American Aviation Institute 

M ^ ^ m . •^:^tT OPERATION 

pmum OF 

.^^SPORWiON 

n' nDCQATinMQ 

on nCi ! ! P i: 2M 

OCTOBER 3, 2011 

BY MAIL 

DOCKET MANAGEMENT FACILITY 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Avenue SE 

Washington, DC 20590-0001 

RE: Enhancing Airline Passenger Protections I 

OST-2007-0022 

Enhancing Airline Passenger Protections II 

OST-2010-0140 

Please find the attached correspondence from the American Aviation Institute to 

The Hon. Ray LaHood, sent October 3, 2011 via U.S. mail. This correspondence 

concerns dockets OST-2007-0022 and OST-2010-0140. 

If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. 

Thank you. 

Darryl Jenkins 

Chairman 

American Aviation Institute 

(540) 364-6913 Office 

djenkihs@aviationinstitute.org 

4833 Rugby Avenue, Suite 301 • Bethesda, MD 20814 

www.aviationinstitute.org 
AAi 

AmefiCvin Aviat.-on institate 

October 3, 2011 

The Honorable Ray LaHood 

Secretary 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Avenue SE 

Washington, DC 20590 

RE: Enhancing Airline Passenger Protections I and il 

Dockets OST-2007-0022 and OST-2010-0140 

Dear Mr. Secretary: 

Since 2010, we have tracked the impact of the three-hour tarmac delay rule and flight 

cancellation rates. Our analysis demonstrated that by setting the domestic tarmac delay 

rule at three hours (Instead of four hours) and by declining to define specific fines and 

enforcement guidance, DOT policy has directly caused a significant Increase in airline 

flight cancellation rates. The surge in cancellation rates has been sustained and 

American public has been negatively impacted. 

On September 7, 2011, the Government Accountability Office issued GAO-11-733, 

Airline Passenger Protections, based on a comprehensive independent review of flight 

cancellations before and after the rule became effective. Among other points, the GAO 

established that: 

- DOT has not defined. In the regulation or elsewhere, what constitutes a violation 

of the rule that warrants a fine (p29); 

- The tarmac delay rule Is associated with a higher rate of flight cancellations 

(p36); and 

- The negative impact of cancellations has been "far more than DOT initially 

predicted" (p59). 

GAO recommended that DOT "fully assess the impact of the tarmac delay rule" and 

"refine the rule's requirements and implementation" if warranted. 

Given GAO's comprehensive independent review, we were surprised to read your 

Department's response denying the connection between the rule and cancellation rates. 

On September 20, 2011, the official FastLane blog stated "our analysis shows that our 

new protections have not directly affected cancellation rates". Yet even DOT'S narrow 

analysis (focusing solely on flights with two-hour taxi times) shows that cancellation rates 

nearly doubled In the first year after the rule (from 6.3% to 11.4%). GAO validated this 

statistical connection between the rule and cancellation rates. 

4833 Rugby Avenue, Suite 301 • Bethesda, Maryland 20814 

www.aviationinstitute.org 
Cn September 16, 2011, Aviation Daily reported that to comply with GAO 

recommendations, DOT stated it had "selected a contractor to conduct a comprehensive, 

independent analysis" and that the report "is being conducted by Bethesda, MD-based 

Econometrica." 

Econometrica and its subcontractor HDR are hardly "independent" in this matter. The 

firms produced the economic analyses that projected just 41 incremental domestic flight 

cancellations due to the rule, an implausibly small prediction now demonstrated to be 

orders of magnitude less than reality. They were unable to quantify any cancellation 

impact from the tarmac rule for international flights. 

Hiring Econometrica once again to conduct the GAO-recommended review of the rule is 

hardly encouraging. It suggests DOT is more interested in covering past mistakes and 

re-hashing defective analysis than openly addressing the impact of the rule. 

We have noted immediate steps that can reduce the impact of flight cancellations while 

preserving the consumer intent of the rule, including a clear, graduated fine structure, 

specific enforcement guidance, and a four-hour domestic threshold versus the current 

three-hour standard. To resolve any uncertainty about the rule's impact, DOT can 

introduce a fifth cancellation code to ASQP reports to track cancellations from the rule. 

We share your agency's passion for addressing egregious violations of consumer rights. 

Yet in the face of overwhelming evidence, DOT refuses to admit what is clear to GAO, to 

industry, and to the public - there are material trade-offs from the rule that must be 

addressed. The time has come to tackle these obvious deficiencies, instead of stalling 

while countless additional passengers are unnecessarily stranded. 

Respectfully, 

Darryl Jenkins 

Chairman 

American Aviation Institute 

(540)364-6913 

djenkins@aviationinstitute.org 

Joshua Marks 

Executive Director 

American Aviation Institute 

(301)841-2596 

jmarks@aviationinstitute.org 

Page 2