April 22, 2014 (Via email) Mr. Sean Burton President Board of Airport Commissioners Los An eles !

orld Airports 1 !orld !a" Los An eles, CA #004$%$&0' (ear President Burton) *+) +sta,lis-in a formal pro.ess for re/ie0in proposed Amendments to t-e Certified Ser/i.e Pro/iders Pro ram (CSPP) 1n April #, in .on2un.tion 0it- offi.ials from t-e Ma"or3s offi.e, "ou presented Airlines for Ameri.a (4A4A5) and t-e Airline Ser/i.e Pro/iders Asso.iation (4ASPA5) for t-e first time 0it- a radi.al .-an e to t-e LA!A Certified Ser/i.e Pro/ider Pro ram (4CSSP5). 6-e CSPP 0as .arefull" ne otiated and .rafted o/er a four "ear period. (urin t-e .ourse of t-ose four "ears of dis.ussions, proposals for la,or pro/isions t-at 0ould -a/e re7uired Airport Ser/i.e Pro/iders (4ASPs5) to si n a reements 0it- la,or or ani8ations 0ere ad/an.ed. 9o0e/er, t-e La,or 9armon" pro/ision (se.tion '.:) in t-e final CSPP did not .ontain an" re7uirement for CSPs to si n a reements 0it- la,or or ani8ations. At a meetin of t-e LA!A Board of Commissioners on Au ust :, 2012, all t-e sta;e-olders offered support for t-e CSPP, and it 0as adopted ," t-e LA!A Board of Airport Commissioners. Su,se7uentl", LA!A .ommen.ed t-e appli.ation pro.ess for ASPs to ,e li.ensed as Certified Ser/i.e Pro/iders (4CSP5). 6-e first roup of CSPs 0as e<pe.ted to ,e appro/ed t-is mont-. 9o0e/er, after apparentl" 0or;in 0it- t-e Ser/i.e +mplo"ees =nternational >nion% >nited Ser/i.e !or;ers !est (4S+=>%>S!!5) alone for man" mont-s, and 2ust as t-e CSPP 0as set to laun.-, t-e Cit" of Los An eles and LA!A are suddenl" proposin amendments .ontainin mandator" la,or a reement re7uirements 7uite similar to t-ose t-at 0ere pre/iousl" re2e.ted. Adoption of t-e proposed amendments 0ould upend t-e CSPP pro.ess, and effe.ti/el" mandate t-at all ASPs si n a reements 0it- unions ? 0it-out t-e emplo"ees ,ein permitted to /ote on 0-et-er t-e" 0ant to ,e represented ," t-at union. !-ile LA!A and t-e Cit" apparentl" afforded t-e S+=>%>S!! man" mont-s to 0or; on t-e lan ua e of t-ese amendments, 0e -a/e ,een presented 0it- 2ust 1: da"s after 1

our April # meetin , and i/en a deadline of April 2$ for our .omments. !e ,elie/e t-at t-e matter 0ill ,e ,rou -t to a /ote at t-e ne<t BoAC meetin on Ma" $, 2014. 6-is trun.ated and dis.riminator" timeta,le is fundamentall" unfair and 0-oll" in.onsistent 0it- t-e Cit" of Los An eles and LA!A3s .laim of .ommitment to pro.ess, transparen." and ood o/ernment. +7uall" as important, su.- a pro/ision, -o0e/er, .-ara.teri8ed, .learl" /iolates federal la,or la0 and 0ill, as past efforts to interfere in pri/ate part" la,or relations -a/e done, su,2e.t LA!A to si nifi.ant finan.ial lia,ilit". 1t-er airports 0-i.- -a/e ta;en t-e time to e<amine similar proposals t-rou - a t-ou -tful pro.ess -a/e .ome to t-is .on.lusion. A4A -as retained outside .ounsel to prepare an anal"sis of t-e le al impli.ations of t-e proposed amendments. 9o0e/er, 0-ile t-e le al anal"sis is ,ein prepared, A4A and t-e ASPA are respe.tfull" re7uestin t-at) 6-e deadline of April 2$ for su,missions ,e e<tended, and LA!A initiate a formal .omment pro.ess ? similar to t-e pro.ess adopted ," t-e Minnesota Airports Commission (MAC) ? so t-at all parties in.ludin unions, emplo"ees, ASPs, and airlines .an full" ,rief t-e le al and operational impli.ations of t-e amendments. At a minimum, t-e .omment period s-ould ,e not less t-an #0 da"s. @i/en t-e fa.t t-at t-e multi%part" dis.ussions of t-e CSPP terms lasted for almost 4 years, #0 da"s to e/aluate amendments is not too mu.- to as; and, in our /ie0, is t-e minimum ne.essar" to pro/ide informati/e input. As e<plained ,elo0, it 0ould ,e in t-e ,est finan.ial interest of t-e Cit" of Los An eles and LA!A to -a/e a .ompre-ensi/e re/ie0 of t-e le al and fa.tual issues in order to a/oid potential le al e<penses. 6-e Cit" of Los An eles pre/iousl" in.urred su,stantial le al lia,ilit" (appro<imatel" A14 million in dama es and le al fees) 0-en ? at t-e ,e-est of a union ? it inter/ened in a li.ensin pro.ess and added la,or .onditions for a ta<i .ompan" li.ense. (See atta.-ed 1#&# and 1##2 LA 6imes arti.les a,out t-e @olden State 6ransit .ase.)

