Order 2012-11-12

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

WASHINGTON, D.C. 

Issued by the Department of Transportation

on the 15th day of November, 2012

 

 Served: November 15, 2012

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

SUMMARY

By this Order, we tentatively decide that it is in the public interest to grant the motion of Delta 

Air Lines, Inc. (Delta) to move its Detroit-Haneda slot pair for scheduled combination services to 

Seattle-Haneda, rather than select an alternative use for that slot pair. 

BACKGROUND

Under the Memorandum of Understanding between the United States and Japan, signed on 

October 25, 2010, four daily slot pairs are available to carriers from each country to provide 

scheduled combination services between the United States and Tokyo’s Haneda Airport.1 By 

Order 2010-7-2, issued July 6, 2010, we allocated the four slot pairs as follows: 1) one slot pair 

to Hawaiian Airlines, Inc. (Hawaiian) for Honolulu-Haneda service; 2) two slot pairs to Delta, 

one for Los Angeles-Haneda and one for Detroit-Haneda services; and 3) one slot pair to 

American Airlines, Inc. (American) for New York (JFK)-Haneda service.2

On July 30, 2012, Delta filed a motion requesting authority to move its Detroit-Haneda slot pair 

to the Seattle-Haneda route and asked the Department to institute any necessary proceedings to 

 1 The scheduled operations are subject to the following conditions: 1) U.S. operations at Haneda are permitted 

between 2200 and 0700 hours local time; 2) departures from Haneda to a point in the 48 contiguous U.S. states are 

not permitted prior to midnight; and 3) extra sections are not permitted. 2 Not selected in that proceeding were American for one slot pair for Los Angeles-Haneda service; Continental 

Airlines, Inc., for one slot pair for Newark-Haneda service; Continental Micronesia, Inc., for one slot pair for GuamHaneda service; Delta for one slot pair for Seattle-Haneda and one slot pair for Honolulu-Haneda services; Hawaiian 

for a second Honolulu-Haneda service; and United Air Lines, Inc. (United) for one slot pair for San FranciscoHaneda service. 

Motion of 

DELTA AIR LINES, INC.

in the matter of 2010 U.S.-Haneda Combination 

Services Allocation Proceeding

 Docket DOT-OST-2010-0018
2

enable Delta to change gateways. United and Hawaiian filed objections to Delta’s motion.

Alaska Airlines, Inc. (Alaska), the Delta Master Executive Council of the Air Line Pilots 

Association (Delta MEC), and the Port of Seattle each filed answers in support of Delta. 

American filed an answer stating that it had no objection to Delta’s request, provided that all 

carriers holding Haneda slots are granted equivalent relief. Delta then filed a response asserting 

that it stood ready to demonstrate the merits of its Seattle proposal in any carrier selection 

proceedings that the Department deemed necessary.

By Order 2012-8-20, issued August 17, 2012, the Department instituted this proceeding to 

determine whether it is in the public interest to grant Delta’s motion to transfer its DetroitHaneda slot pair to the Seattle-Haneda route, or whether the public interest instead would be 

better served by an alternative use of that slot pair. The Order set forth a procedural schedule 

and evidentiary requirements for the establishment of a record for the Department to make a 

decision in this case. Pursuant to that procedural schedule, applications and any supporting

material were due August 27, 2012, answers were due September 6, 2012, and replies were due 

September 13, 2012.

SUMMARY OF APPLICATIONS AND RESPONSIVE PLEADINGS

Four carriers – American, Delta, Hawaiian, and United – filed applications for the slot pair under 

consideration, to provide daily combination services in the U.S.-Tokyo (Haneda) market.3

 

American proposes daily service from Los Angeles using B-777 aircraft. Delta proposes daily 

service from Seattle using B-767 aircraft. Hawaiian proposes daily service from Kona using 

A-330 aircraft. United proposes daily service from San Francisco using B-777 aircraft. 

Answers and replies were filed by each of the applicant carriers. Alaska filed an answer and 

reply reaffirming its support of Delta’s proposal. In addition, a number of civic parties filed 

formal pleadings in support of the various applicant carriers. The Continental Master Executive 

Council of the Air Line Pilots Association, the San Francisco International Airport, and the 

United Master Executive Council of the Air Line Pilots Association filed in support of United’s 

proposal. The Delta MEC and the Port of Seattle filed in support of Delta’s proposal.

