America n Aviatio n Institut e 

### M ^ ^ m . •^:^t TOPERATIO N 

## pmu mO F .^^SPORWiO N n ' nDCQATinM Q 

### o n nC i ! ! P i : 2 M
OCTOBE R 3 , 201 1 B Y MAI L DOCKE TMANAGEMEN T FACILIT Y U.S
. Departmen t o

f Transportatio n 120 0 Ne wJerse yAvenu e S E Washington , DC 20590-000 1 RE : Enhancin g Airlin e Passenge rProtection s I OST-2007-002 2 Enhancin g Airlin e Passenge rProtection s I I OST-2010-014 0 Pleas e fin d th e attache d correspondence fro m th e America n Aviatio n Institut e t o Th e Hon
. Ra

yLaHood , sen t Octobe r3 , 201 1 vi a U.S
. mail
. Thi s correspondence concern s docket s OST-2007-002 2 an d OST-2010-0140
. I f yo u have an yquestions , pleas e d o not hesitat e t o contac t me . Than k you . Darry l Jenkin s Chairma n America n Aviatio n Institut e (540 ) 364-691 3 Offic e djenkihs@aviationinstitute.org

483 3 Rugb yAvenue , Suit e 30 1 • Bethesda , M D 2081 4

www.aviationinstitute.or

g

# AA i

AmefiCvi n Aviat.-o n institat e Octobe r3 , 201 1 Th e Honorabl e Ra

yLaHood Secretar y U.S
. Departmen t o

f Transportatio n 120 0 Ne wJerse yAvenu e S E Washington , DC 2059 0 RE : Enhancin g Airlin e Passenge rProtection s I an d i l Docket s OST-2007-002 2 an d OST-2010-014 0 Dea rMr
. Secretary : Since 2010 , w

e hav e tracke d th e impac

t o f th e three-hou rtarma cdelayrul e an d fligh t cancellatio n rates . Ou ranalysi s demonstrate d that b ysettin g th e domesti ctarma cdelay rul e at thre e hour

s (Instea d o

f fou rhours ) an d bydeclinin g t o defin e specifi cfine s an d enforcemen t guidance , DO T polic yhas directl ycause d a significan t Increas e i n airlin e fligh t cancellatio n rates . Th e surg e i n cancellatio n rate s has bee n sustaine d an d America n publi chas bee n negativel yimpacted
. O n Septembe r7 , 2011 , th e Governmen t Accountabilit yOffice issue d GAO-11-733 , Airlin e Passenge rProtections , base d o n a comprehensive independen t reviewo f fligh t cancellation s before an d afte rth e rul e becam e effective
. Amon g othe rpoints , th e GA O establishe d that :

- DO T has no t defined
. I n th e regulatio n o relsewhere , wha t constitute s a violatio n o f th e rul e that warrant s a fin e (p29) ;

- Th e tarma cdela

yrul e I s associate d wit h a highe rrat e o f fligh t cancellation s (p36) ; an d

- Th e negative impac t o f cancellation s has bee n "fa rmor e tha n DO

T initiall y predicted " (p59)
. GA O recommende d that DO T "full yasses s th e impac t of th e tarma cdela

yrule " an d "refin e th e rule' s requirements an d implementation " i f warranted
. Give n GAO' s comprehensive independen t review , w e wer e surprise d t o read you r Department' s respons e denyin g th e connectio n betwee n th e rul e an d cancellatio n rates . O n Septembe r20 , 2011 , th e officia l FastLan e blo g state d "ou ranalysi s show s that ou r ne wprotection s hav

e no t directl yaffecte d cancellatio n rates"
. Yet eve n DOT' S narro w analysi s (focusin g solel yo n flight s wit h two-hou rtax i times ) show s that cancellatio n rate s nearl ydouble d I n th e firs t yea rafte rth e rul e (fro m 6.3 % t o 11.4%)
. GA O validate d thi s statistica l connectio n betwee n th e rul e an d cancellatio n rates . 483 3 Rugb yAvenue , Suit e 30 1 • Bethesda , Marylan d 2081 4

www.aviationinstitute.or gC n Septembe r16 , 2011 , Aviatio n Dail yreporte d tha t t o compl ywit h GA O

recommendations , DO T state d i t ha d "selecte d a contracto rt o conduc t a comprehensive , independen t analysis " an d tha t th e report "i s bein g conducte d b yBethesda , MD-base d Econometrica. " Econometric a an d it s subcontracto rHD R ar e hardl y"independent " i n thi s matter . Th e firm s produce d th e economi canalyse s tha t projecte d jus t 4 1 incrementa l domesti cfligh t cancellation s du e t o th e rule , a n implausibl ysmal l predictio n no wdemonstrate d t o b e order s of magnitud e les s tha n reality
. The ywer e unabl e t o quantif yan ycancellatio n impac t fro m th e tarma crul e fo rinternationa l flights
. Hirin g Econometric a onc e agai n t o conduc t th e GAO-recommende d revie wo f th e rul e i s hardl yencouraging
. I t suggest s DO Ti s mor e intereste d i n coverin g pas t mistake s an d re-hashin g defectiv e analysi s tha n openl yaddressin g th e impac t of th e rule
. W e hav e note d immediat e step s tha t ca n reduc e th e impac t o f fligh t cancellation s whil e preservin g th e consume rinten t o f th e rule , includin g a clear , graduate d fin e structure , specifi cenforcemen t guidance , an d a four-hou rdomesti cthreshol d versu s th e curren t three-hou rstandard
. T o resolv e an yuncertaint yabou t th e rule' s impact , DO Tca n introduc e a fift h cancellatio n cod e t o ASQ P report s t o trac k cancellation s fro m th e rule
. W e shar e you ragency' s passio n fo raddressin g egregiou s violation s o f consume rrights
. Ye t i n th e fac e o f overwhelmin g evidence , DO T refuse s t o admi t wha t i s clea rt o GAO , t o industry , an d t o th e publi c- ther e ar e materia l trade-off s fro m th e rul e tha t mus t b e addressed
. Th e tim e ha s com e t o tackl e thes e obviou s deficiencies , instea d o f stallin g whil e countles s additiona l passenger s ar e unnecessaril ystranded
. Respectfully ,

Darry l Jenkin s Chairma n America n Aviatio n Institut e (540)364-691 3 djenkins@aviationinstitute.or g Joshu a Mark s Executiv e Directo r America n Aviatio n Institut e (301)841-259 6 jmarks@aviationinstitute.or g

Pag e 2