[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 57 (Friday, March 25, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Pages 15540-15543]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-5883]



  Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 57 / Friday, March 25, 2005 / 
Notices  

[[Page 15540]]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

[Docket No. 2004-16944]


Operating Limitations at Chicago O'Hare International Airport

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of order.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: On February 10, 2005, the Federal Aviation Administration 
(FAA) issued an order to show cause, which solicited written views on 
extending the FAA's August 18, 2004, order limiting scheduled 
operations at O'Hare International Airport (O'Hare). The August 2004 
order made effective a series of schedule adjustments that the air 
carriers individually agreed to during a scheduling reduction meeting. 
These agreements, in general, resulted in a voluntary O'Hare peak-hour 
arrival rate of eighty-eight scheduled flights, with the exception of 
the 8 p.m. hour--the final peak hour of the day--when the rate would 
not exceed ninety-eight scheduled arrivals.
    This notice extends the August 2004 order until October 29, 2005. 
The order was originally scheduled to expire on April 30, 2005.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gerry Shakely, System Operations, Air 
Traffic Organization: telephone (202) 267-9424; facsimile (202) 267-
7277; e-mail [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Order Extending the August 2004 Limitatation of Scheduled Operations at 
O'Hare International Airport

    On February 10, 2005, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) 
issued an order to show cause (70 FR 7792, Feb. 15, 2005), which 
solicited written views on extending the FAA's August 18, 2004, order 
limiting scheduled operations at O'Hare International Airport (O'Hare). 
The August 2004 order made effective a series of schedule adjustments 
that the air carriers individually agreed to during a scheduling 
reduction meeting convened under 49 U.S.C. 41722. These agreements, in 
general, resulted in a voluntary O'Hare peak-hour arrival rate of 
eighty-eight scheduled flights, with the exception of the 8 p.m. hour--
the final peak hour of the day--when the rate would not exceed ninety-
eight scheduled arrivals.
    The order to show cause specifically requested written views on two 
issues. First, it solicited views on extending the duration of the 
August 2004 order. In the absence of an extension, the August 2004 
order would expire on April 30. The order to show cause expressed the 
FAA's intention to extend the expiration date until October 31, 2005.
    Second, the order to show cause sought views on the FAA's 
reallocation of any unused capacity assigned in the August 2004 order. 
Specifically, the FAA asked whether it should reallocate any unused 
capacity through the revised expiration date. If so, the order to show 
cause asked how the FAA should allocate any such arrival authority.
    The FAA's authority to extend the August 2004 order is the same as 
the authority cited in that order. The FAA proposes to extend the 
August 2004 order under the agency's broad authority in 49 U.S.C. 
40103(b) to regulate the use of the navigable airspace of the United 
States. This provision authorizes the FAA to develop plans and policy 
for the use of navigable airspace and, by order or rule, to regulate 
the use of the airspace as necessary to ensure its efficient use.
    In addition, the FAA has begun a rulemaking in which it has 
proposed to adopt a rule that would limit scheduled operations at 
O'Hare. The proposed rule would take effect upon the expiration of this 
order limiting scheduled flights at O'Hare and would expire in April 
2008.
    Extension of the August 2004 Order: A total of eleven respondents 
filed written views on the FAA's extension of the August 2004 order. 
The respondents included six air carriers (Air Canada, America West 
Airlines, American Airlines, Independence Air, United Airlines, and 
U.S. Airways); one air carrier association (Air Carrier Association of 
America); the City of Chicago; and three organizations representing 
general aviation, charter, and other unscheduled operators (National 
Air Transport Association, National Business Aviation Association, and 
Mark Travel, Inc.).
    None of the respondents representing scheduled air carrier 
interests opposes an extension of the August 2004 order, but each 
carrier included additional comments or suggestions.
    America West indicated it would not support an extension beyond the 
proposed October 31 date.
    Independence Air questioned whether absent the limitations, 
carriers would in fact increase flight schedules. The FAA, however, 
expects that carriers would increase flights and that a substantial 
increase in congestion and delays at O'Hare would result if the August 
2004 order were not extended, based on our experience before we issued 
that order.
    US Airways conditioned its support for the extension on the FAA's 
determination that an increase in scheduled operations at another 
Chicago-area airport--Midway Airport--is not causing additional delays 
at O'Hare. The FAA routinely monitors overall airspace capacity in the 
Chicago area and elsewhere and attempts to minimize the impact of 
operations wherever there are closely situated airports. We have 
specifically evaluated the number of scheduled operations at Midway 
Airport while the August 2004 order has been in effect and considered 
the operational impact on O'Hare when the August 2004 scheduling 
targets were adopted.
    Comparing the August 2004 schedules with the March 2005 published 
schedules, the number of weekday scheduled air carrier operations at 
Midway Airport has declined about 23% from 732 to 566 per day. In the 
peak hours from 12 p.m. to 8 p.m. Central Time, the hours during which 
American Airlines and United Airlines reduced scheduled arrivals at 
O'Hare under the August 18 Order, Midway scheduled operations have 
decreased by 25%. Scheduled flights in the 7 p.m. hour, the peak hour 
in August 2004, have decreased by 37%. Many of these changes may be 
temporary as some carriers at Midway have announced plans to increase 
service. However, there is no evidence that the voluntary schedule 
adjustments at O'Hare have resulted in a significant increase in 
scheduled flights at Midway Airport or that the operational impact from 
flights at Midway has worsened since the August schedule discussions. 
The voluntary limitations in the August 2004 order do not appear to 
have prevented air carriers at either airport from publishing 
competitive schedules. Several carriers serve both O'Hare and Midway, 
as is the case in other cities with multiple airports. No evidence has 
been presented that the extension of the limits at O'Hare unduly 
restricts an operator from making service decisions for the Chicago 
region.
    Mark Travel, which is a tour operator that conducts unscheduled 
public charters at O'Hare, the National Air Transport Association 
(NATA), and National Business Aviation Association (NBAA) collectively 
state that the congestion at O'Hare was caused primarily by scheduled 
air carriers. They request that adequate capacity be allocated to the 
operators of unscheduled flights at O'Hare. NBAA opposes an extension 
beyond October 2005, and NATA further opposes any limits on general 
aviation or other unscheduled arrivals.
    The August 2004 order governs only the scheduled arrivals of air 
carriers at O'Hare and was issued under the FAA's

