UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

WASHINGTON, DC

Issued by the Department of Transportation on November 17, 2005

NOTICE OF ACTION TAKEN -- DOCKET OST-2000-7282

This serves as notice to the public of the action described below, taken
by the Department official indicated (no additional confirming order
will be issued in this matter).

Application of UNITED PARCEL SERVICE CO. (UPS) filed 9/9/05 to:

XX Renew exemption under 49 U.S.C. 40109 to provide the following
service:

Scheduled foreign air transportation of property and mail between the
terminal point Los Angeles, California, and the terminal point
Guadalajara, Mexico.  UPS further requests the right to integrate this
authority with its existing certificate and exemption authority.

Applicant rep: David L. Vaughan<PHONE_NUMBER> DOT Analyst: Tretha
Chromey<PHONE_NUMBER>

D I S P O S I T I O N

XX Granted (subject to conditions, see below)

The above action was effective when taken: November 17, 2005 through
November 17, 2007.

Action taken by:	Paul L. Gretch, Director

			Office of International Aviation

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

Except to the extent exempted or waived, this authority is subject to
the terms, conditions, and limitations indicated: 	XX	Holder’s
certificates of public convenience and necessity

XX	Standard exemption conditions (attached)

Conditions:  The U.S.-Mexico exemption authority granted is subject to
the dormancy notice requirements set forth in condition 7 of Appendix A
of Order 88-10-2.

The route integration authority granted is subject to the condition that
any service provided under this exemption shall be consistent with all
applicable agreements between the United States and the foreign
countries involved.  Furthermore, (a) nothing in the award of the route
integration authority granted should be construed as conferring upon UPS
rights (including fifth-freedom intermediate and/or beyond rights) to
serve markets where U.S. carrier entry is limited unless UPS notifies
the Department of its intent to serve such a market and unless and until
the Department has completed any necessary carrier selection procedures
to determine which carrier(s) should be authorized to exercise such
rights; and (b) should there be a request by any carrier to use the
limited-entry route rights that are included in UPS’s authority by
virtue of the route integration exemption granted here, but that are not
then being used by UPS, the holding of such authority by route
integration will not be considered as providing any preference for UPS
in a competitive carrier selection proceeding to determine which
carrier(s) should be entitled to use the authority at issue.

On the basis of data officially noticeable under Rule 24(g) of the
Department’s regulations, we found the applicant qualified to provide
the services authorized.

Under authority assigned by the Department in its regulations, 14 CFR
Part 385, we found that (1) our action was consistent with Department
policy; (2) grant of the exemption was consistent with the public
interest; and (3) grant of the authority would not constitute a major
regulatory action under the Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975.
To the extent not granted, we denied all requests in the referenced
Docket.  We may amend, modify, or revoke the authority granted in this
Notice at any time without hearing at our discretion.

Persons entitled to petition the Department for review of the action set
forth in this Notice under the Department’s regulations, 14 CFR
§385.30, may file their petitions within seven (7) days after the date
of issuance of this Notice.  This action was effective when taken, and
the filing of a petition for review will not alter such effectiveness.

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

http://dms.dot.gov//reports/reports_aviation.asp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 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
International Principal Security Inspector (IPSI) to advise the IPSI 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.

05/2004


[Federal Register: November 18, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 221)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 59476-59477]
[DOCID:fr18no09-4]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[Docket No. USCG-2009-0976]

Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Delaware River, Between Tacony,
PA and Palmyra, NJ

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of temporary deviation from regulations.

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

SUMMARY: The Commander Fifth Coast Guard District has issued a
temporary deviation from the regulations governing the operation of the
Tacony-Palmyra Bridge (Route 73), across the Delaware River, mile 107.2
between the townships of Tacony, PA and Palmyra, NJ. The deviation is
necessary to facilitate the resurfacing of the bridge roadway. This
deviation reduces the vertical clearance of the bridge in the closed
position by three feet and restricts operation of the draw span.

DATES: This deviation is effective from 9 p.m. on November 16, 2009,
until 5 a.m. on December 23, 2009.

