Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 223 / Tuesday, November 20, 2007 / Proposed Rules 65237

with Indian Tribal Governments’’). F. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act • Fax: (202) 493–2251. Because none of the options on which The Department has determined that Instructions: You must include the we are seeking comment would the requirements of Title II of the agency name and docket number DOT– significantly or uniquely affect the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 OST–01–9325 or the Regulatory communities of the Indian tribal do not apply to this notice. Identification Number (RIN) for the governments or impose substantial rulemaking at the beginning of your direct compliance costs on them, the Issued this 15th day of November, 2007, at comment. All comments received will Washington, DC. funding and consultation requirements be posted without change to http:// of Executive Order 13084 do not apply. Michael W. Reynolds, www.regulations.gov, including any Deputy Assistant Secretary for Aviation and personal information provided. D. Regulatory Flexibility Act International Affairs. Privacy Act: Anyone is able to search [FR Doc. 07–5760 Filed 11–15–07; 4:15 pm] The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 the electronic form of all comments BILLING CODE 4910–13–P U.S.C. 601 et seq.) requires an agency to received in any of our dockets by the review regulations to assess their impact name of the individual submitting the comment (or signing the comment, if on small entities unless the agency DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION submitted on behalf of an association, determines that a rule is not expected to business, labor union, etc.). You may have a significant economic impact on Office of the Secretary review DOT’s complete Privacy Act a substantial number of small entities. statement in the Federal Register The regulatory initiatives discussed in 14 CFR Part 250 published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR this ANPRM would have some impact [Docket No. DOT–OST–01–9325] 19477–78), or you may visit http:// on some small entities but we do not DocketsInfo.dot.gov. believe that it would have a significant RIN No. 2105–AD63 Docket: For access to the docket to impact on a substantial number of small read background documents or entities. We invite comment to facilitate Oversales and Denied Boarding Compensation comments received, go to http:// our assessment of the potential impact www.regulations.gov or to the street of these initiatives on small entities. AGENCY: Office of the Secretary (OST), address listed above. Follow the online E. Paperwork Reduction Act Department of Transportation (DOT). instructions for accessing the docket. ACTION: Notice of Proposed Rulemaking FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tim The ANPRM proposes several new (NPRM). Kelly, Aviation Consumer Protection collections of information that would Division, Office of the General Counsel, SUMMARY: The Department of require approval by the Office of Department of Transportation, 1200 Transportation (DOT or Department) is Management and Budget (OMB) under New Jersey Ave., SE., Washington, DC proposing to amend its rules relating to the Paperwork Reduction Act (49 U.S.C. 20590, 202–366–5952 (voice), 202–366– oversales and denied boarding 3501 et seq.) The ANPRM solicits 5944 (fax), [email protected] (e-mail). comment on requiring certificated and compensation to increase the limits on SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: commuter airlines that operate domestic the compensation paid to ‘‘bumped’’ scheduled passenger service using any passengers, to cover flights by certain Background aircraft with more than 30 passenger U.S. and foreign air carriers operated with aircraft seating 30 to 60 passengers, Part 250 establishes minimum seats to retain for two years the standards for the treatment of airline following information about any ground which are currently exempt from the rule, and to make other changes. Such passengers holding confirmed delay that triggers their contingency reservations on certain U.S. and foreign plan or lasts at least four hours: (1) The changes in the rule, if adopted, would be intended to maintain consumer carriers who are involuntarily denied length of the delay, (2) the cause of the boarding (‘‘bumped’’) from their flights delay, and (3) actions taken to minimize protection commensurate with developments in the aviation industry. because they have been oversold. In hardships for passengers. The most cases, bumped passengers are Department plans to use this DATES: Comments are requested by entitled to compensation. Part 250 information to conduct reviews of January 22, 2008. Late-filed comments contains limits on the amount of incidents involving long delays on the will be considered to the extent compensation that is required to be ground and to identify any trends and practicable. provided to passengers who are bumped patterns that may develop. The ANPRM ADDRESSES: You may file comments involuntarily. The rule does not apply further proposes to require the identified by the docket number DOT– to flights operated with aircraft with a collection of flight delay data from OST–01–9325 by any of the following design capacity of 60 or fewer passenger certain U.S. and foreign air carriers methods: seats. regarding their flights to and from the • Federal eRulemaking Portal: go to In adopting the original rule in the U.S. and also to require certain U.S. http://www.regulations.gov and follow 1960’s, the Civil Aeronautics Board (the carriers to compile and publish the online instructions for submitting Department’s predecessor in aviation complaint information. We invite comments. economic regulation) recognized the comments regarding any aspect of these • Mail: Docket Management Facility, inherent unfairness in carriers selling information collections, including the U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 more ‘‘confirmed’’ ticketed reservations following: (1) The necessity and utility New Jersey Ave., SE., West Building for a flight than they have seats. of the information collection, (2) the Ground Floor, Room W12–140, Therefore, the CAB sought to reduce the estimated burden, (3) ways to enhance Washington, DC 20590–0001. number of passengers involuntarily the quality, utility, and clarity of the • Hand Delivery or Courier: West denied boarding to the smallest information collected, and (4) ways to Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140, practicable number without prohibiting minimize the collection burden without 1200 New Jersey Ave., SE., between 9 deliberate overbooking or interfering reducing the quality of the information a.m. and 5 p.m. ET, Monday through unnecessarily with the carriers’ collected. Friday, except Federal Holidays. reservations practices. Air travelers

