Hogan Lovells US LLP is a limited liability partner ship registered in the District of Columbia. Hogan Lovells refers to the international legal practice comprising Hogan Lovells US LLP, Hogan Lovells International LLP, Hogan Love lls Worldwide Group (a Swiss Verein), and their aff iliated businesses with offices in: Abu Dhabi Al icante Amsterdam Baltimore Beijing Berlin Boulder Brussels Caracas Colorado Springs Denver Dubai Duss eldorf Frankfurt Hamburg Hanoi Ho Chi Minh City Hong Kong Houston London Los Angeles Madrid Miami M ilan Moscow Munich New York Northern Virgin ia Paris Philadelphia Prague Rome San Fra ncisco Shanghai Silicon Valley Singapore Tokyo Ulaanbaatar Warsaw Washington DC Associated offices: Budape st Jeddah Riyadh Zagreb Hogan Lovells US LLP Columbia Square 555 Thirteenth Street, NW Washington, DC 20004 Direct phone +1 202 637 8898

Direct fax +1 866 728 1992 www.hoganlovells.com

January 14, 2013

By Electronic Submission

U.S. Department of Transportation Docket Management System 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE Washington, DC 20590

Re: Petition of Republic Airline Inc. for Extension of FAA Exemption No. 9346B, Regulatory Docket No. FAA- 2007-28086

Dear Sir or Madam:

Republic Airline Inc. (“Republic”) hereby petitions the Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration (“FAA”), pursuant to 14 C.F.R. Part 11, for an extension of FAA Exemption No. 9346B, last issued to Republic on March 10, 2011, e xempting Republic from the requirements of 14 C.F.R. § 121.434(c)(1)(ii), thereby allowing Rep ublic to substitute a qualified and authorized check airman in place of an FAA inspector to observ e a qualifying pilot in command (PIC) while that PIC is performing prescribed duties during at least one flight leg that includes a takeoff and a landi ng when completing initial or upgrade training as spec ified in § 121.424. 1

Exemption No. 9346B terminates on June 30, 2013. R epublic respectfully requests that this exemption be extended for at least two additional y ears, through June 30, 2015. Republic hereby incorporates by reference all relevant information previously submitted in the instant docket. Republic submits that further extension of this exe mption is in the public interest and will provide a n equivalent level of safety -- findings that the FAA made in granting the initial exemption to Republic on June 22, 2007, and in the subsequent extension o f the exemption. 2

1 Section 121.434(c)(1)(ii) prescribes, in pertinen t part, that if a qualifying PIC is completing init ial or upgrade training specified in § 121.424, the PIC must be observed in the performance of prescribed duties by an FAA inspector during at least one flig ht leg that includes a takeoff and a landing.

2 The FAA has made similar findings and has granted (and extended) exemptions to similarly situated applicants. See, e.g., Docket FAA-2002-12 009 (Chautauqua Airlines, Inc.); Docket FAA-2006- 26589 (Shuttle America Corporation); Docket FAA-200 2-12947 (Trans States Airlines); Docket FAA-2005- 21877 (Freedom Airlines); Docket FAA-2006-24900 (Ai r Midwest); Docket 2006-24996 (Alaska Airlines).U.S. Department of Transportation

Federal Aviation Administration January 14, 2013 Page 2

Good cause exists for the FAA to act on this petiti on without delay, and without publishing a summary in the Federal Register or awaiting comment s, pursuant to 14 C.F.R. § 11.87. No new precedent will be established by extending the exis ting exemption previously granted to Republic.

Republic urges the FAA to grant this non-controvers ial request for an extension of Exemption No. 9346B prior to the June 30, 2013 expiration dat e. In the event that the FAA does not act on this petition prior to that date, Republic hereby invoke s and relies upon the automatic extension provisions of the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U .S.C. § 558(c), to the extent that such relief is consistent with the FAA’s rules, policies and proce dures, in order to continue the effectiveness of Republic’s current exemption pending the FAA’s fina l determination on this petition.

Republic submits the following information in furth er support of this request:

The original intent of § 121.434(c)(1)(ii), issued in early 1970, was to validate the training a pilot

received in a visual simulator. Since that rule wa s adopted, the airline industry has had over 40 years of experience with visual simulators and adva nced simulation. The airlines have successfully trained tens of thousands of pilots us ing sophisticated advanced simulators. Republic believes the advanced simulation experienc e of the airline industry combined with that of the FAA has made the present rule virtually obso lete.