POSITION OF THE PARTIES

American asserts that Los Angeles is the largest U.S. mainland Origin & Destination (O&D) 

market to Tokyo, with two times more local passengers than San Francisco and six times more 

local passengers than Seattle. American states that the Los Angeles-Haneda market is currently 

served by the Star alliance, through flights operated by All Nippon Airways Co., Ltd. (ANA) 

displaying the designator codes of United and US Airways, Inc. (US Airways); and by the 

SkyTeam alliance, through flights operated by Delta. American argues that its proposal would 

enhance inter-alliance competition in the large Los Angeles-Haneda market by allowing its 

alliance, oneworld, to compete directly with Star and SkyTeam.

 3 See Appendix A for a summary of the applicants’ proposals in chart form.
3

American also states that it would provide significant connecting opportunities for 25 U.S. cities, 

including the 10 largest U.S. mainland-Tokyo O&D markets.4 Through its immunized 

cooperative relationship with Japan Airlines Co., Ltd. (JAL), it would provide connecting 

opportunities beyond Haneda to 29 cities in Japan, as well as to Shanghai, Beijing, Bangkok, 

Hong Kong, Seoul, Singapore, and Taiwan.5

The competing carriers contend that the Los Angeles-Tokyo market is already well served and 

the market would not support an additional Los Angeles-Haneda flight. United argues that the 

Los Angeles-Tokyo market already has nearly twice the amount of service as San Francisco, and 

selecting Los Angeles would leave San Francisco - the second largest West Coast-Tokyo market

- without any nonstop U.S. carrier service to Haneda.

6 Delta contends that, if American receives 

the Los Angeles-Haneda slots, it would likely reduce its current Los Angeles-Narita service, as it 

did with its New York (JFK)-Narita service when it was awarded a New York-Haneda slot pair.7

 

Hawaiian argues that American’s track record of repeated cancellations on its New York (JFK)-

Haneda service suggests that an additional allocation at Los Angeles would be a waste of 

valuable resources.8

Delta maintains that its proposal would make the most productive use of the Haneda slot pair. 

Delta states that Seattle is the largest U.S.-Tokyo O&D market without any nonstop Haneda 

service, and that Seattle competes with San Francisco and Los Angeles for U.S.-Tokyo traffic. 

Delta states that, through the combination of its own services and its partnership with Alaska, 

Delta would provide one-stop service to Haneda from 42 points in the United States.9

Delta notes that, subsequent to the 2010 U.S.-Haneda Combination Services Allocation 

Proceeding, the American/JAL and United/ANA joint ventures were granted antitrust immunity, 

and argues that American and United are able to access Haneda through the metal-neutral 

transpacific joint venture flights of their Japanese partners.10 Delta further states that it is the 

sole independent network competitor against the Star and oneworld immunized alliances, and 

that only its proposal would preserve the three-way alliance competitive market structure that 

currently exists in the U.S.-Haneda market.11

The competing carriers question the viability of Delta’s proposal, given the size of the SeattleHaneda market and the fact that Delta’s proposed connections rely heavily on code-share service 

provided by Alaska. American argues that Seattle is the sixth largest Tokyo O&D market and 

the smallest market proposed in this proceeding, and points out that Los Angeles is the largest 

O&D market proposed in this proceeding.12 Hawaiian asserts that the Seattle market is not large 

enough to support additional Tokyo service and that Delta’s proposal will suffer the same fate as 

 4 American Application, at 8. 5 American Answer, at 2. 6 United Answer, at 9. 7 Delta Answer, at 13. 8 Hawaiian Answer, at 25-26. 9 Delta Application, at 9. 10 Delta Application, at 2. 11 Delta Answer, at 5. 12 American Answer, at 3.
4

its Detroit-Haneda service.13 United calls Delta’s competition arguments based on metal 

neutrality misguided, contending that additional opportunities for U.S. carriers, consumers, and 

communities are key benefits of immunized joint ventures.

14

Hawaiian asserts that, of the four U.S. carrier services to Haneda, its Honolulu-Haneda service 

has been the most successful, and that an award for Kona-Haneda service would make the best 

use of the slot pair. Hawaiian states that Kona is underserved as the second-largest U.S.-Tokyo 

O&D market without nonstop service to/from Tokyo, and the only market proposed in this 

proceeding without nonstop service to Tokyo. Hawaiian further states that only its proposal will 

provide a sustainable ongoing volume of passengers.

