AFS-05-302-E May 4, 2005

Exemption No. 8099A Regulatory Docket No. FAA-2003-15446

Jonathan B. Hill, Esq. Counsel for JetBlue Airways Corporation Dow, Lohnes, and Albertson, PLLC 1200 New Hampshire Avenue, NW. Washington, DC 20036

Dear Mr. Hill:

This letter is to inform you that we have granted your petition to extend Exemption No. 8099. It explains the basis for our decision and describes its effect.

The Basis for Our Decision

By letter dated April 14, 2005, you petitioned the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) on behalf of JetBlue Airways Corporation (JetBl ue) for an extension of Exemption No. 8099. That exemption from § 121.434(c)(1)(ii) of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations allows JetBlue to substitute a qualified and authorized check airman or aircrew program designee for an FAA inspector to observe a qualifying pilot in command (PIC) who is completing initial or upgrade training specified in § 121.424 during at l east one flight leg that includes a takeoff and a landing.

In your petition, you indicate that there has been no change in the conditions and reasons relative to public interest and safety that were the basis for granting the original exemption.

The FAA has determined that good cause exists for not publishing a summary of the petition in the Federal Register because the requested extension of the exemption would not set a precedent, and any delay in acting on this petition would be detrimental to JetBlue.2

Our Decision

The FAA has determined that the justification for the issuance of Exemption No. 8099 remains valid with respect to this exemption and is in the public interest. Therefore, under the authority provided by 49 U.S.C. 40113 and 44701, which the FAA Administrator has delegated to me, I grant your petition

The Effect of our Decision

Our decision extends the termination date of Exemption No. 8099 to July 31, 2007, unless sooner superseded or rescinded.

All conditions and limitations of Exemption No. 8099 remain the same. This letter must be attached to, and is a part of, Exemption No. 8099.

Sincerely,

//s// James J. Ballough Director, Flight Standards ServiceApril 9, 2007 Exemption No. 8099B Regulatory Docket No. FAA-2003-15446

Jonathan B. Hill, Esq. Counsel for JetBlue Airways Corporation Dow, Lohnes, and Albertson, PLLC 1200 New Hampshire Avenue, NW., Suite 800 Washington, DC 20036

Dear Mr. Hill:

This letter is to inform you that we have granted your petition to extend Exemption No. 8099, as amended. It explains the basis for our decision, describes its effect and lists the revised

conditions and limitations.

The Basis for Our Decision

On March 20, 2007, you petitioned the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) on behalf of JetBlue Airways Corporation (JetBlue) for an extension of Exemption No. 8099, as amended. That exemption from § 121.434(c)(1)(ii) of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations allows JetBlue to substitute a qualified and authorized check airman or aircrew program designee for an FAA inspector to observe a qualifying pilot in command (PIC) who is completing initial or upgrade training specified in § 121.424 during at l east one flight leg that includes a takeoff and a landing.

In your petition, you indicate that there has been no change in the conditions and reasons relative to public interest and safety that were the basis for granting the original exemption.

The FAA has determined that good cause exists for not publishing a summary of the petition in the Federal Register because the requested extension of the exemption would not set a precedent, and any delay in acting on this petition would be detrimental to JetBlue.

E-2007-04492

Our Decision

The FAA has determined that the justification for the issuance of Exemption No. 8099, as amended, remains valid with respect to this exemption and is in the public interest. Therefore, under the authority provided by 49 U.S.C. 40113 and 44701, which the FAA Administrator has delegated to me, I grant your petition, subject to the revised conditions and

limitations.

Conditions and Limitations

1. A JetBlue check airman or aircrew program designee may conduct a PIC observation in place of an FAA inspector when––

a. The Administrator preapproves that substitution for each observation of a qualifying PIC candidate, thus reserving first right of refusal to the FAA in each case. JetBlue, therefore, must contact an appropriate FAA office, in each instance, before substituting that check airman or aircrew program designee.

b. The qualifying PIC candidate has completed no less than 10 hours of supervised operating experience (OE) and accomplished no fewer than two takeoffs and landings; and

c. The qualifying PIC candidate is performing PIC duties during a complete flight leg, including flightdeck preparation, before starting engines checklist, taxi, takeoff, all other flight phases, landing, taxi, and securing checklist.

2. Each JetBlue check airman or aircrew program designee 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 a check airman or aircrew program designee JetBlue 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. JetBlue must maintain student, check airman, and aircrew program designee records that demonstrate compliance with the conditions and limitations of this exemption.

The Effect of Our Decision

Our decision extends the termination date of Exemption No. 8099, as amended, to July 31, 2009, unless sooner superseded or rescinded. This letter must be attached to, and is a part of Exemption No. 8099.

Sincerely,

/s/ James J. Ballough Director, Flight Standards Service