LAWA has no Proprietary Interest in either Airplanes or Airline Contracts with AIRLINE Service Providers 6-e S+=>3s relian.e on t-e airport3s alle ed 4proprietar" po0ers5 to 2ustif" t-e la,or -armon" proposal .ompletel" misstates t-e e<tremel" limited e<tent of t-e proprietar" po0ers e<.eption. =t also e<-i,its a deep mis.on.eption of t-e terms 4o0ners-ip5 and 4mar;et parti.ipant.5 Spe.ifi.all") ASPs are A=*L=B+ Ser/i.e Pro/idersCnot A=*P1*6 Ser/i.e Pro/iders. 6-e" are ser/i.in airplanes t-at t-e airlines o0n and operate, and passen ers and 2

.ar o t-at are ,ein transported ," t-e airlines. Criti.all", t-e ser/i.es of t-e ASPs are o/erned ," .ontra.ts ,et0een t-e A=*L=B+S and t-e ASPs. ASPs pro/ide no oods or ser/i.es to LA!A. Conse7uentl", sin.e LA!A does not .ontra.t 0it- ASPs, it is not a mar;et parti.ipant 0it- re ards to Airline Ser/i.e Pro/iders and .annot assert an" proprietar" po0ers. 6-e proprietar" po0ers e<.eption to Airline (ere ulation A.t (4A(A5) preemption ? 0-i.- is limited to t-ose ri -ts and po0ers -istori.all" e<er.ised ," airports at t-e time t-e A(A 0as ena.ted ? does not .ome into pla". LA!A -as no proprietar" interest in t-e airlines3 .ontra.tual arran ements to transport t-eir passen ers and .ar o, and it is not a mar;et parti.ipant 0it- re ards to Airline Ser/i.e Pro/iders. B" .ontrast, to t-e e<tent t-at LA!A .ontra.ts 0it- A=*P1*6 ser/i.e pro/iders to ,uild, ser/i.e or maintain A=*P1*6 fa.ilities, LA!A is a.tin in its traditional .apa.it" as t-e airport o0ner and ma" ,e in t-e position of a 4mar;et parti.ipant5 for t-ose ser/i.es. Conse7uentl", onl" t-e airlines are 4mar;et parti.ipants5 as to t-e ASPs. LA!A, ," .ontrast, li.enses ASPs and in t-at role a.ts in a re ulator" .apa.it". =n its re ulator" .apa.it", LA!A does not -a/e t-e aut-orit" to inter/ene in emplo"ment and la,or relations matters ,et0een airlines and t-eir ser/i.e pro/iders. B" 0a" of analo ", t-e Cit" of Los An eles paid for, ,uilt and maintains t-e streets and side0al;s of Los An eles. 6-e Cit" issues permits or licenses for ta<is, restaurants, and ot-er ,usinesses to perform t-eir ,usinesses on t-e streets and side0al;s of Los An eles and ser/e t-eir mar;etpla.e. But t-ose permits do not ma;e Los An eles a 4mar;et parti.ipant5 in t-e ta<i or restaurant industries. Conse7uentl", neit-er t-e Cit" nor LA!A -a/e a le al ,asis to atta.- an" ;ind of la,or .onditions to airline .ontra.ts 0it- t-ird parties. A P!"lic# Comprehensive and $ransparent Review o% the SEI&'&SWW La"or (armony Provisions is in the )est Interests o% the City# Airlines and ASPs A4A maintains t-at in t-e interests of 4transparen."5 and 4due pro.ess5 ? and to prote.t LA!A and t-e Cit" from potential le al dama es % LA!A must follo0 t-e e<ample of t-e MAC. As dis.ussed in reater detail ,elo0, t-e MAC .ondu.ted a si< mont- pu,li. re/ie0 of t-e S+=>3s LPA proposal ,efore ma;in a final determination. A4A 0ould su,mit t-at t-e rationale for a full and open re/ie0 of t-e S+=> sponsored LPA and ot-er proposals, is e/en more .ompellin at LA!A ,e.ause of t-e ,elo0 timeline of e/ents) 6-e .urrent CSPP 0as t-e su,2e.t of 4 "ears of dis.ussions ,efore ,ein appro/ed ," t-e BoAC in 2012.

