§ 93.221 Transfer of slots.
http://law.justia.com/us/cfr/title14....1.3.11.13.9.7

(a) Except as otherwise provided in this subpart, effective April 1, 1986, slots may be bought, sold or leased for any consideration and any time period and they may be traded in any combination for slots at the same airport or any other high density traffic airport. Transfers, including leases, shall comply with the following conditions:

(1) Requests for confirmation must be submitted in writing to Slot Administration Office, AGC–230, Office of the Chief Counsel, Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Ave., SW., Washington, DC 20591, in a format to be prescribed by the Administrator.....

(2) The slot transferred must come from the transferor's then-current FAA-approved base.

(3) Written evidence of each transferor's consent to the transfer must be provided to the FAA.

(4) The recipient of a transferred slot may not use the slot until written confirmation has been received from the FAA.

(5)(i) Until a slot obtained by a new entrant or limited incumbent carrier in a lottery held under §93.225 after June 1, 1991, has been used by the carrier that obtained it for a continuous 24-month period after the lottery in accordance with §93.227(a), that slot may be transferred only by trade for one or more slots at the same airport or to other new entrant or limited incumbent carriers under §93.221(a)(5)(iii). This transfer restriction shall apply to the same extent to any slot or slots acquired by trading the slot obtained in a lottery. To remove the transfer restriction, documentation of 24 months' continuous use must be submitted to the FAA Office of the Chief Counsel.

(6) The Office of the Secretary of Transportation must determine that the transfer will not be injurious to the essential air service program.


Injurious= harmful, hurtful, or detrimental. I hardly see where the DOT/FAA will be able to justify their ruling. Allowing the CAL/AirTran trade eliminated a LCC at the Newark Airport and gave the dominate carrier even more power. Tell me how that wasn't "Injurious"?

We have met all of the requirements from what I've seen. They are clearly in the wrong.