| Q: |
Pollution Insurance: Central has never carried pollution insurance because it is covered by the State Storage Tank Trust Fund. I believe Central and the Airport are adequately protected without the requirement of pollution insurance. I have been informed by our insurance broker that a policy providing $1,000,000 coverage would cost us between $50,000-$75,000 per annum. This would be a new added expense to the company, one that I believe is unnecessary. Recommend repeal of the pollution insurance requirement.
|
| A: |
1/13/06 meeting discussion Item.
|
|
| Q: |
"I submit the changes were too sweeping and should be repealed or altered substantially. In any event the rules pertaining to insurance requirements by commercial operators should not be allowed to take effect February 1, 2006"
|
| A: |
1/13/06 meeting discussion Item.
|
|
| Q: |
Reference Section 22.03a. There should not be a requirement for a Commercial Liability policy unless the operator leases the premises.
|
| A: |
1/13/06 meeting discussion item.
|
|
| Q: |
Reference Section 22.03b. My recollection of the discussions in the various meetings was that the $1,000,000 requirement for liability coverage for any POV being driven on the ramp was a sufficient solution to that issue. A $2,000,000 requirement for business automobile liability is overreaching. My observation is that the $1,000,000 requirement has significantly reduced the amount of vehicular traffic on the AOA. Little more will be gained by the added requirement except an additional burden on the Commercial Operator whose business, by definition, is somewhat limited.
|
| A: |
1/13/06 meeting discussion item.
|
|
| Q: |
Reference Section 22.03f. If there should not be a requirement for a $1,000,000 Commercial Liability Policy, then it follows, there should not be a requirement for a $5,000,000 commercial umbrella policy.
|
| A: |
1/13/06 meeting discussion item.
|
|
| Q: |
There exists today a solution to the dilemma of the aircraft owner who wants protection from his losses of the kind suffered by Lexicon. This solution did not exist at the time of Lexicon's loss. Historically an aircraft "owner's" policy did not cover either loss of use or loss of value. They now offer "rental reimbursement" as a standard feature in their offerings to corporate turbine aircraft owners. The bottom line is that any turbine aircraft owner may purchase any amount of coverage he wishes for the loss of value for his aircraft in the event of an accident.
|
| A: |
1/13/06 meeting discussion item.
|
|
| Q: |
The new rules tasked Central with the enforcement of all the new insurance rules as they applied to Commercial Operators with responsibility for the ingress and egress through the gates. The possibility of this requirement was never discussed in any of the public meetings or private conversations. Placing Central in such a position without notice or prior discussion is inappropriate to say the least. Suffice it to say that this requirement must reviewed.
|
| A: |
Currently under discussion with Central Flying Service.
|
|
| Q: |
Concerns relating to the insurance requirements as applicable to small contractors employed regularly for facility repairs, etc.
|
| A: |
1/13/06 meeting discussion item.
|
|
| Q: |
Suggest the following sentence be added at end of Section 22.02: "The indemnity set forth herein does not extend to the liabilities caused by or related to the negligence or willful misconduct of the Commission."
|
| A: |
Change approved with the addition of the following: "However, this shall in no way diminish the Commission's right to assert tort immunity as provided by law and statute."
|
|
| Q: |
What insurance do I need if I drive on the ramp? What if I don't drive on the ramp?
|
| A: |
1/13/06 meeting discussion item.
|
|
| Q: |
What type of insurance is needed for a company or individual who works in hangars cleaning aircraft who drives a personal vehicle on the ramp and into the hangars?
|
| A: |
For a company: A) Commercial General Liability, B) Business Auto Liability, C) Hangar Keeper's Liability, D) Worker's Comp. if company has 3 or more employees, and F) Commercial Umbrella Liability. For individuals, all except D).
|
|
| Q: |
Regarding accident Reporting and previous discussion which questioned whether or not "motor vehicles" included aircraft.
|
| A: |
Accident reporting in the Rules and Regs states: "All motor vehicle accidents occurring on Airport property shall be immediately reported to Airport Communications. All motor vehicle accidents occurring on Airport property will be investigated by Little Rock Police Department or other appropriate law enforcement agency when requested to do so by the Little Rock Police Department." Motor vehicles cover all motorized vehicles (i.e. automobiles, tugs) but not aircraft.
|
|
| Q: |
After extensive study of these proposed requirements we believe them to be inequitable, unjustified, unenforceable, and in many cases the coverage unobtainable at any price.
|
| A: |
1/13/06 meeting discussion item.
|
|
| Q: |
Because it was not on the published agenda and because we were emailed the final draft less than an hour before the November Commission meeting, we were not at that meeting to voice our concerns.
|
| A: |
The Commission extended the comment period to 1/6/06, and a Minimum Standards Insurance meeting was scheduled for 1/13/06 to provide another public forum for this matter.
