BEFORE THE FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION WASHINGTON, D.C.

Application of

AMERICAN AIRLINES , INC.

For an exemption from 14 C.F.R. 93.123

( Lansing, Michigan

– Washington D.C. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Docket FAA

- 201 5

- 3491

ANSWER OF DELTA AIR LINES, INC.

Communications with respect to this document should be addressed to:

Robert J. Cortelyou Senior Vice President

– Network Planning Joe Esposito Vice President Network Planning DELTA AIR LINES, INC. 1030 Delta Boulevard Atlanta, Georgia 30320 Alexander Van der Bellen Managing Director

– Regulatory

and International Affairs & Associate General Counsel Christopher Walker Regional Director

– Regulatory and

International Affairs DELTA AIR LINES, INC. 1212 New York Avenue, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 842

- 4184 sascha.vanderbellen@delta.com chris.walker@delta.com

September 15
, 201 5BEFORE THE FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION WASHINGTON, D.C.

Application of

AMERICAN AIRLINES , INC.

For an exemption from 14 C.F.R. 93.123

(Lansing, Michigan

– Washington D.C.) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Docket FAA

- 2015

- 3491

ANSWER OF DELTA AIR LINES, INC.

American Airlines, Inc. (“American”) , by far the largest slot holder at DCA, has

requested FAA to exercise extraordinary exemption authority to grant American relief

from the High Density Rule (“HDR”) which limits the number of takeoff and landing slots

at DCA. Delta and other carriers are constrained by the HDR from operatin g the full

range of network options and competitive services they would like to offer at DCA.

There is a no legitimate public interest basis for granting American an exemption from

the HDR, given the extensive DCA slot portfolio at its disposal.

America n’s claimed need for exemption relief is to continue the DCA

- Lansing

service now operated by Sun Country under FAA Exemption No. 10466. While Delta is

sympathetic to the desire of Lansing to maintain nonstop service to DCA, there is no

need to provide Am erican with exemption sl ots in order for it to do so. If FAA is willing to

cons ider exemption relief for large DCA incumbent carriers to provide DCA

- Lansing

service it should grant Delta’s contemporaneously filed application for such slots. 1

1 Unless the FAA is prepared to grant an unlimited number of DCA exemptions, which would render the HDR meaningless, FAA must weigh the merits of the mutually exclusive competing applications . See, ASHBACKER RADIO CORP. V. FCC , 326 U. S. 327 (1945)

.Answer of Delta Page 3

The circumstances supporting FAA exemption relief to Sun Country are vastly

different than those associated with American’s current request. Sun Country originally

received slots for Minneapolis

- Lansing

- DCA services in a contested DOT route case

proceedin g. One of the primary factors DOT considered in selecting Sun Country was

that it “qualif[ies] as [a] new entrant under the terms of the statute as it [does not]

operate at DCA.” Order 2010

- 12

- 16 at 5. Moreover, DOT firmly rejected a competing

proposa l filed by American’s merger partner, U.S. Airways: “we reiterate that US

Airways is the single largest slot holder at DCA and could elect to serve Pensacola with

its existing slot holdings. ”

Due to intervening litigation, 2 Sun Country’s DCA

- Lansing slot s were ultimately

reissued by FAA under its public interest authority “to prevent the inequitable result of

Sun Country losing slot exemptions through no fault of its own.” FAA Exemption No.

10466 at 3. FAA imposed strict conditions and limitations tied to DOT’s original selection

of Sun Country, including, inter alia:

• “This exemption authorizes operations only by Sun Country and no

other carrier .” Id. at 4

• “This exemption will be rescinded if Sun Country discontinues

scheduled operations at Ronald Regan Washington Airport.” Id.

Sun Country has elected to discontinue service on the DCA

- Lansing route, and

American can lay no claim to continuation of this exemption. To continue or reissue an

exemption to American would violate the clear and express public interest rationale used

by DOT in assigning exemption authority to Sun Country

– and Sun Country alone.

2 Repub lic Airlines, Inc. v. U.S. Department of Transportation , No. 11

- 1018 (D.C. Cir. 2012).Answer of Delta Page 4

American’s plainly has the ability to operate DCA

- Lansing service without FAA

exemption relief, and the combined carrier’s slot portfolio is much greater now than when

DOT rejected US Airway’s Pensacola application due to its extensive DCA slot holdings.

As illustrated by the following table slots operated by A merican or on its behalf dwarf

those of other holders at the airport:

Source: OAG August Schedules

If the FAA is inclined to grant DCA

- Lansing exemption authority in the

circumstances presented, the competitive distribution of DCA slots would be impro ved

by an award of exemption authority to Delta over American. Any award should be

based on full consideration of competing applications. DOT and FAA have a clear policy

of coordinating review when there are overlapping competitive and slot administration

issues. See FAA/DOT approval of Delta/US Airways transaction, 76 Fed. Reg. 63702

(Docket FAA

- 2010

- 0109). 235

49 42 34 30 8 4 4 3 2 0 50 100 150 200 250 

# Average Daily DCA FlightsAnswer of Delta Page 5

Respectfully submitted,

_________________________________ Alexand er Van der Bellen Managing Director

– Regulatory and

International Affairs & Associate General Counsel DELTA AIR LINES, INC.