\\DC - 036787/000001 - 3438000 v3

BEFORE THE

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

WASHINGTON, D.C.

In the Matter of: Application of

FINAL RULE ENHANCING AIRLINE

PASSENGER PROTECTIONS

)

)

)

)

)

Docket DOT-OST-2010-0140

ANSWER OF FRONTIER AIRLINES, INC.

Communications with respect to this document should be addressed to:

Daniel Shurz

Senior Vice President, Commercial

Daniel Krause

Vice President of Marketing and

Customer Experience

FRONTIER AIRLINES, INC.

Frontier Center One

7001 Tower Road

Denver, CO 80249

Robert E. Cohn

Patrick R. Rizzi

HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP

Columbia Square

555 Thirteenth Street, NW

Washington, DC 20004

+1 202 637 4999/5659

robert.cohn@hoganlovells.com

patrick.rizzi@hoganlovells.com

Counsel for

FRONTIER AIRLINES, INC.

July 13, 2012
\\DC - 036787/000001 - 3438000 v3

BEFORE THE

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

WASHINGTON, D.C.

In the Matter of: Application of

FINAL RULE ENHANCING AIRLINE

PASSENGER PROTECTIONS

)

)

)

)

)

Docket DOT-OST-2010-0140

July 13, 2012

ANSWER OF FRONTIER AIRLINES, INC.

Frontier Airlines, Inc. (“Frontier”) supports the Petition jointly filed by Airlines for

America, the International Air Transport Association, the Regional Airlines Association,

and the Air Carrier Association of America (collectively, “Petitioners”) to extend DOT

Order 2012-1-2 and its enforcement discretion in monitoring compliance with 14 C.F.R.

§§ 399.87 and 399.85(c) (the “New Baggage Rules”).1

When the Department finalized the New Baggage Rules, Frontier moved

expeditiously to alter its technology, procedures, programs, and training in order to be

in compliance on or before the effective date. Frontier also participated in certain

industry discussions with ATPCO about providing the baggage allowance and fee

information on an industry-wide basis. The New Baggage Rules imposed sweeping

changes on the industry that required Frontier to expend substantial financial and

human resources to develop, test, and implement a large number of technological,

reprogramming, hardware/software, process, and training programs in order to inform

passengers about baggage allowances and fees and to apply them in a manner

1 Good cause exists, to the extent necessary, for the Department to consider and accept this Answer. It will

provide the Department more complete information, from a carrier that is not a member of any of the Petitionerassociations, upon which to base its decision on the Petition.
Answer of Frontier Airlines, Inc.

Page 2

\\DC - 036787/000001 - 3438000 v3

consistent with the New Baggage Rules. As a result of these efforts, Frontier believes

that it is in full compliance with the New Baggage Rules for passengers booking and

traveling solely on Frontier Airlines, including on any regional carrier fee-for-service

partner operating under the Frontier brand.

However, meeting the requirement to coordinate baggage policy information

with other carriers in relation to codeshare, interline and non-interline itineraries is

highly complex and difficult, and requires more time. For example, with respect to one

specific scenario relating to coordination of baggage allowances on multiple carriers

over a single itinerary where the consumer is eligible for a frequent flyer baggage

allowance on one of the carriers, the Department advised:

“It is up to the carriers to coordinate among themselves to determine

whether, based on the passenger’s eligibility for reduced or waived baggage

fees for one or more segments of an itinerary, the reduced or waived

baggage fees apply to the entire itinerary. The carriers are jointly

responsible for sharing information regarding the baggage allowances and

fees that will apply to those itineraries and coordinating among themselves

to ensure that passengers are provided accurate information about the

baggage allowances and fees that will apply to their itinerary . . .2

And, that is just for one very specific scenario among the many that arise in day-to-day

operations. Frontier is working to obtain baggage policy information from other

carriers. But, those efforts require more time given the myriad of carrier-combinations

that might arise on interline itineraries where Frontier is operating only one segment of

multiple segment itineraries, particularly where Frontier needs to coordinate with

airlines with which it has no direct inter-carrier relationship.

2

Answers to FAQs on EAPP #2, dated August 19, 2011, and revised on September 6 and October 19,

2011, and on January 11, 2012 (“DOT FAQs”), Q. #44.
Answer of Frontier Airlines, Inc.

Page 3

\\DC - 036787/000001 - 3438000 v3

The Department itself has acknowledged that application of the New Baggage

Rules to travelers on multi-carrier, single-ticket interline itineraries is difficult.

“As for interline itineraries, we [DOT] recognize that it is more difficult to

disclose baggage fees and ensure that the same baggage allowances and

fees that apply at the beginning of a passenger’s itinerary apply throughout

the itinerary on flights that are on a single ticket but are sold pursuant to

interline agreements among the carriers listed on the ticket.” DOT Order

2012-1-2, at 4 (footnote omitted).

And, the fact that the Department found it necessary to devote a large number of its

FAQs to several (but, by no means, all possible) fact-specific scenarios involving the

application of the New Baggage Rules only serves to underscore their overwhelming

complexity.