[[Page 15541]]

authority to conduct a scheduling reduction meeting under 49 U.S.C. 
41722. The FAA is separately addressing unscheduled arrivals at O'Hare 
through proposed Special Federal Aviation Regulation No. 105, Docket 
FAA-2004-19411. In that proceeding, the FAA proposed a reservations 
system to assign peak-hour unscheduled arrivals at O'Hare. This 
proposal is based on historical average usage of the airport by 
unscheduled operations. Under the proposal, the number of reservations 
available to unscheduled operators could increase during periods when 
the FAA's Air Traffic Organization determines that O'Hare has excess 
capacity, such as when weather conditions permit a high arrival rate at 
the airport. Mark Travel, NATA and NBAA previously filed similar 
comments in the public docket opened for that proposed rulemaking, and 
their comments will be addressed in that proceeding.
    The City of Chicago's Department of Aviation does not oppose a 
continued, temporary limitation on scheduled arrivals at O'Hare. 
However, the City posits that the hourly scheduled arrival rate of 
eighty-eight during most peak hours, as set forth in the August 2004 
order, is too low and should yield to an hourly scheduled arrival rate 
of ninety-two. In arriving at the rate of eighty-eight scheduled 
arrivals in the August 2004 order, the FAA relied, in part, on aircraft 
queuing and delay modeling conducted by MITRE Corporation to simulate 
the effect of various schedule reductions on the flight delays 
experienced at O'Hare. We also relied on other operational indicia used 
by the FAA, such as the airport acceptance rate,\1\ the number and 
duration of delays, on-time performance relative to schedule, and the 
number of flight cancellations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The airport acceptance rate or airport arrival rate is the 
number of arrivals an airport is capable of accepting in an hour. 
These rates are based primarily on weather conditions, runway 
configuration, and arrival and departure traffic mix.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the FAA's experience, MITRE Corporation's queuing model has 
equated very closely to the flight delays actually experienced. In the 
case of the August 2004 order, assuming a rate of eighty-eight 
scheduled arrivals, modeling predicted an average 20% decrease in 
arrival delay minutes at O'Hare compared to August 2004 published 
schedules. Over the first four months that the August 2004 order has 
been in effect, actual air traffic data reflect that passengers at 
O'Hare have experienced an average decrease in arrival delay minutes of 
approximately 22%. MITRE Corporation's model also predicted that 
arrival rates greater than eighty-eight per hour would significantly 
degrade the delay-reduction benefits that air carriers and their 
passengers would receive.
    The FAA shares the goal of the City of Chicago to set the 
scheduling target as high as practicable, consistent with average 
airport capacity and our established delay reduction targets. The 
scheduling limits adopted in the August 2004 order reflect an increase 
from the number of arrivals initially proposed by the FAA and are 
significantly less restrictive than the limits imposed under the High 
Density Rule, which ceased to apply to O'Hare after July 1, 2002. As 
indicated by the analyses in the City's comments comparing scheduled 
arrivals against the recorded airport acceptance rate, the airport 
acceptance rate at O'Hare in the late summer through October 2004 was 
higher than that experienced earlier in the year. An airport's 
acceptance rate and system capacity are largely driven by weather and 
operating conditions. The actual hourly arrivals may vary from the 
acceptance rate based on the number and timing of scheduled arrivals, 
general aviation, charter, and other unscheduled flights, as well as 
