Order 2013-8-26

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY 

WASHINGTON, D.C.

Issued by the Department of Transportation

On the Twenty-Ninth day of August, 2013

STA Travel, Inc. Docket OST 2013-0004

Served: August 29, 2013

Violations of 49 U.S.C. § 41712 and

14 CFR Part 257

CONSENT ORDER

This consent order concerns violations by STA Travel, Inc. (“STA”), when it failed to 

disclose code-share arrangements as required by 49 U.S.C. § 41712(c) and 14 CFR Part 

257 during telephone airline reservation calls. These failures also constitute separate and 

distinct violations of 49 U.S.C. § 41712(a), the statutory prohibition against unfair and 

deceptive practices. The order directs STA to cease and desist from future violations of 

Part 257 and section 41712, and assesses $40,000 in civil penalties.

Applicable Law

STA is a ticket agent1 and is therefore subject to the detailed code-share disclosure 

requirements found in 49 U.S.C. § 41712(c) and 14 CFR 257.5(b). Under section 

41712(c), any “ticket agent, air carrier, foreign air carrier, or other person offering to sell 

tickets for air transportation on a flight of an air carrier” is required to disclose “whether 

verbally in oral communication or in writing in written or electronic communication, 

prior to the purchase of a ticket[,] the name of the air carrier providing the air 

transportation; and if the flight has more than one segment, the name of each air carrier 

providing the air transportation for each such flight segment.” Failure to disclose the

required information is an unfair or deceptive practice in violation of section 41712. 

Section 257.4 of the code-share disclosure rule states that the holding out or sale of 

scheduled passenger air transportation involving a code-sharing arrangement is an unfair 

and deceptive trade practice in violation of 49 U.S.C. § 41712, unless, in conjunction 

 1 A “ticket agent” is “a person (except an air carrier, a foreign air carrier, or an employee of an air carrier or 

foreign air carrier) that as a principal or agent sells, offers for sale, negotiates for, or holds itself out as 

selling, providing, or arranging for air transportation.” 49 U.S.C. § 40102(a)(45).
2

with that holding out or sale, carriers and agents follow certain requirements, including 

those of 14 CFR 257.5(b). With regard to oral communications concerning a flight that is 

part of a code-sharing arrangement, section 257.5(b) states that a ticket agent or carrier 

must disclose to prospective consumers before they book the flight the existence of the 

code-share arrangement, the corporate name of the transporting carrier, and any other 

name under which the flight is held out to the public. Violations of section 257.5(b) 

constitute unfair and deceptive trade practices and unfair methods of competition in 

violation of 49 U.S.C. § 41712.

Facts and Conclusion

An investigation by the Office of Aviation Enforcement and Proceedings (Enforcement 

Office) revealed a lack of compliance by STA with section 257.5(b) of the Department’s 

code-share rule and 49 U.S.C. § 41712(c). For a period of time during January and 

February of 2013, Enforcement Office staff made a number of telephone calls to STA as 

potential purchasers and inquired about booking a flight. During these calls, the STA

reservations agents answering the calls failed to make the required disclosure regarding 

code-share arrangements for the flights in question. Specifically, when discussing flights 

marketed by one carrier but operated by another with the callers, STA’s reservation 

agents only identified the marketing carrier and did not identify the corporate name of the 

carrier operating the flight or any other name under which the flight was operated, even 

when prompted by the caller. 

The Department interprets Section 257.5(b) and 49 U.S.C. § 41712(c) to require that oral 

code-share disclosures be provided whenever an agent first mentions a code-share flight 

in response to a specific consumer inquiry, including inquiries that may involve only a 

request for information. The telephone calls indicated that STA generally failed to 

inform consumers booking flights involving code-share arrangements of the identity of 

the airline that would actually operate the aircraft on which the consumer would be 

flying.

Mitigation

In mitigation, STA Travel states that it takes seriously its responsibility to comply with 

DOT regulations. STA travel does not believe that it violated any code-share disclosure 

mandates because no bookings were made nor were any reservations held during the 

telephone surveys conducted by DOT Enforcement staff. Nonetheless, STA Travel is 

willing to modify its practices in a way that best serves its customers and minimizes any 

confusion about code-share flights. STA Travel has implemented a more stringent codeshare training methodology to ensure all necessary disclosures are provided to customers. 

STA Travel is confident that the new training methodology will help avoid any 

allegations of code-share violations going forward.
3

Decision

We view seriously the failure of STA to disclose code-sharing arrangements as required 

by 49 U.S.C. § 41712(c) and 14 CFR 257.5(b). Accordingly, after carefully considering 

all of the facts in this case, including those set forth above, the Enforcement Office 

believes that enforcement action is warranted. In order to avoid litigation, STA agrees to 

the issuance of this order, to cease and desist from future similar violations of 

49 U.S.C. § 41712 and 14 CFR 257.5(b), and to the assessment of $40,000 in 

compromise of potential civil penalties that otherwise might be imposed pursuant to 

49 U.S.C. § 46301. We believe that this compromise assessment is appropriate in view 

of the nature and extent of the violations in question, serves the public interest, and 

provides a strong deterrent to non-compliance with the statute and the Department’s 

code-share disclosure rule.

This order is issued under the authority contained in 49 CFR Part 1.

ACCORDINGLY,

1. Based on the above discussion, we approve this settlement and the provisions of 

this order as being in the public interest;

2. We find that by failing to disclose code-sharing arrangements as prescribed in 

49 U.S.C. § 41712(c) and 14 CFR 257.5(b), STA Travel, Inc., violated 14 CFR 257.5(b)

and engaged in an unfair and deceptive trade practice in violation of 49 U.S.C. § 41712;

3. We order STA Travel, Inc., and all other entities owned or controlled by or under 

common ownership with STA Travel, Inc., its successors and assignees, to cease and 

desist from further violations of 49 U.S.C. § 41712(c) and 14 CFR 257.5(b); 

4. We assess STA Travel, Inc., $40,000 in compromise of civil penalties that might 

otherwise be assessed for the violations found in ordering paragraph 2 above. Of this 

total penalty amount, $5,000 shall be due and payable within thirty (30) days of the date of 

the issuance of this order; $5,000 shall be due and payable within sixty (60) days of the date 

of issuance of this order; and $10,000 shall be due and payable within ninety (90) days of the 

date of issuance of this order. The remaining portion of the civil penalty amount, $20,000, 

shall become due and payable immediately if, within one year of the date of issuance of this 

order, STA Travel, Inc., violates this order’s cease and desist provisions or fails to comply 

with the order’s payment provisions, in which case STA Travel, Inc., may be subject to 

additional enforcement action for violation of this order; and, 

5. Payment shall be made through Pay.gov to the account of the U.S. Treasury in 

accordance with the instructions contained in the Attachment to this order. Failure to pay 

any portion of the penalty as ordered shall subject STA Travel, Inc., to the assessment of 

interest, penalty, and collection charges under the Debt Collection Act.
4

This order will become a final order of the Department 10 days after its service date 

unless a timely petition for review is filed or the Department takes review on its own 

motion.

BY:

SAMUEL PODBERESKY

Assistant General Counsel for 

 Aviation Enforcement and Proceedings

An electronic version of this document is available at 

www.regulations.gov