Third-party Complainants, 

vs. 

Delta Air Lines, Inc. 

Docket DOT -OST-2015-0001 

ANSWER OF DELTA AIR LINES, INC. TO THIRD-PARTY COMPLAINT 

Communications with respect to this document should be directed to: 

January 20, 2015 

Jon-Peter F. Kelly 

Assistant General Counsel 

Delta Air Lines, Inc. 

Department 981 

1030 Delta Boulevard 

Atlanta, Georgia 30354-1989 

Tel: (404) 714-5631 

Fax: (404) 677-2971 

Email: jonpeter.f.kelly@delta.com 
Third-party Complainants, 

vs. 

Docket DOT -OST -2015-0001 

Delta Air Lines, Inc. 

ANSWER OF DELTA AIR LINES, INC. TO THIRD-PARTY COMPLAINT 

Pursuant to 14 C.F.R. § 302.405(a), Delta Air Lines, Inc., ("Delta") answers the abovecaptioned third-party complaint and, for the reasons set forth herein, urges the Department of 

Transportation ("the Department") to dismiss the complaint without further investigation or action. 1 

Delta is fully aware of, and takes care to remain compliant with, the Department's 

guidance as to the online display of taxes and carrier-imposed fees. See Notice, "Additional 

Guidance on Airfare/Air Tour Price Advertisements," U.S. Department of Transportation, Office 

ofthe Secretary, February 21,2012. However, as all carriers do, Delta periodically updates its 

website, Delta.com. On November 15, 2014, Delta rolled out updates to the site. Those updates 

included the fare displays for tickets redeemable with miles from Delta's SkyMiles frequentflyer program. Those updates, unfortunately, resulted in the erroneous identification of certain 

charges as "taxes," when those sums included carrier-imposed fees, in certain unusual frequentflyer award-redemption situations. 

1 The caption on the complaint erroneously identifies Delta as "Delta Airlines." Delta corTects that error in the 

caption to this answer. 
wen:: unaffected. bt.!cause fare displays for those transc.t<..tions show the full price. with no sepa

at

breakout of taxes. Sec Exhibit 1. As for SkyMiles redemptions for itineraries onginating 

anywhere except Europe. the ref"t!rence to "ta-xes" was actually correct because the cash 

c.:omponent on those av,:ard-rcdcmption transactions did not include any carrier-imposed charge!>. 

Delta was unaware of the erroneous '·tax" dic;play in these unusualtransact!ons until it 

\\'as served with the complaint on January 6. 2015. Once the ~!> t! \\aS brought to our attention 

however, \VC corrected it within 48 hours. By January 8, the \Vord ''taxes" was removed from liH.: 

fare display for all SkyMiles redemptions regardless of origination. Sec Exhibit 2. In the 

attached exhibit 2, for example, the fare tor a roundtnp itinerary from Paris to Nt:w York is 

disp a)cd as 60,000 [milesl plus 085 ~5 . No rcfer~nce is made to "taxes'" .,sa component of the 

fare. With this correction. the display is n<'W fully compliant with the Depa tme t'~ l'ebruary 

2012 gUidance. 

One reason that D..::lta was unaware ofthc error until the complaint was <:c1-vcd is thJ11he 

1tincranes that lhts cn·or affected were so rare. ln the relevant period of i'olovember IS. ~0 14 

(when Delta.com was updated and the error occurred). to January 8. 201 S (when the error was 

corrected). there were oYer 3.?5 million ticket transactions on Dclta.com. Ofthosc trunsactionc;, 

1e\vcr than 500 were Sky Miles redemptions for itineranes originating out of Europe 1 In other 

words, less than 0.02% of Delta's online customers redeemed tickets after seeing tht: trrant 

displa]. 

1 Ofthnt fi gure, some customers mudc pu cha~es for itineraries that never touched the United Sr.at..:1' at al l (e.g .. 

tl} ing from Europe to South America). Excluding those itinerarie~ the number drops to fewer than 400. 

2 

.. 
imposed surcharge. but all customers who saw thi::; enoncous display on tklta.com were fully 

and accurately apprised ofthc total price. in terms of both miles und cash. in the initial fare 

display of their shopping experience. Again, using the attached example from r:xhibit 2. the 

initial fare display disclosed that the total price would be 60.000 miles plus €385.25. l ithcr the 

customer wa~ willing to pay that amount, or not. Whether the entire cash component ultimately 

goes Lo Delta or is remitted by Ddta to a government entity has no impact on the tustomer either 

way. And as the complaint acknowledges, the exact allocation oCthe cash component, including 

the amount that was a carrier-imposed surcharge. was clearly disclosed by Delta during the 

transaction in the pop-up box displayed atier one click to any customer fo:- \vhom this detail \\·as 

material. /\::;the complainants'' O\\'ll allegations make clear. they were fully aware of the 

surcharge component and were not deceived in any ,,·ay. 

finall y, Delta notes that the present issue is almost identical to that raised by complainant 

Edelman in a matter he initiated by third-party wmplaint against Cathay Paci1ic Airways 

Limited ("Cathay Pacific'') in 2013. Edelman Y. Cathay Pacific Airways Limited, Order 2013-8 

23 (August 29 2013). As here. Mr Edelman complained that some of Cathay Pacific's fare 

displays (which were generated through a third-party booking engine) incorrectly identified sums 

that included carrier-imposed fcl!s as ·'taxes:· ld. at 2. Cathay Pacific conceded the error and 

indicated that it \\·orkcd with the third-part) booking engine to correct the problem .. ,,.·ithin l\.\0 

weeks of the !iling of Mr. Fdelman's complaint.'' !d. In light or '·the prompt and complete 

remedial action under1aken by Cathay and [the third-party booking engine],'' the Dcpar1ment 

3 
con-cctcd its n1re displays in two days, not two weeks. Hence, Delta submits that the same 

resolution should be implemented here: a dismissal ofthc complaint \Vithout the imposition of 

any civil penalties. 

WHERErORE. Delta Air Lines. In<.: .. respectfully tequests that the Dcpartm~nt disrmss 

the nbovc-captioned third pan) complaint without further investigatio11 or action. 

Dated: January 20 2015 

Respectful!> submitted. By: _fjc - I Jon-Peter F. Kelly =-=--""" 

V Assistant Gc;neral Counsel 

Dt.. t. _ \ir :., nes, Inc. 

Dep'lr mcnt 981 

1030 Delta Boulevard 

Atlanta Georgia 30354-1989 

Tel: (404) 714-5631 

fax : ( 404) 677-2971 

Email: jonpeter.f.kelly@dclta.com 

J 1\s here, complainant Edelman requested that the Department ord~r Cathay Pacific to refund monies that were paid 

t()r the affected ticket~. Edelman v (~thav Pacific Airwavs Limited, Order 2013-8 23, at~ (/\ugu-;t ~9, 2013 ). The 

Dcp<:rtment obviously denied lhat request as inappropriate. The same analysis applies to Delta here. The request 

should be denied. 

4 
,933 ·o,057 

,C)13 057 

1,q33 u,057 

"1,933 057 

1,933 ' r 057 

.Jason Steele 

Blane Workie 

Kimberly Graber 

jasondsteclc@gmail.com 

blane. workie@dot.gov 

kimberly. grabcr@,dot. gov