After t-e CSPP -ad ,een adopted, ,ut 0-ile ASPs 0ere still oin t-rou - t-e initial appli.ation pro.ess, a la,or dispute arose ,et0een t-e S+=>%>S!! and .ertain ASPs at LAD. 6-e S+=>%>S!!, in an effort to .ompel resolution of t-e la,or dispute on its terms, drafted ne0 LPA and ot-er amendments, 0-i.- 0ere presented LA!A and t-e Cit" at some point in t-e fall of 201'. At t-e April #, 2014 meetin , A4A and ASPA 0ere informed t-at dis.ussions and e<.-an e of do.uments re ardin t-e LPA -ad transpired amon t-e S+=>% >S!!, Cit" and LA!A for man" mont-s. B" .ontrast, t-e proposed LPA and ot-er amendments 0ere onl" s-ared 0it- t-e ASPs and airlines in late Mar.- and 0e 0ere una,le to 7uestion LA!A and t-e Cit" a,out t-e su,stan.e of t-e amendments until t-e April # meetin . !-ile t-e union -as -ad mont-s to present its ar uments in fa/or of t-e amendments, t-e ASPs and airlines -a/e ,een afforded 2ust 1: da"s from t-e time of our meetin on April # to t-e April 2$ deadline. B" reopenin t-e CSPP at t-e ,e-est of 2ust a union and adoptin a union% sponsored proposal, LA!A and t-e .it" are inter/enin in a pendin la,or dispute and t-ere," e<posin t-emsel/es to le al and finan.ial lia,ilit". =n similar .ir.umstan.es in t-e 1#&0s, t-e Cit" of Los An eles inter/ened on t-e side of t-e 6eamsters in a la,or dispute in/ol/in a ta<i .ompan". As in t-e .urrent matter, t-e Cit" suddenl" amended t-e e<istin li.ense re7uirements ," .onditionin t-e issuan.e of an operatin li.ense on t-e ta<i .ompan" si nin an a reement 0it- a la,or or ani8ation. 6-e matter t0i.e 0ent to t-e >S Supreme Court 0-i.- ruled t-at the City had violated the employer*s ri+hts !nder %ederal la"or laws and o0ed dama es to t-e emplo"er for denial of t-e li.ense. @olden State 6ransit Co. / Cit" of Los An eles (@olden State ==), 4#' >.S. 10' (1#&#). 6-e result 0as an a0ard of dama es and interest of A10.# million t-at .ould -a/e risen as -i - as A14 million 0it- attorne"s3 fees. 6-e Cit" ultimatel" settled for A12.E$ million. (See atta.-ed LA 6imes arti.le of Fanuar" &, 1##2.) Amon ot-er t-in s, it is note0ort-" t-at t-e Cit" of Los An eles apparentl" failed to institute a pu,li. .omment pro.ess or see; an independent le al opinion ,efore de.idin to amend t-e ta<i li.ensin pro.ess and impose la,or .onditions. =nstead, t-e Cit" relied solel" upon t-e opinion of its o0n staff attorne"s, a de.ision t-at t-e Cit" Attorne"s3 offi.e later pu,li.l" re retted after e<pendin an additional A1.: million in le al fees on top of t-e A12.E$ million settlement. Guotin t-en Assistant Cit" Attorne" Fo-n 9a ert") o 4At t-e time, 0e did not feel t-e a.tions 0ere ille al.5 (See atta.-ed LA 6imes arti.le of Fanuar" &, 1##2.) 1/erall, as stated ," Coun.ilman He/ Iarosla/s;", t-e dama es in @olden 6erminal 0ere 4a lesson t-at la,or%mana ement relations are t-e ,usiness of la,or and mana ement.5 (See atta.-ed LA 6imes arti.le of Fanuar" &, 1##2.) 4