15 Hawaiian argues that selecting its 

proposal would reduce concentration in markets dominated by the oneworld, SkyTeam, and Star 

alliances, while doubling Hawaiian’s Tokyo service.16

Hawaiian acknowledges that its proposal would largely serve Japan originating passengers, but 

asserts that the introduction of a nonstop Kona-Haneda flight would have a substantial positive 

impact on Hawaii’s tourism-based economy, create over 1,400 U.S. jobs, and generate $74

million in new exports annually.17 18

The competing carriers generally argue that an award to Hawaiian would place half of the 

limited Haneda opportunities in the state of Hawaii, and that the public interest would not be 

served by primarily benefiting Japanese leisure passengers. Delta and United argue that 

Hawaiian does not need a limited Haneda slot pair since it is free to begin service at Narita.

19 

The competing carriers also question the timeline for instituting Hawaiian’s proposed service, 

given Hawaiian’s own acknowledgement that Kona International Airport may require updates to 

Customs and Immigration facilities.

20

United maintains that its San Francisco-Haneda proposal would best maximize public benefits 

by combining the large San Francisco gateway with numerous online connections, claiming the 

most online connections of any applicant in this proceeding. United argues that its proposal 

would provide nonstop Haneda service in the second largest West Coast-Tokyo market, a market 

that is nearly three times larger than the Seattle-Tokyo market.21 United further argues that it has 

the largest and most comprehensive hub on the West Coast, and that its San Francisco-Haneda 

 13 Hawaiian Answer, at 29-31. 14 United Reply, at 6-8. 15 Hawaiian Reply, at 3. 16 Hawaiian Answer, at 9 17 Hawaiian Answer, at 4. 18 On September 25, 2012, Hawaiian filed a motion requesting that the Department take official notice of a White 

House press release highlighting the importance of boosting foreign travel and tourism to the United States. In 

addition to the press release, Hawaiian attached a copy of Executive Order 13597 (published at Fed. Reg. 3373 

(2012)) Establishing Visa and Foreign Visitor Processing Goals and the Task Force on Travel and Competitiveness, 

and also attached a 2012 Task Force report on “National Travel and Tourism Strategy.” We received no opposition 

to Hawaiian’s motion and will take official notice of the cited press release.

19 Delta Answer, at 10; and United Answer, at 8. 20 Hawaiian Application, at 4, n.2. 21 United Application, at 3.
5

proposal would reach a catchment area far larger than the proposals offered by Delta and 

Hawaiian.

22

United asserts that it is the only U.S. carrier serving Japan that is not permitted to operate at 

Haneda with its own aircraft and crews, and that selection of its proposal would establish 

competitive parity among U.S. carriers at Haneda, while also providing competition with the San 

Francisco-Haneda services provided by American’s oneworld partner, JAL.

23 

American argues that United should not receive an award since United and its Star alliance 

partner ANA already command the largest presence in the U.S.-Japan nonstop market, operating 

a combined 210 weekly nonstop frequencies compared to oneworld’s 118 weekly nonstop 

frequencies.24 Hawaiian argues that the San Francisco-Tokyo market already has abundant 

service, and that the market is not large enough to accommodate United’s proposed service 

addition.25 Delta contends that, if United were awarded a San Francisco-Haneda slot pair, it 

would reduce its San Francisco-Narita service, while Delta’s proposal would inject true new 

capacity to Tokyo.

26 

TENTATIVE DECISION

We have tentatively decided that it is in the public interest to grant the motion of Delta to move 

its Detroit-Haneda slot pair to provide daily scheduled services between Seattle, Washington and 

Tokyo’s Haneda International Airport, rather than select an alternative use for that slot pair. 

Since we last examined the allocation of Haneda slots in the 2010 U.S.-Haneda Combination 

Services Allocation Proceeding, we have had the benefit of two years of U.S. carrier experience 

operating within the limited arrival/departure-time window at Haneda. We also now have the

benefit of knowing which U.S. gateways Japanese carriers have chosen to serve with their 

limited slot pair allocations – Honolulu and Los Angeles for ANA; and Honolulu and San 

Francisco for JAL. 