ADDRESSES: Documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in
the docket are part of docket USCG-2009-0976 and are available online
by going to http://www.regulations.gov, inserting USCG-2009-0976 in the
``Keyword'' box and then clicking ``Search.'' They are also available
for inspection or copying at the Docket Management Facility (M-30),
U.S. Department of Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room
W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call or e-mail Terrance Knowles, Environmental Protection Specialist,
Fifth Coast Guard District; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If you have questions on viewing the
docket, call Renee V. Wright, Program Manager, Docket Operations,
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Burlington County Bridge Commission, who
owns and operates this bascule drawbridge, has requested a temporary
deviation from the current operating regulations set out in 33 CFR
117.5 and 117.716(b) to facilitate the resurfacing of the bridge
roadway.
    The Tacony-Palmyra Bridge (Route 73) at mile 107.2, across the
Delaware River, between Tacony, PA and Palmyra, NJ, has a vertical
clearance in the closed position to vessels of 53 feet above mean high
water (MHW). This clearance will be reduced for safety netting by
approximately three feet to 50 feet above MHW.
    Under this temporary deviation, the resurfacing repairs will
restrict the operation of the draw span on the following dates and
times:
    Closed-to-navigation each day from 9 p.m. to 5 a.m., from 9 p.m. on
November 16, 2009 to 5 a.m. on November 24, 2009; and from 9 p.m. on
November 30, 2009 to 5 a.m. on December 23, 2009; except vessel
openings will be provided with at least four hours advance notice given
to the bridge operator at<PHONE_NUMBER> or via marine radio on Channel
13. The drawbridge will open in the event of an emergency. Vessels that
can pass under the bridge without a bridge opening may do so at all
times. There are no alternate routes for vessels transiting this
section of the Delaware River.
    The Coast Guard has coordinated the restrictions with the Delaware
River Pilots Association and will inform the other users of the
waterways through our Local and Broadcast Notices to Mariners of the
closure periods for the bridge so that vessels can arrange their
transits to minimize any impact caused by the temporary deviation.
    In accordance with 33 CFR 117.35(e), the drawbridge must return to
its regular operating schedule immediately at the end of the designated
time period. This deviation from the operating regulations is
authorized under 33 CFR 117.35.

    Dated: November 6, 2009.
Waverly W. Gregory, Jr.,
Chief, Bridge Administration Branch, by direction of the Commander,
Fifth Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. E9-27635 Filed 11-17-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 162 (Wednesday, August 21, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 51804-51806]
[FR Doc No: 2013-20375]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

[Docket No. FAA-2011-0183]

Access to Aircraft Situation Display to Industry (ASDI) and
National Airspace System Status Information (NASSI) Data

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final Notice of the Process for Limiting Aircraft Data
Displayed Via ASDI.

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

SUMMARY: In a proposal published on May 9, 2012, the FAA tentatively
identified a process through which aircraft owners and operators could
ask the FAA to limit the agency's dissemination of their aircraft data
via the FAA's ASDI program.\1\ The FAA noted that its final decision on
the policy will replace the interim policy to which the FAA has adhered
since publishing it on December 16, 2011.\2\ After considering each of
the comments submitted to the public docket in response to the
proposal, the FAA is issuing this final policy with respect to the
dissemination of aircraft data via ASDI.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 77 FR 27,269 (May 9, 2012).
    \2\ 76 FR 78,328 (Dec. 16, 2011).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    If you wish to review the background documents or the comments
received in this matter, you may go to http://www.regulations.gov at
any time and follow the online instructions for accessing the
electronic docket. You may also go to the U.S. Department of
Transportation's Docket Operations in Room W12-140 on the ground floor
of the West Building at 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC,
between 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays.

DATES: The procedures described in this document will take effect on
September 20, 2013.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: You may direct any questions about
adding aircraft to and removing aircraft from the ASDI block list to
Mr. Damon Thomas by telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER> or by electronic mail
at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    On November 18, 2011, the President signed into law H.R. 2112, the
``Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act, 2012,'' which
provided the U.S. Department of Transportation's appropriation for the
balance of fiscal year 2012. Section 119A of that statute provided
that:

    [n]otwithstanding any other provision of law, none of the funds
made available under this Act or any prior Act may be used to
implement or to continue to implement any limitation on the ability
of any owner or operator of a private aircraft to obtain, upon a
request to the Administrator of the [FAA], a blocking of that
owner's or operator's aircraft registration number from any display
of the [FAA's ASDI and NASSI] data that is made available to the
public, except data made available to a Government agency, for the
noncommercial flights of that owner or operator.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Public Law 112-55, Sec.  119A, 125 Stat. 552, 649.