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:18 Nov 19, 2007 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20NOP1.SGM 20NOP1 rmajette on PROD1PC64 with PROPOSALS 65238 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 223 / Tuesday, November 20, 2007 / Proposed Rules

receive some benefit from controlled rule has served a useful purpose; (2) If there are not enough volunteers, overbooking because it allows flexibility however, in light of recommendations the airline must use non-discriminatory in making and canceling reservations as from various sources, including procedures (‘‘boarding priorities’’) in well as buying and refunding tickets. Congress and major airlines themselves, deciding who is to be bumped Overbooking makes possible a system of we are proposing to revise certain involuntarily. confirmed reservations that can almost aspects of the rule that may be outdated. (3) Most passengers who are always be honored. It allows airlines to In view of the passage of time since the involuntarily bumped are eligible for fill more seats, reducing the pressure for rule was last revised and changes in denied boarding compensation, with the higher fares, and makes it easier for commercial air travel over that time, we amount depending on the price of each people to obtain reservations on the are seeking comment on whether we passenger’s ticket and the length of his flights of their choice. On the other should increase the compensation or her delay. If the airline can arrange hand, overbooking is the major cause of maximums and extend the rule to cover alternate transportation that is oversales, and the people who are a broader range of aircraft, or whether scheduled to arrive at the passenger’s inconvenienced are not those who do we should adopt other more destination within 2 hours of the not show up for their flights, but fundamental changes to the rule. The planned arrival time of the oversold passengers who have conformed to all Department is also seeking comment on flight (4 hours on international flights), carrier rules. The current rule allocates certain other changes of lesser impact the compensation equals 100% of the the risk of denied boarding among that are under consideration. passenger’s one-way fare to his or her travelers by requiring airlines to solicit The Current Denied Boarding next stopover or final destination, with volunteers and use a boarding priority Compensation Rule a $200 maximum. If the airline cannot procedure that is not unjustly meet the 2 (or 4) hour deadline, the discriminatory. The purpose of the Department’s compensation rate doubles to 200% of In 1981, the CAB amended the denied boarding compensation rule is to the passenger’s one-way fare, with a oversales rule to exclude from the rule balance the rights of passengers holding $400 maximum. This compensation is reservations with the desirability of all operations using aircraft with 60 or in addition to the value of the allowing air carriers to minimize the fewer passenger seats. (ER–1237, 46 FR passenger’s ticket, which the passenger adverse economic effects of ‘‘no-shows’’ 42442, August 21, 1981.) At the time of can use for alternate transportation or (passengers with reservations who that proceeding, the impact of the rule have refunded if not used. cancel or change their flights at the last on carriers operating small aircraft was (4) There are several exceptions to the found to be significant. If a passenger minute). The rule sets up a two-part compensation requirement. was denied boarding on a typical small system. The first encourages passengers Compensation is not required if the aircraft short-haul flight and to voluntarily relinquish their passenger does not comply fully with subsequently missed a connection to a confirmed reservations in exchange for the carrier’s contract of carriage or tariff long-haul flight, the short-haul carrier compensation agreed to between the provisions regarding ticketing, usually had to compensate the passenger and the airline. The second reconfirmation, check-in, and passenger in an amount equal to twice requires that, where there is an acceptability for transportation; if an the value of the passenger’s remaining insufficient number of volunteers, aircraft of lesser capacity has been ticket coupons to his or her destination, passengers who are bumped substituted for operational or safety subject to a maximum limitation. For involuntarily be given compensation in example, if the short-haul fare was $50 an amount specified in the rule. In reasons; if the passenger is offered and the connecting long-haul fare was addition, the Department requires accommodations in a section of the $500, the first carrier often had to pay carriers to give passengers notice of aircraft other than that specified on the the passenger denied boarding those procedures through signs and ticket, at no extra charge (a passenger compensation in an amount far greater written notices provided with tickets seated in a section for which a lower than $50, depending on whether and at airports, and to report the fare is charged is entitled to an alternate transportation could be number of passengers denied boarding appropriate refund); or if the carrier arranged to arrive within a short time, to the Department on a quarterly basis. arranges comparable transportation, at despite the minimal fare that the first The Civil Aeronautics Board (CAB) no extra cost to the passenger, that is carrier received for its flight. The first required payments to bumped planned to arrive at the passenger’s next problem was exacerbated by the fact passengers 45 years ago. In Order No. E– stopover or final destination not later that most commuter airline flights at the 17914, dated January 8, 1962, the CAB than 1 hour after the planned arrival time were on small turboprop and conditioned its approval of ‘‘no-show time of the passenger’s original flight. piston engine aircraft which were penalties’’ for confirmed passengers on (5) A passenger who is denied affected by weight limitations in high a requirement that bumped passengers boarding involuntarily may refuse to temperature/humidity conditions to a be compensated. An oversales rule was accept the denied boarding greater extent than jets and, therefore, adopted in 1967 as 14 CFR Part 250 compensation specified in the rule and might require bumping even when the (ER–503, 32 FR 11939, August 18, 1967) seek monetary or other compensation carrier did not book beyond the seating and revised substantially in 1978 and through negotiations with the carrier or capacity of the aircraft. 1982 after comprehensive rulemaking by private legal action. Part 250 has tended to reduce proceedings (ER–1050, 43 FR 24277, (6) Carriers must post counter signs passenger inconvenience and financial June 5, 1978 and ER–1306, 47 FR 52980, and include notices with tickets to alert loss occasioned by overbooking without November 24, 1982, respectively). The travelers of their overbooking practices imposing heavy burdens on the airlines key features of the current requirements and the consumer protections of the or significant costs on the traveling are as follows: rule. In addition, they must provide a public. In focusing only on the (1) In the event of an oversold flight, detailed written notice explaining their treatment of passengers whose boarding the airline must first seek volunteers oversales practices and boarding is involuntarily denied, we have who are willing to relinquish their seats priority rules to each passenger avoided regulating carriers’ reservations in return for compensation offered by involuntarily denied boarding, and to practices. Overall, it appears that the the airline. any other person requesting a copy.

