BEFORE THE

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

WASHINGTON, D.C.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

:

In the Matter of :

:

2010 U.S.-HANEDA COMBINATION : Docket DOT-OST-2010-0018

SERVICES ALLOCATION PROCEEDING : 

:

------------------------------------------------------------------------

ANSWER OF

UNITED AIR LINES, INC.

Communications with respect to this document should be sent to:

Hershel I. Kamen

Senior Vice President – Alliances,

 Regulatory & Policy

UNITED AIR LINES, INC.

1350 I Street, N.W.

Washington, DC 20005-3389

Steve Morrissey

Managing Director – Regulatory Affairs

 & Policy

UNITED AIR LINES, INC. 

1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW

Washington, DC 20036

(202) 296-2337

steve.morrissey@united.com

June 14, 2011

Daniel A. Weiss

Managing Director – International

 & Regulatory Affairs

Thomas Newton Bolling

Vice President & Associate General Counsel

UNITED AIR LINES, INC. 

1600 Smith Street

15th Floor - HQSLG

Houston, TX 77002

(713) 324-5606

thomas.bolling@united.com
BEFORE THE

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

WASHINGTON, D.C.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

:

In the Matter of :

:

2010 U.S.-HANEDA COMBINATION : Docket DOT-OST-2010-0018

SERVICES ALLOCATION PROCEEDING : 

:

------------------------------------------------------------------------

ANSWER OF

UNITED AIR LINES, INC.

Delta1has not been providing Detroit-Haneda service since March, and it apparently has 

no plans to provide the B-747-400 service it promised in this proceeding. Nonetheless, Delta has 

asked the Department to extend for another 12 months Delta’s ability to waste the slots-- a 

valuable public resource -- it secured for Detroit-Haneda service. Although Delta’s current 

request is based on the extraordinary consequences of the earthquake, tsunami and nuclear power 

plant damage in Japan, long before that tragedy Delta sought and received authority to delay the 

institution of service. When Delta did institute service, it ceased after approximately one month. 

In light of Delta’s continuing failure to provide the Haneda service it proposed, the Department 

should withdraw Delta’s slots for daily Detroit-Haneda service and award them to United so it 

 

1 Common names are used for airlines.
Answer of United

Page 2

can offer daily nonstop B-777 San Francisco-Haneda service just as it proposed originally in this 

proceeding.2 

United states as follows in support of its position:

1. When the Department awarded Delta half of the Haneda slots available for U.S. 

carriers on July 6, 2010, it gave the carriers an unprecedented amount of time (until January 29, 

2011) to institute their new flights. Nonetheless, Delta sought an extension of time to institute its 

new flights alleging demand would be at its nadir in January and February. Delta began DetroitHaneda B-747-400 service on February 19, 2011, but suspended service on March 24, 2011, 

barely a month after it began. Although Delta now plans to re-institute service using 

significantly smaller B-777 aircraft on June 16, it seeks authority to postpone or suspend some or 

all of that service until June 2012. 

2. Delta’s proposals in this proceeding emphasized the importance of the 403-seat 

B-747-400 aircraft it promised to operate, arguing that “the 403 seat capacity of the 747 will . . . 

maximize the value of the scarce Haneda slots that are available to U.S. carriers” because the 

“shortfall of available nonstop options emphasizes the importance of injecting as much nonstop 

capacity in the . . . market as possible when awarding these frequencies.”

3 Delta also said it “will 

use large capacity 747-400 aircraft for maximizing service, competitive and public interest 

 

2 United has today sought renewal of its San Francisco-Guangzhou dormancy 

waiver but, unlike Delta, has volunteered to relinquish its authority if another carrier wants to 

utilize it promptly. See United’s June 14, 2011, motion in Docket DOT-OST-2007-28567.

3

See Delta’s March 1, 2010, Answer in this proceeding at 11, 14 (emphasis in 

original). Delta offered aircraft larger than the B-777 on the Los Angeles-Haneda route for 

approximately one month before it suspended service, and it is now reinstituting Los-AngelesHaneda service with the B-777 aircraft it derided as too small for the Los Angeles-Haneda route.
Answer of United

Page 3

benefits” and provide “63 percent more capacity” than B-777 aircraft . When Delta requested its 

first waiver of the dormancy requirements in this proceeding, which had already allowed 

significantly longer time than usual for the institution of services using the new authority, Delta 

emphasized that its “two new B-747-400 services . . . will be introducing substantial new 

capacity with more than 800 new daily nonstop seats per day each way.”

4

 Delta will now use

268 or 276-seat B-777 aircraft, a 30% reduction in the number of seats it promised to offer in this 

proceeding, on its Detroit-Haneda and Los Angeles-Haneda routes.

3. Although Delta has had 11 months since it was awarded slots and eight months 

since the U.S.-Japan agreement permitting the flights was effective to plan and market its 

Haneda flights, Delta has failed to operate any Detroit-Haneda flights over a period of nearly 

four months since the original start-up date in January. Delta has been delinquent in starting and 

maintaining service as well as using aircraft far smaller than those it promised to operate on both 

its Detroit-Haneda and Los Angeles-Haneda routes.

