BEFORE THE

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

WASHINGTON, D.C.

____________________________________ In the Matter of the Joint Petition of )

)

REPUBLIC AIRLINE INC. ) Docket No. FAA

- 2002

- 13734;

SHUTTLE AMERICA CORPORATION ) Exemption No. 7370G

)

For exemption from 14 C.F.R. Section 93.123 )

_____________________________________ )

JOINT RESPONSE OF SOUTHWEST AIRLINES AND JETBLUE AIRWAYS

Ron Ricks James Hnat

Executive Vice President

-- Executive Vice President

Chief Legal and Regulatory Officer JetBlue Airways Corporation

Mark Shaw 27

- 01 Queens Plaza North

Vice President General Counsel & Long Island City, NY 11101

Corporate Secretary

SOUTHWEST AIRLINES CO. Robert C. Land

27 02 Love Field Drive Senior Vice President

Dallas, TX 75235

- 1611 JetBlue Airways Corporation

1212 New York Ave., N.W.

Robert W. Kneisley Suite 1212

Associate General Counsel Washington, DC 20005

Leslie C. Abbott

Senior Attorney Jonathan B. Hill

SOUTHWEST AIRLINES CO. J. Parker Erkmann

919 18 th Street, N.W. Cooley LLP

Suite 600 1299 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W.

Washington, DC 20006 Washington, DC 20004

bob.kneisley@wnco.com jhill@cooley.com

(202) 263

- 6284 perkmann@cooley.com

Counsel for JetBlue

Airways Corporation

January 30 , 20141 BEFORE THE

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

WASHINGTON, D.C.

____________________________________ In the Matter of the Joint Petition of )

)

REPUBLIC AIRLINE INC. ) Docket No. FAA

- 2002

- 13734;

SHUTTLE AMERICA CORPORATION ) Exemption No. 7370G

)

For exemption from 14 C.F.R. Section 93.123 )

_____________________________________ )

JOINT RESPONSE OF SOUTHWEST AIRLINES AND JETBLUE AIRWAYS

Southwest Airlines and JetBlue Airways file this brief Joint Response to the

January 29, 2014 letter (“Letter”) of Republic Airline and its corporate affiliates Shuttle

America and Chautauqua Airlines concerning the use of Exemption No. 7370 for service

provided exclusively under the Delta Connection brand between Ronald Reagan

Washington National Airport (“DCA”) and Madison, Wisconsin ( “ MSN”). 1

Republic’s Letter is most notable for what it does not say, rather than what it

does. It does not even attempt to reconcile the de facto transfer of this slot exemption

to Delta Air Lines, the second largest slot holder at DCA

, with the two decades of

precedent and explicit FAA findings that the slot exemption in question is intended to

allow new entrant and limited incumbent carriers to “maintain or achieve access to the

airport” so that they may better compete with larg er carriers. Moreover , Republic does

not even acknowledge, much less defend, it s unauthorized advertising and selling of the

service to the public without waiting for FAA to make a decision on its pending petition.

1 To the extent necessary, Southwest and JetBlue seek leave from the FAA to file this Joint Response. Good cause

exists for this filing because it will lead to a more complete record for decision without causing any undue delay.2

Lacking a legitimate defense on the m erits, Republic resorts to arguing that its

petition must be granted in order to avoid depriving Madison of nonstop service to DCA.

This is both inaccurate and irrelevant. In fact, t wo distinct service options are available

to provide nonstop DCA

- MSN service today , not to mention possible future service from

other carriers. First, Delta is free to serve Madison at any time , as it did for many years,

with two of its more than 100 unencumbered DCA slots . In addition, Republic and its

corporate affiliates Shuttle America and Chautauqua are also currently able to serve the

market, at the existing schedule times, in their own names. Republic and Delta have

chosen not to avail themselves of either option, however . Instead they hope to achieve

a mo re profitable outcome by threatening to exit the market unless FAA allows a

transfer that is flatly inconsistent with the conditions of the exemption itself. FAA should

not succumb to such pressure tactics

.

Beyond this, n onstop service to DCA is important to many cities and communities

that lack such service due to capacity restraints at DCA

. A desire for nonstop flights to

DCA is hardly unique to Madison , and that community’s understandable interest in

maintaining such service cannot override the FAA’s r esponsibility to administer the slot

system with consistency and integrity

. In this case

, FAA explicitly excluded route

selection from its public interest criteria for allocating th e slot exemption in question

.

Other proceedings, such as EAS and AIR

- 21 s lot exemption cases , have been created

for th at purpose. As shown in our Joint Answer, and left unaddressed by Republic, t he

proposed transfer is inconsistent with the original purpose of the exemption , namely to

enhance competition by new entrants and limited incumbents at DCA

.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~3

In sum, Republic’s de facto transfer of E xemption No. 7370 to Delta is

inconsistent with the FAA’s original finding of public interest

, prohibited by the explicit

language of the exemption itself, and disrespectful of the a gency ’s authority. For all of

the se reasons, we urge the FAA to reject Republic’s Joint P etition.

Respectfully submitted,

__________________ __________________ Robert W. Kneisley Jonathan B. Hill

Leslie C. Abbott J. Parker Erkmann

Southwest Airlines Co. Counsel for JetBlue

Airways Corporation

J a n u a r y 3 0

, 2 0 1 4