Against this background, and having considered the entire record before us, we tentatively select 

Delta’s proposed Seattle-Haneda service. We tentatively find that Delta’s proposal would best 

serve the public interest by providing the first nonstop Haneda service on a significant mainland 

U.S.-Tokyo route that currently lacks any such service, thereby establishing a new U.S. gateway 

to Haneda. We tentatively find that Delta’s proposed service would further serve the public 

interest by providing a number of western cities with a first one-stop connecting opportunity to 

Haneda.

27 We tentatively find in addition that other cities that now enjoy one-stop connections 

over more southerly gateways would gain the option of service over a less circuitous northwest 

gateway.28

 22 United Answer, at 3-4. 23 United Answer, at 2 and 10. 24 American Answer, at 5. 25 Hawaiian Answer, at 28. 26 Delta Answer, at 10 (citing United Application, at n.4). 27 Delta Exhibit, DL-R-201. 28 Delta Exhibits, DL-203 and DL-204.
6

Allowing Delta to move from Detroit to Seattle would also advance one of the prime objectives 

we sought to achieve in our last Haneda proceeding, namely, seeking with our limited number of 

Haneda opportunities to address a diversity of public interest goals. We tentatively find that an 

outcome that brings first-time Haneda service and first U.S.-flag Haneda service to the sixthlargest O&D market, while also promoting the geographic diversity of the U.S.-Haneda 

gateways, would be consistent with our established approach for the award of limited Haneda 

slot opportunities and would best serve the public interest. 

The competing carriers argue that Delta’s proposal should not be selected because the SeattleTokyo O&D market is the smallest proposed in this proceeding. We tentatively find, however,

that only Delta’s proposal would open Haneda access to a new region of the country, the Pacific 

Northwest, resulting in a greater number of service options for the traveling public.

We have also considered the competing carriers’ argument that Delta’s connecting services rely 

too heavily on services operated by its code-share partner Alaska.29 Alaska points out, however, 

that its marketing relationship with Delta is more comprehensive than traditional code-share 

arrangements, and that Alaska and Delta regularly adjust their schedules to facilitate effective 

connections.30 Also, Delta notes that Alaska provides effective feed traffic for Delta’s other 

Seattle services to Asia.

31 Therefore, we tentatively find that the proposed connections, offered 

through Delta’s marketing relationship with Alaska, further support the viability of Delta’s 

proposed new gateway service and grant of Delta’s motion.

We tentatively find that the public benefits that would be achieved by our tentative selection 

outweigh the benefits of the other applications. 

We recognize that American would provide service in the largest U.S.-Tokyo market proposed in 

this proceeding. However, we note that Los Angeles already has two daily nonstop flights to 

Haneda. Delta serves Los Angeles-Haneda with its own flights, and United offers Los AngelesHaneda service through its code share with ANA. Given the very limited opportunities for U.S.

carrier service to Haneda, we tentatively do not find American’s arguments persuasive for adding 

more Haneda service at Los Angeles while other significant U.S.-Tokyo gateways have no 

access to Haneda.

United’s proposal offers certain notable attributes. It would offer the first U.S.-carrier nonstop 

service using its own aircraft in the sizeable San Francisco-Haneda market, the second largest 

U.S.-Tokyo O&D market in this case. United also would offer an extensive number of on-line 

connections through its San Francisco hub to an appreciable catchment area. On balance, 

however, we tentatively find that our public interest objectives in this proceeding would be better 

served by establishing the first U.S.-flag nonstop Haneda service of any sort at Seattle. While 

San Francisco may not have service to Haneda from a U.S. carrier operating its own aircraft, 

American offers daily nonstop San Francisco-Haneda service through its code share with JAL. 

While United’s San Francisco hub might arguably reach more passengers than the combined 

 29 United Answer, at 4-6; Hawaiian Answer, at 29-30; and American Answer, at 2-3. 30 Reply of Alaska, at 1. 31 Delta Exhibit, DL R-202.
7

Delta/Alaska hub at Seattle,32 we tentatively find that the Delta proposal offers important 

advantages of its own in terms of catchment area. Specifically, we note that Delta will provide 

more new cities with first one stop Haneda service than United; that it will better serve the 

Pacific Northwest; and that, in a number of cases, service via Seattle is less circuitous than 

service over San Francisco.33 Against this background, we tentatively find that an award to Delta 

represents the better allocation of this limited Haneda opportunity.