|
|
| Q: |
The individuals and small businesses which provide our community many valuable aviation services would be wiped out by these requirements. Many will be unable to buy the insurance at any price while others will be forced to pay large additional premiums. The local small businesses that did survive would be at a competitive disadvantage to those using Adams Field but operating from other airports such as North Little Rock.
|
| A: |
1/13/06 meeting discussion item.
|
|
| Q: |
In our discussions with aviation trade organizations, they have suggested that the airport might be violating the FAA Grant Assurances should small business who are not able to obtain the required insurance be excluded from the Airport. Please refer to Sect. 22 Item (a) of the Airport Assurances (3/2005). We are in the process of exploring this further and will report our findings.
|
| A: |
1/13/06 meeting discussion item.
|
|
| Q: |
In addition, establishing an environment where only large companies can afford insurance has the unintended consequence of significantly reducing the competition at precisely the time the Commission is actively seeking to enhance it.
|
| A: |
1/13/06 meeting discussion item.
|
|
| Q: |
Since the $1 million coverage is deemed adequate for anyone driving on the ramp (including people with no aviation training), we submit that it is inequitable for the highly trained aviation professionals who make up these small businesses to have significantly higher insurance requirements. There is absolutely no evidence of higher risk associated with the services these professionals perform.
|
| A: |
1/13/06 meeting discussion item.
|
|
| Q: |
We strongly oppose these requirements and urge the Commission to revert back to the $1 million automobile insurance requirement it passed recently.
|
| A: |
1/13/06 meeting discussion item.
|
|
| Q: |
Recommend add the following to Section 22. Definitions, Commercial Operator- "The term Commercial Operator includes those parties providing aeronautical services or activities who do not have a lease with the Commission, who shall be referred to as Independent Contractors. The definition of Commercial Operator shall also include subcontractors of FBO's, SASO's and Independent Contractors."
|
| A: |
1/13/06 meeting discussion item.
|
|
| Q: |
Reference Section 22.03 Opening paragraph: Delete the following: ", if performing particular activities set forth below in paragraphs (a) through (h)," and "Commercial Operators who are only in the business of transporting passengers meet the requirements of this section by complying with paragraphs (a), (b) and (h) or by providing proof of aircraft and passenger liability insurance by listing them as an additional insured."
|
| A: |
1/13/06 meeting discussion item.
|
|
| Q: |
Reference Section 22.03a: Add the following after Commercial General Liability- "Applicable to all Commercial Operators."
|
| A: |
1/13/06 meeting discussion item.
|
|
| Q: |
Reference Section 22.03b: Change the limit combined amount from $2,000,000 to $1,000,000, and after Business Auto Liability add: "Applicable to Commercial Operators operating vehicles in the Airport Operations Area."
|
| A: |
1/13/06 meeting discussion item.
|
|
| Q: |
Reference Section 22.03c: Add the following after Hangarkeeper's Liability- "Applicable to Commercial Operators providing hangar storage or aircraft maintenance/repair services." Delete the following: "for operators providing hangar storage or aircraft maintenance/repair service."
|
| A: |
1/13/06 meeting discussion item.
|
|
| Q: |
Reference Section 22.03d: Add the following after Worker's Compensation and Employer's Liability: "Applicable to Commercial Operators with employees." and capitalize the "T" in "This".
|
| A: |
1/13/06 meeting discussion item.
|
|
| Q: |
Reference Section 22.03e: Add the following after Property- "Applicable to Commercial Operators with leases with the Commission who are responsible for property owned by the Commission."
|
| A: |
1/13/06 meeting discussion item.
|
|
| Q: |
Reference Section 22.03f: Add the following after Commercial Umbrella Liability- "Applicable to Commercial Operators who are FBO's."
|
| A: |
1/13/06 meeting discussion item.
|
|
| Q: |
Reference Section 22.03h: Add the following after Aircraft and Passenger Liability-"Applicable to Commercial Operators in the business of providing charter or commercial flight services. This insurance is not required of Commercial Operators providing pilot services to owner/operators of aircraft. Limit"
|
| A: |
1/13/06 meeting discussion item.
|
|
| Q: |
Reference Section 22 last paragraph: Add the following paragraph "Commercial Operators utilizing subcontractors on the Airport Operations Area shall be required to confirm their subcontractors' compliance with the above required insurance limits."
|
| A: |
1/13/06 meeting discussion item.
|
|
| Q: |
Feels that the $1 million requirement is all that is needed and would like to work with the airport on better ways to secure the ramp and reduce liability. Feels that the proposed insurance requirements are unfair to those who operate small businesses due to high cost and possibly being unobtainable.
|
| A: |
1/13/06 meeting discussion item.
|