    In light of this appropriation language, the FAA withdrew a prior
policy that it published on June 3, 2011, which required owners or
operators to submit a Certified Security Concern in order to have their
aircraft blocked from the public's view on displays of ASDI and NASSI
information. In connection with its withdrawal of the June 3 policy,
the FAA published interim procedures by which the owners and operators
of aircraft could request that the FAA block information about the
operations of their aircraft from release to the public via the FAA's
ASDI data feed.\4\ At that time, the FAA noted that it would propose
more detailed procedures for the ASDI blocking program and solicit
public comment on the proposal. The FAA published the FAA's proposed
procedures on May 9, 2012.\5\ The FAA now summarizes and evaluates the
written comments submitted to the public docket in this matter and sets
forth the FAA's final decision on its policy related to the blocking of
aircraft flight data from the ASDI data feed. In a separate action, the
FAA will amend its memoranda of agreement with the subscribers who
receive the information to clarify the subscriber responsibilities,
consistent with the procedures described here.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ 76 FR 78,328.
    \5\ 77 FR 27,269-71.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Summary and Analysis of the Comments

    The FAA received eight written comments on the FAA's proposed
procedures. Out of the eight commenters, two are generically opposed to
blocking aircraft information from the ASDI and NASSI data, and three
are generically in favor of the ASDI aircraft blocking program. The
three remaining commenters question certain aspects of the program and
the FAA's proposal.
    The FAA cannot accommodate the two commenters who oppose the
blocking of aircraft information from the FAA's ASDI and NASSI data
feed. The appropriations provision quoted above clearly precluded the
use of appropriated funds to implement or to carry out any limitation
on blocking from any display of the FAA's public data feed, on owner or
operator request, the aircraft registration number of an aircraft
conducting a noncommercial flight. In the absence of appropriated
funds, the FAA cannot implement a policy or program that would limit
owner or operator ability to block the specified aircraft from the
FAA's data feed.
    With respect to the commenters who raised questions with respect to
the FAA program, an anonymous commenter questions the need and
effectiveness of the option to request the blocking of aircraft data at
the ASDI subscriber level. This commenter suggests that the convenience
of allowing an intermediate level of blocking at the ASDI subscriber
level could be counterbalanced by the potential harm from the
inadvertent release of ASDI and NASSI data at that level.
    In the FAA's notice inviting these comments, the FAA explained the
rationale for the ASDI program's two