Jurt-er, t-e >.S. Supreme Court, in 1##', spe.ifi.all" reaffirmed its -oldin t-at t-e Cit" of Los An eles .ould not use t-e li.ensin pro.ess to impose la,or .onditions on .ontra.ts to 0-i.- t-e Cit" 0as not a part". 6-e Supreme Court dis.ussed its @olden State 6ransit reasonin in t-e .ase of Buildin Constru.tion 6rades Coun.il /. Asso.iated Builders, $0E >.S. 21& (1##'), .ommonl" ;no0n as Boston 9ar,or. =n t-e Boston 9ar,or .ase, a pu,li. entit" %t-e Massa.-usetts Pu,li. !ater Aut-orit" (M!PA) % 0as soli.itin ,ids on a pro2e.t to .lean up t-e Boston 9ar,or. All ,idders -ad to a ree to La,or Pea.e A reementsK La,or Pro2e.t A reements as a .ondition of ettin t-e .ontra.t 0it- MP!A. 6-e Supreme Court up-eld t-e appli.ation of t-e LPA to .ontra.tors ,e.ause t-e M!PA 0as dire.tl" -irin and pa"in t-e .ontra.tors and t-erefore a.tin as a mar;et parti.ipant. =n e<plainin t-e differen.e ,et0een Lre ulatin L and Lmar;et parti.ipantL, t-e Supreme Court re/ie0ed its @olden State 6ransit Corp de.ision and spe.ifi.all" dre0 distin.tions ,et0een 0-at t-e Cit" of Los An eles .ould do 0-en it 0as pur.-asin ser/i.es from a .ompan" /ersus 0-at it .ould not do 0-en it 0as rene0in an operatin li.ense for a .ompan") MN=n @olden StateO 0e refused to permit t-e .it"3s e<er.ise of its re ulator" po0er of li.ense nonrene0al to restri.t @olden State3s ri -t to use la0ful e.onomi. 0eapons in its dispute 0it- its union. See 4E$ >. S., at :1$?:1#. As petitioners point out, a very di%%erent case wo!ld have "een presented had the city o% Los An+eles p!rchased ta,i services %rom -olden State in order to transport city employees Brief for Petitioners '$. =n t-at situation, if t-e stri;e -ad produ.ed serious interruptions in t-e ser/i.es t-e .it" -ad pur.-ased, t-e .it" 0ould not ne.essaril" -a/e ,een pre%empted from ad/isin @olden State t-at it 0ould -ire anot-er .ompan" if t-e la,or dispute 0ere not resol/ed and ser/i.es resumed ," a spe.iP. deadline.5 Boston 9ar,or, $0E >.S. at 22E%2&. (emp-asis supplied) =n parti.ular, it s-ould ,e noted t-at t-e Court did not aut-ori8e t-e .it" to use t-e li.ense pro.ess ? under an" .ir.umstan.es % to re7uire pri/ate parties to si n an a reement 0it- a union. A6 69+ M1S6, t-e Court said t-at t-e Cit" mi -t -a/e ,een le all" permitted to .an.el its o0n .ontra.t 0it- t-e ta<i .ompan" unless t-e .ompan" si ned a la,or a reement. 6-e Court made .lear t-at Los An eles .ould not use its re ulator" aut-orit" to add la,or a reement .onditions to a pri/ate .ompan"3s operatin li.ense. =n sum, t-e Supreme Court on t0o different o..asions -as dire.tl" stated t-at t-e Cit" of Los An eles ma" not .ondition t-e issuan.e of an operatin li.ense to a pri/ate .ompan" on t-e .ompan" enterin into a la,or a reement 0it- a union. 5

