### REDACTED FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION

### REDACTED FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION

### REDACTED FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION

### REDACTED FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION

# EXHIBIT A to Letter of JetBlue Airways Corporation re Rulemaking (April 8, 2010)
*This Exhibit Contains Confidential Information*

# EXHIBIT B to Letter of JetBlue Airways Corporation re Rulemaking (April 8, 2010)

# e r'-o j pr-y^ ,

U.S

. Departmen t GENERA L COUNSE L 120 0 Ne w Jerse y Ave.

. S.E

. o f Transportatio n Washington , D C 2059 0 Offic e o f th e Secretar

y o f Transportatio n Ms

. Joann aL

. Geraghty , Esq

. ^^ ^ ^2

. 200 9 Vic e Presiden t

an dAssociat e General Counse l JetBlu e Airway s Corporatio n 118-2 9 Queen s Blvd

. Fores t Hills , N Y 1137 5 RE : Equivalen t Alternativ e Determinatio n Reques t concernin g 1 4 CFR382.123(c ) Dea r Ms

. Geraghty : Thi s lette r i s i n respons e to you r

Decembe r

17 , 2008 , reques t

submitte do n behal f

o f JetBlu e Airway s (JetBlue ) fo

r a n equivalen t

alternativ e determinatio n concernin g sectio n 382.123(c) ' o f

th e Department' s (DOT's ) revise ddisability rule , whic h becam e effectiv e o n Ma y 13 , 2009

. W e are denyin g JetBlue' s equivalen t alternativ e reques t

for th e reason s discusse dbelow

. However , w e inten dt o conduc t afutur e rulemakin g t o determin e i f sectio n 382.123(c ) shoul db e revise dt o tak e int o accoun t concern s suc h a s thos e JetBlu e raise s o r remai n a s written

. JetBlue' s reques t

essentiall y state s tha

t th e carrie r

want s t o continu e t o us e th e seat-strappin g metho di n perpetuity o n alarg e number ^ o f ne w 150-sea

t Airbu s A-32 0 an d100-sea t Embraer El9 0 narrow-body aircraft

. JetBlue' s reques t concern s thos e aircraf

t tha t wil l b e delivere dbetwee n 201 1 and2016 , andwhic h ar e therefore subjec t t o revise dsectio n 382.123(c)

. Becaus e neithe r o f thes e aircraf

t type s i s currentl y designe dwit h aclose t o r other stowag e are alarg e enoug h t o accommodat e astandard-size dfoldin g wheelchair , th e carrier state s tha t i f it i s prohibite dfiro

musin g th e seat-strappin g metho do n thes e planes , i t wil l nee dt o remov e aro w o f thre e seat s o n th e A-32 0 aircraf t an dtw o seat s o n th e E l 9 0 aircraf t i n orde r t o compl y wit

h th e ne w rule

. Th e carrie r give s th e followin g principal reason s for

it s reques t

to continu e th e us e o f

th e seat-strappin g method : 1 ) Th e carrie r

state s that , althoug h th e 200 4 Notic e o f Propose dRulemakin g (NPRM ) tha t le dto th e revise dPar

t 38 2 aske dfo

r commen t o n whethe r

DO T shoul dcodif

y th e seat-strappin g metho dwhic h i s currentl y permitte db y DO T (o n aircraf t ordere d o n o r before Ma

y 13 , 2009 , o r

delivere do n o r

before Ma

y 13 , 2011) , it

als o stated ,
Sectio n 382.123(c ) prohibit s th e us e o f th e "seat-strapping " metho do f stowin g apassenger' s personal foldin g wheelchai r

i n th e cabi n (i.e. , fastenin g awheelchai r acros s aro w o f

seats ) o n plane s ordere dafte r Ma y 13 , 2009 , o r delivere dafte

r Ma y 13 , 201 1 (hereinafter

simpl y referre dt o a s "ne w planes.")

. Any suc h new plan e mus t hav e th e designate dpriority stowag e spac e require db y sectio n 382.67

.

" A t th e carrier' s request , th e exac t numbe r o f aircraf t ha s bee n redacte di n thi s repl y an di n it s dockete dfilin g fo r competitiv e reasons ."Th e Departmen t propose s t o continu e t o make thi s complianc e optio n availabl e unde r thi s propose drule. " JetBlu e implie s tha t i t base dit s aircraf

t order s o n tha

t statemen t i n th e preambl e t o th e NPR M an dtha t i t wa s surprise dwhen , fou

r year s late r whe n DO T issue dit s final rule , it harme dthi s stowag e metho do n ne w plane s subjec t t o th e in-cabi n wheelchai r stowag e requirement s i n sectio n 382.6 7 o f th e revise drule

. 2 ) JetBlu e state s tha

t DO T faile dt o d o acost-benefi t analysi s o n thi s aspec t

o f th e ne w rule

. Th e carrie r

state s that

i f i t i s force dt o remov e aro w o f thre e seat s o n th e A-32 0 aircraf t an dtw o seat s o n th e El2 0 aircraf t i n question , it

wil l los e significant

revenu e o n suc h aircraf

t schedule dt o b e delivere dbetwee n 201 1 an d2016. ^ JetBlu e state s tha t hadth e Departmen t

conducte dsuc h acost-benefi t analysi s o n thi s issue , it woul dhav e continue dt o permi t carrier s to us e th e metho da s acomplianc e option

. 3 ) JetBlu e state s tha

t th e onl y tw o rationale s state db y DO T i n th e preambl e to th e final rul e for eliminatin g th e seat-strappin g stowag e metho di s tha t th e metho di s a"mor e awkward " wa

y o f stowin g afoldin g wheelchai r than usin g acloset , andtha t i t coul d reduc e th e seatin g capacity o n afiill flight wher e thi s techniqu e i s employed