scheduled flights that arrive earlier or later than the published 
times. Favorable weather conditions in late summer and early autumn and 
the resulting predominance of optimal or near-optimal acceptance rates 
indicated by the City, resulted in improved on-time performance and 
reduced delays at O'Hare.
    In November 2004, when the schedule depeaking and reductions took 
effect, good weather continued to support high acceptance rates. Some 
additional, well-timed arrivals could have been accommodated in this 
period without delay impacts. However, since November 2004, adverse 
weather has decreased the acceptance rate resulting in delays and 
increased flight cancellations. While performance improved 
significantly over the previous year, we believe that more operational 
experience and data are needed before the schedule targets could be 
raised. We also note that some air carriers have elected temporarily 
not to use all the arrival allocations assigned to them, so some hours 
have been below the targeted eighty-eight scheduled arrivals since 
November 2004. As a result, we are not yet convinced that a peak-hour 
arrival rate greater than eighty-eight per hour would be sustainable 
under average operating conditions and provide air carriers and 
passengers with equivalent delay-reduction benefits. As we indicate in 
the notice of proposed rulemaking related to O'Hare, we will continue 
to monitor operations and may propose an increase in the future if 
warranted. In the interim, the FAA expects to take advantage of 
opportunities to make capacity available for unscheduled arrivals and 
other short-term adjustments to meet air carrier scheduling needs.
    It is also significant that the August 2004 order makes effective 
voluntary agreements negotiated during an August 2004 scheduling 
reduction meeting, which the FAA convened under 49 U.S.C. 41722. The 
scheduled arrival rate and the air carrier scheduling adjustments set 
forth in the August 2004 order followed negotiations that included the 
air carriers, and the order carefully considered their views and the 
views of the City within the context of the FAA's delay reduction 
goals. We do not think it wise to issue an order that establishes new 
scheduled arrival rates without additional supporting evidence and 
opportunities for air carrier input. The FAA's order to show cause 
sought views on the narrower proposition of extending the negotiated 
agreement for six additional months.
    As we observed in the order to show cause, the FAA anticipates that 
extending the August 2004 order for six months would give way to a 
final rule that will govern, at least in the near term, the number of 
arrivals at O'Hare during peak hours. In response to the notice of 
proposed rulemaking, the City and all interested members of the public 
will have the opportunity to express their views on the proper level of 
service at O'Hare. The appropriate balance between a high level of 
service and anticipated increases in flight delays would fall within 
the scope of any such discourse.
    The City also asks the FAA to implement a new procedure to permit 
land and hold short operations (LAHSO) for MD-80 aircraft on O'Hare's 
runway 22 Right. The City suggests that such a procedure would increase 
the aircraft arrival rate at O'Hare. Because a large number of MD-80-
series aircraft operate at O'Hare, the FAA acknowledges that the 
ability to use another runway configuration for LAHSO could increase 
the airport's arrival and departure capacity. Moreover, the FAA is 
conducting a review of the performance capabilities of certain MD-80-
series aircraft to determine the appropriate landing distances used for 
LAHSO procedures. The FAA soon expects to validate its preliminary 
conclusion that at least some of the MD-80-series aircraft would meet 
the established safety and operational criteria to

[[Page 15542]]