levels of aircraft blocking.\6\ In summary, given the technology and
the processes in place when the FAA established the ASDI program in
1997, some aircraft owners who desired to track their own blocked
aircraft needed to contract with an ASDI subscriber to get that
information, because there was no way for them to see the data if it
were blocked at the FAA level. The option of requesting aircraft
blocking at the ASDI subscriber level remains necessary for this
purpose today, and the FAA will retain it. However, the commenter is
correct to the extent that the FAA systems that convey aircraft data in
the United States are changing rapidly. As a result, the FAA expects to
update its data sharing policy as it continues to develop and deploy
future systems that handle aircraft operational data.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Id., at 27,270.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The National Business Aviation Association (NBAA) inquires about
the manner in which the FAA expects to protect blocked aircraft data
from subscribers' intentional or inadvertent release. The FAA's
agreement with subscribers requires each subscriber to demonstrate to
the FAA's satisfaction the subscriber's ability to block selectively
the display of any data related to any identified aircraft. In
addition, the agreement has historically required ASDI data subscribers
to honor the privacy and security interests of airspace system users
under the legacy ASDI blocking program. In the notice announcing the
FAA's interim policy, the FAA specified that it construes the current
agreement to obligate ASDI subscribers to filter any aircraft data at
the FAA's direction.\7\ The potential remedy for a subscriber's failure
to honor the privacy and security interests of system users has been
the FAA's immediate termination of the agreement with that subscriber.
This remedy has proven adequate. If any member of the public identifies
an aircraft that should be blocked, yet continues to appear in the
information that an ASDI subscriber releases, he or she can report the
matter to FAA's ASDI program staff by the means identified in the ``For
Further Information Contact'' section of this document.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 76 FR 78,328.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    NBAA also asks the FAA to identify clearly a process for removing
aircraft from the ASDI block list. The FAA's May 2012 proposal states
that the FAA was proposing that it would use the same process for
adding as well as removing aircraft from the ASDI block list.\8\ For
example, in detailing the proposed substance of owner/operator
requests, the FAA noted that the completeness of the information
submitted could influence the FAA's ability to ``add or delete aircraft
from the ASDI block list . . . .'' \9\ In addition, the information
that the FAA proposed for submission included ``[t]he registration
number(s) of the aircraft to be blocked or unblocked . . . .'' \10\ The
FAA does not perceive that using an identical process to block and to
unblock aircraft will be confusing or problematic for requestors, and
the FAA will adopt that approach.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 77 FR 27,269-70.
    \9\ Id., at 27,269.
    \10\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    NBAA additionally suggests that the FAA should permit associations
to consolidate and forward aircraft blocking and unblocking requests to
the FAA. In the FAA's May 2012 proposal, the FAA tentatively determined
that requests to block aircraft must come to the FAA from aircraft
owners, aircraft operators, or their legally authorized agent and not
from associations acting on their behalf. The FAA will adhere to this
requirement. In proposing a minimum legal relationship between an ASDI
block requestor and the aircraft owner or operator, the FAA determined
that the requestor, if he or she is not the actual owner or operator,
should have a fiduciary duty to adhere to the owner's or operator's
express wishes. This is intended to ensure that the requestor has a
legal duty to carry out promptly the owner's or operator's request, and
the FAA expects this to result in a very close correlation between
owner/operator preference and the composition of the ASDI block list.
The FAA continues to believe that the threshold identified in the
proposal is appropriate and will promote the ASDI block list's ongoing
accuracy.
    NBAA further notes that the FAA's proposal does not specify a type
of documentation that the FAA needs in order to process a request
related to aircraft blocking. The FAA did not prescribe a specific form
for blocking and unblocking aircraft principally because the FAA
intends this process to be as simple as possible; the FAA does not want
to suggest that a particular form is necessary to effect the requesting
owner's or operator's wishes. The FAA proposed the minimum amount of
information that the FAA expects the program will need to process the
request.\11\ Elaborating slightly on the FAA's proposal, the FAA will
be best equipped to process the request promptly if the request
includes:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ Id., at 27,269-70.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     The name of the requestor;
     the registration number(s) of the aircraft to be blocked
or unblocked;
     a certification that the requestor is the owner or
operator of the specified aircraft or is a legally authorized
representative of the aircraft owner or operator;
     a telephone number or electronic mail address to which the
FAA can direct any questions about the request; and
     for a request to block one or more aircraft, a statement
indicating the requestor's desired level of ASDI blocking--either at
the FAA source or at the ASDI subscriber level.
    The request must be in writing and delivered either to the
designated electronic mail address or to the designated regular mailing
address for the ASDI blocking program.
    An anonymous commenter asks the FAA to clarify the uses that ASDI
subscribers can make of the ASDI data feed. The commenter states that
the FAA should permit ASDI subscribers to pass along to ``aviation
community'' users ASDI and NASSI near real time data that is further
filtered only to protect basic privacy considerations. The commenter
does not consider the aviation community user to correspond to the
general public, instead defining the aviation community to include, for
example, corporate aircraft operators and fixed base operators and
perhaps also including all businesses and commercial entities providing
air transportation related services. The commenter also asks that the
FAA place no restriction on subscribers' retransmission of historical
flight data, including the past operations of aircraft on the ASDI
block list.
    The permissible uses of ASDI and NASSI data that are subject to
subscriber-level blocking is technically a concern that is separate
from the present discussion. The notice underlying this matter was
limited to the procedures by which aircraft owners and operators can
request that the FAA block their aircraft from the ASDI data feed.\12\
By contrast, the responsibilities of ASDI subscribers with respect to
handling ASDI and NASSI data that is designated as blocked at the
subscriber level are contained in the FAA's contractual memorandum of
agreement with ASDI subscribers. In an effort that parallels the
current procedural policy discussion, the FAA is reviewing its
memoranda of agreement to ensure that they comport with the FAA's
current overall data sharing policy. The FAA will communicate
separately with ASDI subscribers in connection with that effort.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ Id.