.innesota Airports Commission Process and Concl!sion !-ile A4A3s fort-.omin le al opinion letter 0ill address t-e multiple le al o,2e.tions to t-e LPA and ot-er amendments, in t-e interim, it mi -t ,e -elpful if LA!A e<amined some of t-e /oluminous do.uments de/eloped ," t-e MAC. As noted a,o/e, A4A re.ommends t-at LA!A adopt t-e transparent and .ompre-ensi/e approa.- ta;en ," t-e MAC. 1nl" after it -ad i/en t-e parties, t-e pu,li. % and its staff % almost : mont-s did t-e MAC rea.- its ultimate .on.lusion) =mposition of LPAs on Airport Ser/i.e Pro/iders is preempted under federal la,or la0. All of t-e proposals and papers produ.ed in .on2un.tion 0it- t-e MAC3s .ompre-ensi/e stud" of t-e LPA 0ere made a/aila,le to t-e pu,li. and posted to t-e MAC3s 0e,site in ad/an.e of t-e MAC3s Fanuar" 21, 2014 meetin . All sides 0ere allo0ed ade7uate time to read and re,ut ea.- ot-er3s filin s. Belo0 is t-e lin; to t-e entire 121 pa e do.ument t-at a..ompanied t-e MAC a enda for t-eir Fanuar" 21 meetin ) -ttp)KK000.metroairports.or Kdo.sKpu,li.Meetin sKJCQAQ12&#.pdf 9o0e/er, rat-er t-an ma;e "ou read t-e entire 121 pa es, let me dire.t "ou to some -i -li -ts and pro/ide "ou 0it- t-e timeta,le t-at t-e MAC pro/ided t-e parties) =n Ma" 201', t-e S+=> su,mitted its proposed La,or Pea.e A reement to t-e MAC. 6-e LPA proposal at MAC 0as similar to t-e one pendin at LA!A in t-at it re7uired t-e ASP to enter into an a reement 0it- any la"or or+ani/ation see;in to represent emplo"ees. =n Au ust 201', t-e MAC pro/ided t-e airlines and ASPs 0it- t-e S+=> proposal alon 0it- t-e union3s le al opinion defendin t-e LPA. =n late Septem,er 201', A4A, on ,e-alf of t-e airlines, su,mitted our anal"sis of t-e LPA in late Septem,er. Simultaneousl", t-e MAC retained an outside la0 firm ? Bri s and Mor an ? to re/ie0 t-e preemption ar ument and possi,le le al e<posure resultin from t-e adoption of t-e S+=>3s proposed LPA. 6-e Bri s and Mor an memorandum .on.ludin t-at appl"in an LPA to ASPs 0ould ,e preempted under ,ot- t-e *ail0a" La,or A.t (*LA) and t-e Bational La,or *elations A.t (BL*A). (Bri s memo appears at pa es 4:%::) 6-e Bri s memo also .on.luded t-at t-e MAC 0ould fa.e .i/il lia,ilit" under Se.tion 1#&', spe.ifi.all" .itin t-e >S Supreme Court de.ision in @olden State 6ransit Co. /. Cit" of Los An eles. (See pa e ::)

Prior to its 1.to,er E meetin , t-e MAC pro/ided all t-e opposin parties 0it- ea.- ot-er3s do.uments as 0ell as t-e Bri s Mor an anal"sis for re/ie0. 1n 1.to,er E, ,ot- A4A and t-e S+=> 0ere permitted to testif" to t-e full MAC a,out t-e proposals, and t-e airport3s attorne" pro/ided a /er,al anal"sis. =n Bo/em,er, t-e S+=> pro/ided its re,uttal to t-e Bri s memo (pa es :E%E:).