While we note that Kona currently lacks nonstop service to Tokyo, we recognize that the State of 

Hawaii now enjoys three of the eight total U.S.-Haneda route-opportunities available to U.S. and 

Japanese carriers. Consistent with our ongoing goal of using our limited Haneda rights to 

address a variety of public interest objectives, including the objective of geographically diverse 

gateways, we tentatively find that the public interest would be better served by opening Haneda 

nonstop access to a new region of the country, the Pacific Northwest, than by allocating a fourth 

Haneda route to Hawaii. 

Our tentative decision to allow Delta to move its slot pair to Seattle is limited to the proposal 

considered in this proceeding. Should any carrier, including Delta, currently serving Haneda 

wish to change its gateway, it should expect a comparable comparative selection proceeding to 

determine whether it is in the public interest to allow the carrier to do so.

TERMS, CONDITIONS, AND LIMITATIONS

We have tentatively decided to impose a startup condition for this award. If our tentative 

decision is made final, we will require Delta to institute its proposed services within 90 days 

after the service date of such a final order in this proceeding. In addition, we propose that the

slot pair allocated in this proceeding be subject to a 90-day dormancy condition, wherein any slot 

pair not utilized for a period of 90 days (once inaugurated) would be deemed dormant and revert 

to the Department.

ACCORDINGLY,

1. We tentatively find that it is in the public interest to grant the motion of Delta Air Lines, Inc. 

to move one slot pair, currently allocated for Detroit-Haneda services, to the Seattle-Haneda 

market, rather than select an alternative use for that slot pair; 

2. We grant the September 25, 2012, motion of Hawaiian Airlines, Inc.;

3. We tentatively deny the remaining applications in this proceeding;

4. We direct any interested parties having objections to our tentative findings and conclusions 

set forth in this order and in ordering paragraphs 1 and 3 above, to file their objections, in the

above-captioned docket, with the Department’s Docket Section, U.S. Department of 

Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200

 32 United Exhibit, UA-A-104. 33 Delta Reply, at 7 and Delta Exhibit, DL-R-201.
8

New Jersey Avenue, S.E., Washington, D.C., 20590, no later than ten (10) calendar days from 

the date of service of this order; answers thereto shall be filed no later than seven (7) calendar 

days thereafter;34

5. If timely and properly supported objections are filed, we will afford full consideration to the 

matters or issues raised by the objections before we take further action;35 if no objections are 

filed, we will deem all further procedural steps to be waived and will proceed to enter a final 

order awarding the authority proposed in this order; and

6. We will serve this order on the parties to the captioned docket of the order, the Japanese

Ambassador to the United States in Washington, DC, the Federal Aviation Administration, and 

the U.S. Department of State (Office of Aviation Negotiations).

By:

Susan L. Kurland

Assistant Secretary for Aviation

and International Affairs

(SEAL)

An electronic version of this document is available on the World Wide Web at:

http://www.regulations.gov

 34 The original filing should be on 81⁄2" x 11" white paper using dark ink and be unbound without tabs, which will 

expedite use of our docket imaging system. In the alternative, filers are encouraged to use the electronic filing 

submission capability available through the Dockets/FDMS Internet site (http://www.regulations.gov) by following 

the instructions at the web site.

35 As we are providing for the filing of objections to this tentative decision, we will not entertain petitions for 

reconsideration of this order.
Appendix A

 1 The number of seats shown takes into account blocked seats for crew rest purposes, as carriers noted in their 

applications.

Applicant Proposed 

Routing

U.S.-Haneda

Depart/Arrive Times 

(Summer)

Haneda-U.S. 

Depart/Arrive Times (Summer)

Type 

Aircraft

Capacity1

Depart Arrive Elapsed Depart Arrive Elapsed

American Los Angeles 

– Haneda

0125 0500 

+1

11:35 0005 1820 10:15 B-777 247 Seats – 16 First / 37 

Business / 194 Economy

Delta Seattle –

Haneda

1935 2200 

+1

10:25 0000 1700 9:00 B-767 225 Seats – 25 Business 

Elite / 

29 Economy Comfort / 

171 Economy

Hawaiian Kona –

Haneda

1750 2200 

+1

9:10 2355 1250 7:55 A-330 294 Seats – 18 Business / 

276 Economy

United San Francisco 

– Haneda

1900 2215 

+1

11:15 0005 1720 9:15 B-777 268 Seats – 7 First / 40 

Business / 221 Economy