789 

Federal Aviation Administration, DOT 

§ 161.305 

(B) At the applicant’s discretion, in-

formation may also be submitted as 
follows: 

(

1

) Evidence not submitted under 

paragraph (e)(2)(ii)(A) of this section 
(Condition 2) that there is a reasonable 
chance that expected benefits will 
equal or exceed expected cost; for ex-
ample, comparative economic analyses 
of the costs and benefits of the pro-
posed restriction and aircraft and non-
aircraft alternative measures. For de-
tailed elements of analysis, see para-
graph (e)(2)(ii)(A) of this section. 

(

2

) Evidence not submitted under 

paragraph (e)(2)(ii)(A) of this section 
that the level of any noise-based fees 
that may be imposed reflects the cost 
of mitigating noise impacts produced 
by the aircraft, or that the fees are rea-
sonably related to the intended level of 
noise impact mitigation. 

(ii) 

Condition 2: The restriction does not 

create an undue burden on interstate or 
foreign commerce. 

(A) Essential informa-

tion needed to demonstrate this statu-
tory condition includes: 

(

1

) Evidence, based on a cost-benefit 

analysis, that the estimated potential 
benefits of the restriction have a rea-
sonable chance to exceed the estimated 
potential cost of the adverse effects on 
interstate and foreign commerce. In 
preparing the economic analysis re-
quired by this section, the applicant 
shall use currently accepted economic 
methodology, specify the methods used 
and assumptions underlying the anal-
ysis, and consider: 

(

i

) The effect of the proposed restric-

tion on operations of aircraft by avia-
tion user class (and for air carriers, the 
number of operations of aircraft by 
carrier), and on the volume of pas-
sengers and cargo for the year the re-
striction is expected to be implemented 
and for the forecast timeframe. 

(

ii

) The estimated costs of the pro-

posed restriction and alternative non-
aircraft restrictions including the fol-
lowing, as appropriate: 

(

A

) Any additional cost of continuing 

aircraft operations under the restric-
tion, including reasonably available in-
formation concerning any net capital 
costs of acquiring or retrofitting air-
craft (net of salvage value and oper-
ating efficiencies) by aviation user 

class; and any incremental recurring 
costs; 

(

B

) Costs associated with altered or 

discontinued aircraft operations, such 
as reasonably available information 
concerning loss to carriers of operating 
profits; decreases in passenger and 
shipper consumer surplus by aviation 
user class; loss in profits associated 
with other airport services or other en-
tities: and/or any significant economic 
effect on parties other than aviation 
users. 

(

C

) Costs associated with imple-

menting nonaircraft restrictions or 
nonaircraft components of restrictions, 
such as reasonably available informa-
tion concerning estimates of capital 
costs for real property, including rede-
velopment, soundproofing, noise ease-
ments, and purchase of property inter-
ests; and estimates of associated incre-
mental recurring costs; or an expla-
nation of the legal or other impedi-
ments to implementing such restric-
tions. 

(

D

) Estimated benefits of the pro-

posed restriction and alternative re-
strictions that consider, as appro-
priate, anticipated increase in real es-
tate values and future construction 
cost (such as sound insulation) savings; 
anticipated increase in airport reve-
nues; quantification of the noise bene-
fits, such as number of people removed 
from noise contours and improved 
work force and/or educational produc-
tivity, if any; valuation of positive 
safety effects, if any; and/or other qual-
itative benefits, including improve-
ments in quality of life. 

(B) At the applicant’s discretion, in-

formation may also be submitted as 
follows: 

(

1

) Evidence that the affected car-

riers have a reasonable chance to con-
tinue service at the airport or at other 
points in the national airport system. 

(

2

) Evidence that other air carriers 

are able to provide adequate service to 
the airport and other points in the sys-
tem without diminishing competition. 

(

3

) Evidence that comparable services 

or facilities are available at another 
airport controlled by the airport oper-
ator in the market area, including 
services available at other airports. 

VerDate Sep<11>2014 

08:20 May 17, 2019

Jkt 247048

PO 00000

Frm 00799

Fmt 8010

Sfmt 8010

Y:\SGML\247048.XXX

247048