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

    Nevertheless, the FAA notes potential pitfalls that could accompany
the recommendations of the anonymous commenter. For example, the
commenter's definition of an aviation community user could include the
flight department of a company that is interested in the aircraft
movements of a competitor's aircraft. This could presumably thwart a
reason that the competing airspace user sought ASDI blocking in the
first place. In addition, the FAA has not previously agreed that ASDI
subscribers can display the historical movements of blocked aircraft.
Aside from the absence of a clear line as to when such data becomes
historical, the FAA did not propose to permit ASDI subscribers to
retransmit the historical movements of blocked aircraft, and the
commenter's suggestion therefore falls outside the scope of the
proposal.

III. Conclusions

    With respect to the procedures for aircraft owner and operator
requests to block and unblock aircraft from inclusion in the FAA's ASDI
data feed, the FAA concludes as follows:
    1. Requestors. The FAA will honor each written request of an
aircraft owner and operator, submitted in accordance with paragraphs 2
and 3 to block or unblock their aircraft's appearance in the FAA's
public ASDI data feed. Aircraft owners and operators may submit their
request on their own behalf, or they may do so through a legally
authorized agent, including an attorney or an aircraft management
company with a fiduciary duty to carry out the owner's or operator's
express wishes with respect to the aircraft.
    2. Substance of Requests. To assist the FAA in processing aircraft
owner or operator requests promptly, all requests related to an
aircraft's ASDI blocking or unblocking must include the following
information:
     The name of the requestor;
     the registration number(s) of the aircraft to be blocked
or unblocked;
     a certification that the requestor is the owner or
operator of the specified aircraft or is a legally authorized
representative of the aircraft owner or operator;
     a telephone number or electronic mail address to which the
FAA can direct any questions about the request; and
     for a request to block one or more aircraft, a statement
indicating the requestor's desired level of ASDI blocking--either at
the FAA source or at the ASDI subscriber level.
    3. Addresses. The FAA's primary electronic mailbox for all aircraft
blocking and unblocking requests and for related inquiries directed to
the ASDI blocking program is<EMAIL_ADDRESS>The FAA also will
accept aircraft block and unblock requests submitted by regular mail
at: FAA ASDI Blocking Request; ATO System Operation Services, AJR-0;
Wilbur Wright Building, Room 3E1500; 600 Independence Avenue SW;
Washington, DC 20597.
    4. FAA Monthly Implementation. The FAA implements the ASDI block
list updates on the first Thursday of each month. As a result, requests
that the FAA receives on or before the 15th of the preceding month are
likely to be processed in time to take effect in the month after the
FAA receives them. However, it is possible that the volume of requests
in a given month, a requestor's timeliness, or issues with the
completeness and accuracy of the information that the FAA receives
could preclude the FAA from processing some requests in time for them
to take effect in the month following their submission. In that event,
the FAA will process all requests in the order in which the FAA
receives them, to the extent that it is possible.
    5. FAA Treatment of Aircraft That Are Currently Blocked. Any
aircraft that is currently on the ASDI block list, either by virtue of
a certified security concern submitted after June 3, 2011, or a request
submitted under the FAA's interim ASDI block policy, will remain
indefinitely on the ASDI block list when the policies in this document
take effect. It is not necessary for the owners or operators of these
aircraft to resubmit their requests, unless they wish to change the
blocking status of their aircraft or amend the level at which their
aircraft is blocked.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on August 14, 2013.
J. David Grizzle,
Chief Operating Officer, ATO.
[FR Doc. 2013-20375 Filed 8-20-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P