, Edward Faberman, 202-719-7420, epfaberman@acaa1.com
OST-2005-21165 - Exemption - Orlando/Tampa-Cancun
OST-2005-22589 - Exemption - Dallas-Ft. Worth/Chicago-Cancun
Re: Revised Cancun Service Start Dates
Pursuant to a recent request from the Department, Spirit Airlines is hereby submitting its revised start-up dates for its proposed new US-Cancun services. As you know, these revisions are necessitated by the extensive damage done to Cancun-area tourism facilities by Hurricane Wilma.
Spirit anticipates introducing its new Tampa-Cancun service during the second quarter of 2006. Spirit anticipates inaugurating its proposed new Dallas-Cancun and Orlando-Cancun services during the final quarter of 2006.
Counsel: Garfinkle Wang, Anita Mosner, 703-522-0900
The Austrian Group / British Midland Airways Limited / Deutsche Lufthansa AG / Polskie Linie Lotnicze LOT S.A. / Scandinavian Airlines System / Swiss International Air Lines Ltd. / TAP Air Portugal / United Air Lines, Inc.
OST-2005-22922 - Approval of and Antitrust Immunity for Alliance Expansion Agreements and an Amended Coordination Agreement
Served November 22, 2005
Notice Providing Access to Documents
In order to afford interested parties prompt access to the documents under conditions agreed to by the Joint Applicants (including Swiss and SAS in their individual capacities) and imposed by the Department under similar recent circumstances, we will grant immediate interim access to all documents covered by the Rule 12 Motion to counsel and outside experts for interested parties who file appropriate affidavits with the Department in advance. Moreover, Parties will be permitted to make copies of the exhibits, at the Dockets facility, for use by persons who have filed confidentiality affidavits. We also find it appropriate to grant interim access to any subsequent materials that may be filed in this case under a Rule 12 Motion to counsel and outside experts for interested parties who file appropriate affidavits with the Department in advance, unless the party filing the Motion objects.
We expect all affidavits to state, at a minimum, that (1) the affiant is counsel for an interested party or an outside independent expert providing services to such a party; (2) the affiant will use the information only for the purpose of participating in this proceeding; and (3) the affiant will disclose such information only to other persons who have filed a valid affidavit in Docket OST-2005-22922. Affiants and interested parties must understand and agree that any pleading or other filing that includes or discusses information contained in the covered documents must itself be accompanied by a Rule 12 Motion requesting confidential treatment.
Affiants having filed affidavits may examine the documents at the Department of Transportation at the Dockets location. Affiants must present a stamped copy of the affidavit filed with the Department of Transportation before examination of the documents. Immediately after the completion of any judicial review of our final decision in this docket or the expiration of the 60-day period within which a person may petition for judicial review, all persons who have filed confidentiality affidavits in this proceeding are hereby directed to file a further affidavit stating that all copies of the applicants’ confidential materials have been destroyed or returned to the applicants.
Finally, when we have determined that the record of this case is complete, we will announce an appropriate procedural schedule.
United Air Lines, Inc. and British Midland Airways Limited d/b/a bmi
OST-2003-15758- US-UK - Exemptions and Statements of Authorization to Engage in Codesharing
United Air Lines, Inc. and British Midland Airways Limited dlb/a bmi respectfully reply to the untimely and meretricious answer of Continental Airlines, Inc. opposing United and bmi's October 3, 2005 application requesting a further renewal of United's and bmi's beyond U.S. gateway, intra-United Kingdom, and beyond United Kingdom-gateway code-share authority. United and bmi requested that their respective statements of authorization should be granted on an indefinite basis rather than just for a limited two year term.
Continental, with only the barest acknowledgement of its uniquely favored code-share position at London Heathrow, has now decided to voice its opposition to United's and bmi's request for indefinite statements of authorization. Continental bases its opposition to United's and bmi's request for indefinite renewal on Continental's lack of "competitive access," "commercially viable slots" and "facilities" at London's Heathrow Airport. Continental's argument elevates overreaching to new heights in trying to equate resolution of the issue concerning U.S. carrier access to London's Heathrow Airport with whether United and bmi should receive indefinite or just two year renewals for code-sharing statements of authorization. Continental's argument also sounds eerily similar to Continental's November 3 press release in which Continental went to extraordinary lengths to criticize the Department's forward-looking proposal to allow non-U.S. citizens to exercise control over various commercial and managerial aspects of U.S. carrier operations as well as to adopt broader measures to protect their investments in U.S. carriers. Continental's apparent contention is that any such expansion of the degree of control a non-U.S. citizen may exert over a U.S. carrier must be preceded by Continental first obtaining competitive access and free commercially viable slots at London's Heathrow Airport. While United and bmi could not more strongly disagree, the London Heathrow access issue should have no bearing on whether United and bmi's authorizations are indefinitely renewed.
Counsel: United - Wilmer Cutler, Jeffrey Manley, 202-663-6670, Jeffrey.manley@wilmerhale.com / bmi - Squire Sanders, Marshall Sinick, 202-626-6651, Msinick@ssd.com
United Air Lines, Inc. and Swiss International Air Lines Ltd. d/b/a Swiss
OST-2004-19148 - United - Exemption - US-Germany Codeshare with Lufthansa (Libya)
OST-2005-22464 - United and Swiss - US-Switzerland Blanket Codeshare
Application to Amend Exemption
United Air Lines, Inc. hereby applies for an amendment to its exemption authority to allow United to provide scheduled foreign air transportation of persons, property, and mail between the United States and points worldwide on a third-country code-share basis pursuant to its blanket code-share statement of authorization in Docket OST-2005-22464 under which United's "UA" designator code is displayed on flights operated by Swiss International Air Lines Ltd. d/b/a Swiss. United also requests route integration authority to combine this exemption authority with its current certificate and exemption authority as permitted under applicable bilateral agreements. For administrative convenience, United requests that this exemption be granted for a period co-extensive with the exemptions granted previously to United in the instant docket (through January 24, 2007).
Counsel: Wilmer Cutler, Jeffrey Manley, 202-247-6670, jeffrey.manley@wilmerhale.com
Joint Notice of Additional Codeshare
Pursuant to the blanket statement of authorization granted to United Air Lines, Inc. and Swiss International Air Lines Ltd. d/b/a Swiss in the captioned docket, United and Swiss hereby notify the Department that Swiss will display United's "UA" designator code on Swiss's flights between Zurich, Switzerland and Dar es Salaam, Tanzania.
OST-1995-125 - Form 41 Schedule B-7
United Parcel Service Co. hereby submits this motion to withhold from public disclosure, certain information contained in UPS' Schedule B-43, Inventory of Airframes and Aircraft Engines, for the period ending September 30, 2005, submitted herewith under seal, pursuant to Rule 39 of the Rules of Practice of the Department of Transportation. UPS believes that the information contained in its Schedule B-43 report is confidential and commercially-sensitive data, the premature public disclosure of which would cause substantial injury to UPS. UPS requests that the data at issue be withheld from public disclosure for a period of ten years.
A small portion of the information required to be filed pursuant to Part 241 is of a commercially sensitive and confidential nature. In this case, certain price and cost data contained in UPS' Schedule B-43, are highly sensitive and confidential. Public disclosure of these data would have an adverse financial impact on UPS.
Counsel: Kelley Drye, David Vaughan, 202-955-9864