. Th e carrie r dispute s th e former

reason , sayin g tha

t th e seat-strappin g metho dha s no t resulte din an y consume r

complaints

. I

n tha t regard , th e carrie r

ha s submitte d severa l compliment s fi-ompassenger s regardin g it s handlin g o f in-cabi n wheelchai r stowag e requests
. JetBlu e dispute s th e latte r concern b y sayin g that , eve n wit h highe r loa dfactor s recently , i t i s rar e tha

t passenger s ar e denie dboardin g becaus e th e carrie r ha dto sto w afoldin g wheelchai r

acros s aro w o f

seats
. Th e carrie r

state s tha t base don a samplin g o f

incident s coverin g th e eight-mont h perio dprio r

t o it s request , i

t receive d 4 7 request s fo

r onboar dstowag e o f

passengers ' wheelchair s an dtha t no t asingl e passenge r wa s denie dboardin g becaus e suc h areques t wa s made

. Th e carrie r

als o state s that , unlik e mos t

carriers , it

doe s no t overboo k flights a s apractice

. JetBlu e state s tha t it s polic y o f

no t overbookin g flights, alon g wit h th e fac t tha t request s fo

r in-cabi n stowag e o f

wheelchair s ar e quit e rare , cal l into questio n DOT' s assertio n tha t th e sea t strappin g metho dreduce s seatin g capacit y fo r passengers . Th e carrie r state s tha t DOT' s positio n tha

t th e us e o f

th e seat-strappin g metho dreduce s seatin g capacity fo

r other passenge r

is , "a t best , overstate dan dunsupported. " JetBlu e als o state s tha

t it s Station s Operation s Manua l specificall y state s tha

t a t n o tim e wil l it s cre w attemp t

t o dissuad e apassenge r

fi-omrequestin g th e in-cabi n stowag e o f

apersonal wheelchair

. Th e carrie r state s tha t it s policy , alon g wit

h th e fact tha t i s ha s receive dn o complaint s i n thi s area , see mto indicat e tha t DOT' S concern s abou t

an y potentia l stigm ao r

embarrassmen t

t o apassenge r

wishin g to sto w awheelchai r

i n th e cabi n ar e no t

justified

. JetBlu e als o state s tha t i t i s evaluatin g th e possibility o f allowin g passenger s t o reserv e it s wheelchai r stowag e spac e in advance , whic h woul dtotall y eliminat e any potential for th e denie d boardin g o f

passengers . Th e carrie r

conclude s it s reques t

b y statin g tha

t it s us e o f th e

^ A t th e carrier' s request , th e total estimate dlos t revenu e ha s bee n redacte di n thi s repl y an din it s dockete d filin g fo r competitiv e reasons .sea t strappin g metho dha s bee n prove n to b e asuccessfii l alternativ e t o th e stowag e o f afoldin g wheelchai r

in acloset

. W e understan dwhy , give n thes e point s mad e b y JetBlu e in it s request , th e carrie r i s seekin g a n equivalen t

alternativ e determinatio n o n th e matter
. However , i t i s no t appropriat e for

th e Department

t o treat a s a n equivalen t

alternativ e to aregulatory requiremen t somethin g tha

t wa s a t issu e i n th e rulemakin g andthat i s explicitl y prohibite di n th e final rule

. Consequently , w e ar e denyin g JetBlue' s reques t fo r a n equivalen t

alternativ e determinatio n an dmaintainin g th e requiremen t tha t th e seat-strappin g metho db e phase dout a s state di n sectio n 382.123(c ) o f

th e revise drule , a s written

. W e nonetheles s believ e that th e issue s JetBlu e ha s raise dd o meri t fiirther consideratio n i n a n appropriat e forum

. Therefore , w e inten dt o addres s thi s matte r in afutur e rulemakin g whic h wil l permi t

u s to revie w th e matte r

o n a n industry-wid e basi s an ddetermin e i f an y change s i n th e rul e tex t

ar e warranted

. A s yo u know , w e ar e no t onl y concerne dtha

t th e "seat-strapping " metho db e saf e an defficient

. Amon g ou r primary concern s i s ensurin g tha t th e us e o f thi s stowag e metho ddoe s no t resul t i n th e embarrassmen t

an dstigmatizatio n o f passenger s wit

h disabilitie s an dinconvenienc e to othe r passengers , particularl y o n fiall flights wher e us e o f

th e metho dcoul dresul t

i n th e carrier' s inability to boardup to thre e passenger s wh o woul dotherwis e hav e bee n abl e to fly i f th e aircraf

t hadbee n equippe dwit

h aclose t o r othe r stowag e are atha

t di dno t involv e th e potential displacemen t o f othe r passengers . A fiirther

concer n i s whethe r

th e stowag e metho dha s resulted , o r i s likel y t o result , i n an y consumer

dissatisfactio n o r

complaints , b y eithe r

wheelchai r

user s o r othe r passengers . Give n th e curren t stat e o f th e rule , thes e concern s ar e bes t addresse do n a

n industry-wid e basi s throug h arulemaking

. W e assur e yo u w e inten dt o d o s o a s expeditiousl y a s possible

. If yo u hav e an y question s abou t thi s matter , pleas e contac t Mike Spolle n o f

m y staff , o r me , a t (202 ) 366-0342

. Yo u ma y als o reac h u s b y FA

X a t (202 ) 366-5944

. Sincerely ,

Samue l Podberesk

y Assistan t General Counse l fo

r Aviatio n Enforcement

andProceeding s