April 19 , 2013

Kathryn B. Thomson, Esq.

Chief Counsel

Office of the Chief Counsel

Federal Aviation Administration 800 Independence Avenue, SW

Room 900 Washington, DC 20591

Re: Request for Temporary Waiver of Minimum Operating

- Authorization Usage Requ irement s at EWR, LGA, and JFK

Dear Ms. Thomson :

Airlines for America (“A4A”) and the Regional Airline Association (“RAA”) hereby request that the Federal Aviation Administration (“FAA”) temporarily waive minimum operating

- authorization usage requirement s currently in effect at Newark Liberty International Airport (“EWR”), New York LaGuardia Airport (“LGA”), and New York John F. Kennedy International Airport (“JFK”) in light of the FAA’s decision to reduce flight operations at major U.S. airports, includi ng EWR, LGA, and JFK, effective April 21, 2013.

A4A and RAA request that the FAA grant such a general waiver for at least 90 days or until the FAA sequestration furloughs end, whichever is longer.

The FAA has informed A4A, RAA, and their member airlines that, effective April 2 1 , 2013, the FAA will impose a program of severe ground delays, which will result in drastic reductions in the number of flights that may take off and land at some of the largest and busiest U.S. airports, including EWR, LGA,

and JF K

, 1 / during some of the busiest times of the day. The FAA’s implementation of these daily ground delay programs at seven major U.S. airports will result in the delay of approximately 3,800 flights daily.

The FAA has also determined that an additional six major U.S. airports will require daily traffic management initiatives resulting in approximately 2,900 additional daily flights being delayed. 2 / Most of

these combined thi rteen airports are major hubs for U.S. airlines and all are critical nodes in the na tio nal air transportation system. Therefore , the projected flight delays will wreak havoc on the carriers’ networks,

1 / Other airports that w ill be affected by delays as a result of the FAA flight

- delay plan include Chicago O’Hare International Airport, Los Angeles International Airport, San Diego International Airport, and Fort Lauderdale/Hollywood International Airport.

2 / These six airp orts include Philadelphia International Airport, Charlotte/Douglas International Airport,

Hartsfield

- Jackson Atlanta International Airport, Miami International Airport, Chicago Midway International Airport, and San Francisco International Airport.impacting hundreds of cities across the U.S. to and from which traffic is routed through these hub airports

,

there by delaying other flights and forcing passengers to miss connections. According to the FAA, these delays are a necessary part of the agency’s sequestration implementation plan and the delays will continue at least until the end of the current fiscal year (September 30, 2013). A4A and RAA understand that approximately 6,700 flights per day may be subject to these delays

, even assuming good weather

and no other air traffic control

- related or other issues that could affect daily operations. The potential amount of daily flight delays projected by the FAA is alarming, especially considering that in all of 2012, the most flight delays experienced on a single day in the U.S. was less than half this amount (2,994 flights).

A4A , RAA, and their members were only notified about the FAA’s pl ans to impose these drastic delays within days of the FAA’s April 21, 2013 implementation date. Thus, the airlines have had no time or opportunity to identify and plan for all of the system

- wide impacts of these delays. Even worse, the FAA is implementing this delay program at the beginning of the peak summer travel season, at a time when air travel demand is increasing and flights hav e already been heavily booked. Airlines’ existing flight schedules were devised and implemented in good faith based on the a irlines’ (and the traveling public’s) reasonable expectation that the FAA would be able to accommodate certain flight volumes at the affected airports

. The FAA’s delay plan, however, may make it impossible for airlines to operate th e se established flight s chedules without substantial delays and last

- minute cancellations

. It is important to recognize that

the effects of FAA

- imposed delays will not be limited to a specific de parture at a specific airport. Airlines typically operate aircraft on linear routes ( from point A to point B to point C to point D to point E to point F) rather than on round trips ( i.e. , a series of flights between points A and B). Therefore, the FAA’s flight

delay plan is likely to result in the typical aircraft encountering disparate de lays throughout the day at many airports (and not only at the 13 airports the FAA has identified as being the primary focus of flight

operation reductions)

, which will make delays even more unpredictable and further complicate the airlines’ challenges in a ttempting to manage the FAA's capacity reductions.

Because it is anticipated that the FAA’s flight

- delay plan will continue in effect for an extended period of time, A4A and RAA ’s member airlines will need to consider ways to reduce their schedules. In

f act, A4A and RAA today sent a letter to FAA and the Department of Transportation (“DOT”) requesting

that FAA/DOT convene schedule

- reduction meetings with airlines for the airports that will be most severely affected by the FAA’s delay plan

. 3 / Those airpor ts include EWR, LGA, and JFK.