conduct LAHSO on O'Hare's runway 22 Right.
    While air traffic control may offer a LAHSO clearance, however, it 
remains the air carrier's role to establish company operating 
procedures that are consistent with LAHSO requirements, and it is 
ultimately in the pilot's discretion to accept or reject a LAHSO 
clearance from air traffic control. Given the additional steps outside 
the FAA's control that must be accomplished before an operation may use 
LAHSO procedures, we are unable to predict at this point when, and how 
often, there would be realized capacity increases due to certain MD-80-
series aircraft conducting LAHSO on runway 22 Right. Therefore, even 
assuming that the FAA could, in extending the August 2004 order, 
increase the peak-hour arrival rate it identifies, the determination 
regarding MD-80 aircraft and LAHSO that the City requests could not be 
factored into any such increase at this time.
    The City additionally requests that the FAA exempt all 
international arrivals (whether conducted by domestic or foreign air 
carriers) from the limits by not counting them toward the arrival rates 
for each air carrier specified in the August 2004 order. Under the 
current order, arrivals by foreign flag carriers, except for Canadian 
carriers, are not limited. However, there are two important 
considerations as to the impact of foreign air carrier arrivals. First, 
the FAA included the number of then-scheduled foreign air carrier 
arrivals as of August 2004 when determining the cumulative airport 
demand, and adjustments by domestic air carriers were made based on 
then-existing foreign air carrier schedules. Second, foreign air 
carrier operations, at approximately 2.6%, are a relatively small 
percentage of O'Hare peak hour arrivals, and their overall level has 
historically remained quite stable. While there has been some shifting 
of foreign air carrier arrivals from one time period to another, there 
are limited increases during peak hours planned by foreign carriers for 
the summer 2005 season.
    We do not dispute the City's assertion that the limitations on the 
international arrival gates and facilities in Terminal 5 would act as a 
natural constraint on overall international arrivals by both domestic 
and foreign air carriers. The effect of the City's proposal, however, 
would be to permit air carriers that operate international arrivals to 
add more domestic arrivals to fill the place of the exempted 
international flights, unless there was an corresponding, one-for-one 
reduction in the number and timing of arrival authorizations currently 
authorized for either domestic or international arrivals. Given that 
there are over thirty international arrivals each day by domestic 
carriers, excluding arrivals from Canada, this could increase the peak-
hour arrival rate among the air carriers well above eighty-eight 
scheduled flights and would correspondingly degrade the delay 
reductions achieved by the August 2004 order. As we indicated earlier, 
the FAA is not prepared at this time to increase the scheduling targets 
beyond the parameters in the August 2004 order. The FAA therefore will 
not, in the context of extending the August 2004 order, alter the 
underlying voluntary agreements in the fundamental way that the City 
recommends.
    United Airlines and Air Canada, while not opposed to extending the 
August 2004 order, pointed out that the proposed expiration date of 
October 31 differs from the change of season recognized by the 
International Air Transport Association (IATA). In 2005, the IATA 
change of season will take place on October 29. The air carriers note 
that conforming the expiration of the August 2004 order to the IATA 
change of season would make any schedule changes at the expiration of 
the order less complicated for air carriers scheduling international 
operations at O'Hare. This is also consistent with scheduling 
adjustments made by many domestic operations to recognize the change 
from daylight savings time to standard time. As a result, and because 
the FAA does not believe that advancing the expiration of the August 
2004 order by two days will either harm any interested party or 
materially undermine the extension's delay-reduction benefits, the FAA 
will adopt October 29, 2005, as the new expiration for the August 2004 
order.
    Reallocation of Unused Capacity: The order to show cause also 
solicited views on whether the FAA should reallocate, during the 
duration of the August 2004 order, any arrival authority that is unused 
by the air carrier to which it was assigned. Because the order 
implemented a series of voluntary agreements, the FAA believes that it 
would be advisable to reallocate unused capacity only if there were 
consensus on reallocation among the air carriers that are parties to 
these agreements. The written submissions reflect a lack of agreement 
either on reallocation or on an appropriate reallocation method.
    Nine respondents expressed a position on a possible reallocation of 
unused arrival authority. Air Canada and Independence Air are opposed 
to the reallocation of unused capacity for the duration of the August 
2004 order. In addition, among the seven respondents expressing support 
for the reallocation of unused arrival authority, the respondents 
identified at least four mutually exclusive reallocation methods. Two 
air carriers would accord preference on reallocation to the air 
carriers that reduced their flight schedules to assist the FAA in 
arriving at the peak-hour schedule target. Two other air carriers would 
give preference to limited incumbent air carriers. The City proposed to 
manage the reallocation of unused capacity through a weighted lottery 
that accords varying degrees of preference to a number of factors. NATA 
proposed reserving any unused capacity for unscheduled operations. U.S. 
Airways supported reallocation but did not identify a reallocation 
method. Additionally, there was no universally accepted assessment 
among the respondents of when arrival authority is unused.
    Because the comments raise diverse issues that would be more 
suitably addressed through agency rulemaking or through an additional 
scheduling reduction meeting rather through an extension of the 
existing order, for the duration of the August 2004 order the FAA will 
not reallocate unused arrival authority. As a result, the FAA's Air 
Traffic Organization will consider any such unused capacity when 
determining whether to permit additional reservations for unscheduled 
arrivals at O'Hare.
    Conclusion: The FAA proposed to extend the August 2004 order for 
six months on the basis of its tentative findings that action is needed 
to prevent a recurrence of overscheduling at O'Hare and that extending 
the August 2004 order through October 2005 is a rational way of 
addressing that need, because the order reflects the FAA's agreements 
with U.S. and Canadian scheduled carriers serving O'Hare. After 
considering the responses, the FAA has determined to make those 
findings final and to extend the order until October 29, 2005.
    Accordingly, with respect to scheduled flight operations at O'Hare, 
it is ordered that:
    1. Ordering paragraph seven of the FAA's August 18, 2004, order 
limiting scheduled operations at O'Hare International Airport is 
amended to state that the order shall expire at 9 p.m. on October 29, 
2005.


[[Page 15543]]


    Issued in Washington, DC, on March 21, 2005.
Marion C. Blakey,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 05-5883 Filed 3-22-05; 10:04 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P