As the rules have taken effect and carriers try in good faith to comply, the

experience of implementation has revealed innumerable real-world situations not

understood at the time the Department issued its enforcement moratorium in January

2012, nor contemplated by the New Baggage Rules themselves. It is hard to overstate

the complexity of applying these New Baggage Rules to the myriad of real-world

situations that arise.

The Petitioners explain in substantial detail some of the technological,

reprogramming, coordination, training, and implementation issues that the industry is

still facing in order to comply with the New Baggage Rules. Those same issues are

magnified and even more acute for Frontier because, unlike many of Petitioners’

member-carriers who are alliance partners or otherwise closely affiliated, Frontier is an

unaffiliated low-cost, low-fare competitor.
Answer of Frontier Airlines, Inc.

Page 4

\\DC - 036787/000001 - 3438000 v3

Frontier is not a member of an airline alliance, nor is it a member of any of the

Petitioner-associations. Frontier has a code-sharing arrangement with only Great

Lakes Airlines (“GLA”), no reciprocal frequent flyer agreements, and only a limited

number of interline e-ticket agreements. It uses third-party contractors or personnel

from other airlines to handle certain baggage-related customer service functions at

many of its outstations. Therefore, with the single exception of GLA, Frontier’s only

relationships with other carriers are on an interline basis. Frontier has formal interline

agreements with some carriers, but there are many carriers with which Frontier has no

direct relationship. The Department acknowledged the difficulties faced by carriers like

Frontier when it issued the current moratorium by noting that applying the New

Baggage Rules and sharing baggage policy information are “particularly problematic [in

cases such as Frontier’s] when a passenger is flying on an interline ticket and the

airlines listed on the ticket do not all have a direct relationship with one another.” DOT

Order 2012-1-2, at 4.

For example, a passenger may have a single ticket itinerary traveling from Los

Angeles to Denver on Frontier and then from Denver to Frankfurt on Lufthansa. But,

Frontier has no interline e-ticket or baggage agreement with Lufthansa, thereby

complicating the baggage allowance and fee calculus. As a stop-gap for such

situations lacking any inter-carrier relationship, Frontier is providing passengers with a

coupon/receipt for the baggage fee paid to it that the passenger can then present to

the other carrier’s check-in or gate agent at the connecting point.3That other carrier

3

“When a carrier elects to file their baggage charges per direction rather than per checked portion and a

passenger is at a mid-stream point of the direction, most check-in systems have no way to know whether or not
Answer of Frontier Airlines, Inc.

Page 5

\\DC - 036787/000001 - 3438000 v3

can submit the coupon/receipt to the clearing house for a pro rata allocation of the

collected fee. Of course, such manual stop-gap measures are very inefficient. They

can lead to the inconsistent application of the New Baggage Rules by individual agents

or carriers, and, to the extent that this baggage fee calculus is done at the airport by a

Frontier gate or customer service agent, they may well delay the check-in process for

not only the passenger at issue but also other passengers waiting in line behind that

passenger.

Moreover, given the lack of an industry-wide system for handling baggage

allowances and fees, the New Baggage Rules have required the implementation of

some practices that make travel less convenient. For example, Frontier no longer

inputs “passive segments” in PNRs to facilitate the connection of checked baggage

from a Frontier flight to another carrier’s flight when the passenger purchased two

tickets. In effect, Frontier is compelled to “short check” baggage, so that the

passenger must reclaim his/her bags upon arrival on the Frontier flight, then bring

them to the carrier operating the passenger’s next flight, and then re-check the bags

with that carrier. Another example involves a passenger traveling from Los Angeles to

Denver on Frontier and then onward to Chicago on United where the passenger

purchases two separate tickets but on check-in at LAX, the passenger asks the agent

to check the bags through to Chicago. In the past, Frontier would have tried to

accommodate the passenger’s request. Until an industry-wide system is in place to

charges have been collected at the point of origin. A passenger can present a receipt, but automation would

default to either present the charges for collection, which agents would have to override (meaning some

passengers could not use self-service kiosks) or assume that the charges have been collected previously which will

result in a potential loss of baggage revenue.” Petition at 7.
Answer of Frontier Airlines, Inc.

Page 6

\\DC - 036787/000001 - 3438000 v3

implement the New Baggage Rules automatically and consistently, such

inconveniences may continue.

Frontier believes that the industry’s efforts with ATPCO (as detailed in the

Petition) will result in such a system. However, more time is needed for such a system

to be implemented, and carriers should focus their resources on developing, testing,

and implementing an industry-wide system and coordinating baggage information with

other carriers, not on stop-gap bandage protocols. Thus the limited extension of the

enforcement moratorium is fully warranted.

Accordingly, for the reasons set forth above and in the Petition, Frontier urges

the Department to extend the enforcement discretion with respect to these New

Baggage Rules.

Respectfully submitted,

______________________________________

Robert E. Cohn

Patrick R. Rizzi

HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP

555 Thirteenth Street, NW

Washington, DC 20004

+1 202 637 4999/5659

Counsel for

FRONTIER AIRLINES, INC.
\\DC - 036787/000001 - 3438000 v3

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing Answer of Frontier Airlines, Inc.

has been served this 13th day of July 2012, upon each of the following addressees:

dmullen@airlines.org

cohen@raa.org

epfaberman@acaa1.com

lavind@iata.org

_____________________________

Patrick Rizzi