Under the FAA’s order limiting scheduled operations at EWR, LGA, and JFK, operating authorizations (“OAs”) must be used at least 80 percent of the time they are allocated or the FAA will

withdraw them. 4 / However, the order also states tha t the FAA may waive the minimum

- usage requirement “in the event of a highly unusual and unpredictable condition which is beyond the control of the carrier and which affects carrier operations for a period of five consecutive days or more.” 5 / This case clearly satisfies the FAA’s own criteria for granting a waiver from the “use or lose” rule. The FAA’s flight

- delay plan, and the manner in which the FAA is implementing it at very short notice and with the imposition of drastic delays with out a ny specific information quantifying those delays with respect to specific flights at specific airports, unquestionably creates a “highly unusual and unpredictable condition” that is “beyond the control of” the carriers and is expected to last for considera bly longer than the minimum five

- day period stipulated in the FAA’s order. Thus, good cause exists to grant the requested waiver.

As the FAA is aware, there are clear precedents for the waiver requested here. See, e.g., 66 Fed. Reg. 51718 (October 10, 2001); 67 F ed. Reg. 10249 (March 6, 2002). As the FAA stated in granting the blanket waiver from the minimum slot usage requirement after the September 1 1, 2001 terrorist attacks,

3 / See letter to Department of Transportation Secretary Ray La H ood and Federal Aviation Administration Administrator Michael P. Huerta, April 19, 2013.

4 / See 76 Fed. Reg.18618, 18619 (Apr. 4, 2011); 74 Fed. Reg. 51650 ( Oct. 7, 2009 ) ; 73 Fed. Reg. 3510 (Jan.

18 , 2008), 73 Fed. Reg. 29550 (May 21, 2008)

.

5 / See 76 Fed. Reg.18618, 18619 (Apr. 4, 2011); 74 Fed. Reg. 51650 ( Oct. 7, 2009 ).

### - 2

-

“the agency finds it necessary to take [this] action to assist carriers in m anaging their operations at the high density traffic airports as a result of the recent extraordinary ev ents.” 66 Fed. Reg. at 51718. That same rationale applies now. 6 /

As a policy matter, t he requested waiver is grounded in common sense and would clea rly serve the public interest. The FAA has not provided detailed information about the specific impacts of its de lay plan at specific airports. Rather, to date , the FAA has merely advised the airlines that substantial delays

are inevi table at affected airp orts. However, the effects of those delays will quickly be felt not only at the directly affected airports but across the airlines’ networks as individual flights fail to reach their destinations on schedule, thereby delaying other flights and forcing pass engers to miss connections. The national air transportation network is an extremely complex and interconnected system that involves more than 22,000 flights per day. As a national (and indeed a global) system, it is inevitable that the effects of

any delay s or other adverse operational impact s imposed at any one airport (particularly a major hub) will not be isolated; on the contrary, the effects magnify as they ripple out across the system. In short, the FAA’s flight

- delay plan not only poses a threat of m ajor disruptions at the 13 primarily targeted airports, but across the entire air transportation system, potentially affecting passengers whose itineraries do not even include any of the directly affected airports.

In these exigent circumstances, i t is in the common interest of the airlines, the traveling public, and the FAA that airline operations continue at the affected airports in an orderly manner. This will require an orderly reduction in airlines’ flight schedules, but an essential predicate to such action is that the FAA grant the requested waiver. In order for airlines to reduce their schedules and manage the effects of the FAA’s delay plan, it is imperative that airlines not face the risk of having to forfeit OAs at EWR, LGA, and

JFK. Unless the F AA issues the requested waiver, however, airlines may be deterred from acting promptly to reduce their schedules out of fe ar of forfeiting valuable OAs. In light of th e unprecedented circumstances created by the FAA’s delay plan

– which after all is a gove rnment

- created problem that is beyond the airlines’ control

– the proposed waiver constitutes a modest request that will promote and

facilitate the airlines ’ task of rationalizing their schedules in response to the severe delays that the FAA plans to impos e

.

For these reasons, A 4 A and RAA respectfully req uest th at th e FAA temporarily waive the minimum operating

- authorization usage requirements currently in effect at EWR, LGA, and JFK for at least 90 days or until the Federal Aviation Administration (“ FAA”) sequestration furloughs end, whichever is longer

. For all of the reasons set forth above, A 4 A and RAA believe that good cause exists for the FAA to grant this relief immediately without the need for notice and comment.

Respectfully submitted,

____________________________________ David A. Berg Senior Vice President, General Counsel and Secretary

Airlines for America ____________________________________ Roger Cohen

President Regional Airline Association

6 / See also 75 Fed. Reg. 32987 (June 10, 2010 (granting waiver of minimum

- use requirements at EWR and JFK following the dis ruption to air travel caused by ash from an eruption of a volcano in Iceland); 77 Fed. Reg. 68196 (Nov. 15, 2012) (granting waiver of minimum

- use requirements at JFK, LGA, and EWR following Hurricane Sandy). The FAA has also waived the minimum

- use require ments in situations where, similar to the case at hand, capacity at an airport was severely impacted due to on

- site operational issues

. See 77 Fed. Reg. 1549 (Jan. 10, 2012) and 74 Fed. Reg. 52838 (Oct. 14, 2009) (waiver s granted due to runway constructio n).