BEFORE THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION WASHINGTON, D.C.

__________________________________________ ) Application of ) ) CARIBBEAN AIRLINES LIMITE D ) DOCKET OST-2010-0232 ) for renewal of an exemption ) (Jamaica/Caribbean Points-U.S.) ) __________________________________________)

REPLY OF CARIBBEAN AIRLINES LIMITED

Communications with respect to this document should be sent to: John R. Mietus, Jr. Law Office of John Mietus, LLC 6701 Democracy Blvd., Suite 300 Bethesda, MD 20817-7500 (202) 747-5212 (240) 396-5362 fax john@mietuslaw.com

Counsel for CARIBBEAN AIRLINES LIMITED

March 5, 2012BEFORE THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION WASHINGTON, D.C.

__________________________________________ ) Application of ) ) CARIBBEAN AIRLINES LIMITE D ) DOCKET OST-2010-0232 ) March 5, 2012 for renewal of an exemption ) (Jamaica/Caribbean Points-U.S.) ) __________________________________________)

REPLY OF CARIBBEAN AIRLINES LIMITED

By application dated February 9, 2012, Caribbean Airlines Limited ("CAL") requested renewal of the above-captioned exemption, granted by

Notice of Action Taken dated Februa ry 10, 2011 and amended June 20, 2011 (together, the "Notice"), and invoked th e automatic extension provisions of 5 U.S.C. § 558(c) and Part 377 of the De partment's Special Regulations. As with the original exemption, no U.S. carrier opposes or commented on the renewal application. Yet John P.T. Gilmore, writing from Canada, again opposes the authority on the same grounds that the Department rejected last year in issuing the Notice. CAL respec tfully requests that the Department once again reject Gilmore's arguments and proceed to renew this exemption,- 2 - Caribbean Airlines Reply which permits CAL to operate important, Air Jamaica-branded service to and

from the U.S. The Department has already rejected Gilmore's repetitive arguments against this authority. Footnote 1 of last year's Notice summarizes them: "Gilmore asserts that CAL[:] has failed to provide adequate evidence to support its request; does not hold the requisite designations. . .; [and] does not meet the ownership and control standa rds. . . ." The Department went on to explain "that the assertions made by Mr. Gilmore. . . do not persuade us," and it granted CAL the authority at issue here, explaining that the authority was warranted by the "public interest in the circumstances presented and on the specific record of this case." It remains in the public interest for the Department to renew, without interruption, 1 CAL's authority to provide Air Jamaica-branded service to and from the United States. As contemplat ed by the Notice, this authority was

crucial to "facilitate a smooth transition of air services from Air Jamaica to CAL," and passengers and shippers in these important U.S.-Caribbean markets rely upon CAL's service. Fu rther, the open skies agreements the

1 / On February 14 Gilmore filed a "preliminary response" asserting that CAL's invocation of Part 377 should be rejected fo r its alleged failure to provide timely and adequate supporting evidence. Without prejudice to CAL's view that this document was not authorized by Part 302, CAL submits that Gilmore's assertion is inconsistent with longstanding Department practice regarding Part 377. Moreover, the Department previously rejected his predicate argument ( i.e. , a lack of supporting evidence) in the Notice. In any case, Gilmore agrees that termination of the authority on Part 377 grounds would not be appropriate, as the preliminary response asserts that CAL's authority should "be extended to permit the applicant to resubmit a compliant application."