After re/ie0in t-ese multiple su,missions, t-e MAC le al staff t-en sur/e"ed 2$ airports on t-e issue of e<istin La,or Pea.e and ot-er la,or pro/isions at t-ose airports. Amon ot-er t-in s, t-e MAC Sur/e" (see pa es 'E%'# of MAC do.ument) re/ealed t-at) !it- one e<.eption (Boston3s Lo an Airport), no airport -as a La,or Pea.e A reement t-at applies to Airline Service Providers. (See pa e '#.) 6-e one e<.eption ? t-e LPA at Lo an for ASPs) o !as adopted ," t-e staff in Septem,er 201' 0it-out prior .onsultation 0it- t-e airlines. o 9AS B16 ,een appro/ed ," t-e Massport Aut-orit". o ASPs ? and su,se7uentl" airlines % onl" learned of t-e LPA pro/isions mont-s later durin routine lease rene0als. o 6-e airlines are protestin t-e LPA amendment. =n re ards to ot-er California airports, t-e MAC Sur/e" s-o0ed t-at neit-er San Jran.is.o nor San Fose Airports appl" t-eir LPAs to ASPs. (See pa e '&). 6-e MAC le al staff also prepared its o0n anal"sis of t-e le alit" of appl"in LPAs to Airline Ser/i.e Pro/iders, 0-i.- .on.luded t-at) Sin.e t-e airline ser/i.e pro/iders 0ere .ontra.tin 0it- t-e airlinesCand not t-e airportC4it appears li;el" t-at MSP3s NLPAO re7uirement for airline ser/i.e pro/iders 0ould ,e .onsidered re ulator" in nature and s!"0ect to preemption.5 (emp-asis supplied) (see pa e '#) B" .ontrast, t-e MAC le al staff .on.luded t-at LPAs 0ould ,e not ,e preempted 0-ere t-e airport 0as itself dire.tl" .ontra.tin for ser/i.es (e. . imposin an LPA on a .onstru.tion .ompan" 0it- 0-om t-e airport 0as .ontra.tin to ,uild fa.ilities). (see pa e '#) 6-e full report 0as presented to t-e MAC at its Fanuar"21st meetin . A ain, ,ot- A4A and t-e S+=> 0ere afforded t-e opportunit" to testif" dire.tl" ,efore t-e MAC. At its Fanuar" 21 meetin , t-e MAC referred t-e issue to its Mana ement and 1perations (MR1) Committee for furt-er re/ie0 and a re.ommendation.

At its Je,ruar" 'rd meetin , t-e MR1 Committee 4voted to eliminate %rom %!rther consideration 123 la"or peace, ($) emplo"ee 7ualit" standards, and (:) t-e transfer of .art and 0-eel.-air ser/i.es to MAC.5 (emp-asis supplied) See item S ' on pa e 21 of t-e follo0in lin; to t-e MR1 Committee a enda for its April Et- meetin . -ttp)KK000.metroairports.or Kdo.sKpu,li.Meetin sKM1QAQ1'1:.pdf At its April E meetin , t-e MR1 Committee redu.ed t-e proposals under .onsideration for ASPs to 2ust one) !or;er *etention. See pa e '' of t-e follo0in lin; to MAC A enda) -ttp)KK000.metroairports.or Kdo.sKpu,li.Meetin sKJCQAQ1'2:.pdf M" understandin is t-at at its April 21st meetin , t-e full MAC follo0ed t-e MR1 Committee3s re.ommendation and is no lon er .onsiderin la,or pea.e proposals. 9o0e/er, t-e MAC did dire.t t-e staff to perform additional resear.- on t-e issues of !or;er *etention, and Paid 6ime 1ff for ASP emplo"ees, as 0ell as to re/ie0 0-et-er t-e airport .ould le all" assume t-e responsi,ilit" for dire.tl" -irin ASPs to perform 0-eel.-airK .art dri/in fun.tions inside t-e terminal. (Minutes of t-e April 21 meetin are not "et pu,li.l" a/aila,le.) Concl!sion) A4A respe.tfull" su ests t-at t-e airlines and t-e ASPs % 0-i.- until re.entl" -ad not ,een part of t-e dis.ussion pro.ess ? ,e i/en a full opportunit", for at least #0 da"s, to ,rief and meet 0it- t-e LA!A and t-e Cit" offi.ials re ardin t-ese proposed amendments. =n addition, 0e respe.tfull" su est t-at LA!A and t-e Cit" see; an outside, independent re/ie0 of t-e le al opinion re ardin t-e /alidit" of imposin LPAs on ASPs. 6-an; "ou for .onsiderin our /ie0s. !e loo; for0ard to "our response to our re7uest t-at t-e April 2$ deadline ,e e<tended. *e ards, *o,ert F. (eLu.ia Vi.e President, La,or and +mplo"ment, and Assistant @eneral Counsel Airlines %or America We Connect the World 1'01 Penns"l/ania A/e, B!, Suite 1100 !as-in ton, (C 20004 ! ) 202%:2:%4001 Cell) 202%&41%'0#E rdelu.iaTairlines.or 000.airlines.or ..) @ina Marie Lindse" 8

*a" =l unas Samson Men istu Mana/ Uumar, 1ffi.e of t-e Ma"or Len Sloper, Airline Ser/i.e Pro/iders Asso.iation