The FAA has for many years routinely granted simila r requests for exemptions, subject to certain conditions and limitations, finding that there is a n equivalent level of safety in allowing airlines t o substitute a qualified and authorized check airman in place of an FAA inspector to satisfy the observation requirements. Republic submits that (a ) the facts presented by Republic do not differ materially from those previously presented p reviously by Republic and by similarly situated petitioners; (b) the reasons stated by the FAA for previously granting the exemption to Republic and to similarly situated petitioners also apply to the situation presented herein by Republic; and (c) extension of the exemption to Republic is in th e public interest.

Republic currently expects that it may need to cert ify new PICs each year. Republic states that granting this exemption would allow --

1. The FAA greater flexibility and better use of it s inspection force by focusing on higher priority safety functions;

2. Republic to use a qualified pilot immediately af ter completing OE;

3. Republic to significantly increase the use of qu alified pilots and improve its ability to provide on-time, dependable air service to the publ ic; and

4. Republic to reduce the unnecessary cost of wages and lost productivity for those qualified pilots waiting for the FAA observation.

By allowing a company check airman who is highly qu alified in the airplane to complete the observation, a greater level of scrutiny and object ivity would be provided for the qualifying PIC, thus enhancing the level of safety.U.S. Department of Transportation

Federal Aviation Administration January 14, 2013 Page 3

Finally, consistent with the conditions and limitat ions set forth in Exemption 9346B, Republic proposes that the extended exemption be subject to the same conditions and limitations, as

follows:

1. A Republic check airman or aircrew program desig nee may conduct a PIC observation in place of an FAA inspector when—

a. The Administrator pre-approves that substitution for each observation of a qualifying PIC candidate, thus reserving first right of refusa l to the FAA in each case. Republic, therefore, must contact an appropriate FAA office i n each instance before substituting that check airman or aircrew program d esignee.

b. The qualifying PIC candidate has completed no le ss than 10 hours of supervised OE and accomplished no fewer than two takeoffs and lan dings; and

c. The qualifying PIC candidate is performing PIC d uties during a complete flight leg, including flightdeck preparation, before starting e ngines checklist, taxi, takeoff, all other flight phases, landing, taxi, and securing ch ecklist.

2. Each Republic check airman or aircrew program de signee conducting a PIC observation in place of an FAA inspector must—

a. Be approved by the Administrator to conduct the observation;

b. Have served as check airman or aircrew designee for Republic for no less than 6 months; and

c. Not supervise the OE or conduct the initial line check for the qualifying PIC candidate being observed.

3. Republic must maintain student, check airman, an d aircrew program designee records that demonstrate compliance with the conditions and limi tations of this exemption.

The FAA has previously determined that compliance w ith these conditions and limitations would ensure an equivalent level of safety and would be i n the public interest. Republic will continue to comply with the conditions and limitations to the e xemption, thereby ensuring an equivalent level of safety for its operations.U.S. Department of Transportation

Federal Aviation Administration January 14, 2013 Page 4

WHEREFORE, for the foregoing reasons, Republic resp ectfully requests that FAA issue an exemption, as requested herein.

Respectfully submitted,

Sheryl R. Israel

Counsel for REPUBLIC AIRLINE INC.

sheryl.israel@hoganlovells.com

Attachment

cc: Kevin Thomas, Indianapolis FSDO

Jeff DavisATTACHMENT

FEDERAL REGISTER SUMMARY

As stated in the foregoing petition for exemption, Republic Airline Inc. respectfully requests a waiver of the publication and comment requirements under 14 C.F.R. § 11.87. Nevertheless, in accordance with § 11.81(f), a summary of this Petit ion for an Extension of Exemption No. 9346B, for publication in the Federal Register is as follows:

Docket No.:

FAA-2007-28086

Petitioner:

Republic Airline Inc.

Section of the FAR Affected: 14 C.F.R. § 121.434(c)(1)(ii)

Description of Relief Sought: To extend Exemption No. 9346B to permit Republic Airline Inc. to substitute a qualified and authoriz ed check airman in place of an FAA inspector to observe a qualifying pilot in command (PIC) while that PIC is performing prescribed duties during at least one flight leg th at includes a takeoff and a landing when completing initial or upgrade training as specified in 14 C.F.R. § 121.424.