4. None of the Department’s decisions granting dormancy waivers cited by Delta 

supports such extraordinary relief when another airline seeks to offer the service it proposed 

using the same authority. Although the Department’s Order 2003-4-8 granted all the major 

international U.S. airlines dormancy waivers as a result of the Iraq war, that blanket authority 

expired 11 months later, only short-term renewals were approved in specific markets, and the 

Department denied a similar blanket exemption requested on the basis of high fuel prices and 

adverse economic conditions in Order 2008-7-6. The Department has granted dormancy waiver 

applications, to which no airline objected, for institution of United’s San Francisco-Beijing 

 

4

See Delta’s September 7, 2010 motion in this proceeding at 2.
Answer of United

Page 4

service, but it put United on notice that “should other U.S. carriers currently authorized to serve 

the U.S.-China market file applications for authority, we reserve the right to reconsider our 

decision here to determine whether or not that decision continues to be in the public interest.” 

(See March 25, 2009, approval in Docket DOT-OST-2007-28567) Similarly, when the 

Department waived Delta’s dormancy requirements for Argentina and Brazil frequencies it said 

“Delta has, until recently, been actively conducting operations in the markets involved, and has, 

until now, not sought a dormancy waiver. . . . no other carrier expressed an interest in using the 

frequencies at issue,” and “we are putting Delta on notice, as we have other carriers in similar 

circumstances, that there should be no expectation that that an additional request will similarly 

be granted.” (See February 28, 2003, Notice of Action Taken, Dockets DOT- OST-1999-6210, 

1998-6284 and 2002-11711 at 2 ) No other airline objected to the extension of American’s 

dormancy waiver for its Chicago-Beijing authority or the various dormancy waiver extensions 

sought by Delta for its China service or sought to use those rights awarded to American or Delta. 

In sharp contrast, Delta has already had nearly a year since the award of its Haneda authority to 

institute the Detroit-Haneda service it proposed in this proceeding, is not offering the services it 

proposed, and secured a previous dormancy waiver on the route. When the Department denied 

an American request for extension of a dormancy waiver it said “When we selected American 

over a competing applicant . . . . we did so based on public interest findings deriving from the 

specific features of its proposal” and American “would not be resuming the . . . operations we

contemplated in selecting it . . . and the public interest findings of the Order would no longer be 
Answer of United

Page 5

applicable.”5 More important, United is vigorously seeking to use the slots awarded to Delta for 

San Francisco-Haneda service. 

5. Delta’s own motion makes it clear that Delta’s Detroit-Haneda flights are 

uneconomic even if operated by far smaller aircraft than Delta proposed in this proceeding. 

Delta’s 30% reduction in seats from its promised B-747-400 flights to its B-777 flights exceeds 

the decline in U.S.-Japan traffic cited by Delta, but Delta’s planned operations with B-777 

aircraft will nonetheless be so uneconomic that Delta has sought a 12-month extension of its 

dormancy waiver.6 As Delta itself notes, its Detroit-Haneda service is a dead end at Haneda with 

no traffic connecting in Japan, unlike Delta’s Narita hub, where connecting traffic is plentiful. 

Moreover, Delta’s Detroit-Haneda flights would divert traffic from Delta’s own Detroit-Narita 

service. Delta will be able to maintain a presence at Haneda if it continues operating its Los 

Angeles-Haneda flights since Los Angeles is a far larger local market than Detroit-Haneda and 

can also draw traffic from other major U.S. cities. The fact that Delta’s Detroit-Haneda flights 

are uneconomic should not deprive the traveling public of additional U.S.-flag flights serving

Haneda. Granting Delta’s request would have the effect of precluding United from operating 

U.S.-Haneda flights with its own U.S. aircraft and crews and preclude United from offering the 

nationwide public benefits that would flow from introducing nonstop United flights between its 

San Francisco hub and ANA’s Haneda hub to the benefit of passengers throughout both hub 

networks. 

 

5

 See Order 2002-3-24, Docket DOT-OST- 2000-7844 at 2.

6 Hawaiian has presented data indicating that Delta’s Detroit-Haneda flights were 

woefully uneconomic even before the tragic earthquake in Japan. See Hawaiian’s April 7, 2011, 

application and consolidated answer in this proceeding at 2-4.

Answer of United

Page 7

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I certify that I have this date served the foregoing document on the following persons in 

accordance with the Department’s Rules of Practice:

carl.nelson@aa.com

sascha.vanderbellen@delta.com

jeff.morgan@delta.com

howard_kass@usairways.com

benjamin.slocum@usairways.com

jhill@dowlohnes.com

kandace.bender@flysfo.com

john.martin@flysfo.com

challock@newark/newyorkrbp.org

sbaer@panynj.gov

john.allen@faa.gov

Annalei Avanceña 

International Regulatory Advisor

United Air Lines, Inc.

June 14, 2011