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:18 Nov 19, 2007 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20NOP1.SGM 20NOP1 rmajette on PROD1PC64 with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 223 / Tuesday, November 20, 2007 / Proposed Rules 65239

(7) Every carrier must report, on a compensation set forth in the rule. In denied boardings per 10,000 quarterly basis, data on the number of this regard, in a sense-of-the-Senate enplanements in fact declined for many denied boardings on flights that are amendment to the Department of years. Until 2007, the rate for the past subject to Part 250. Transportation and Related Agencies decade has been slightly below the level Appropriations Act of 2000, Public Law of involuntary bumping reported 10 Discussion 106–69, the Senate noted its sense that years ago. In this regard, 55,828 On July 10, 2007, the Department the Department should amend its passengers were involuntarily bumped published an Advance Notice of denied boarding rule to double the from their flights in 2006 on the 19 Proposed Rulemaking (ANPRM) seeking applicable compensation amounts. largest U.S. airlines (carriers whose comment on several issues associated Legislation has also been introduced in denied boarding rate is tracked in the with the oversales rule. We received Congress to require the Department to Department’s monthly Air Travel over 1,280 comments in response to the review the rule’s maximum amounts of Consumer Report 2). Additional ANPRM. About 20 of the comments compensation. (See S. 319, reported in passengers were bumped by other were from organizations, with the rest the Senate April 26, 2001.) In addition, airlines, whose denied boarding rate is from individuals. Most of the comments in his February 12, 2000, Final Report not tracked in this report but whose from the organizations, including those on Airline Customer Service bumped passengers are subject to the from air carriers and organizations Commitments, the Department’s maximum compensation rates in the representing air carriers, expressed the Inspector General (IG) recommended, DOT rule. The annual rate of opinion that the rule serves a useful among other things, that the airlines involuntary denied boardings per purpose and had benefited the industry petition the Department to increase the 10,000 enplanements in 2006 for the and the public. Many of the individual amount of denied boarding carriers tracked in the report is the comments did not express an opinion compensation payable to involuntarily highest since 2000, and that trend on the specific issues discussed in the bumped passengers. In response thereto, continues in the rate for 2007 to date. ANPRM but rather urged that and citing the length of time since the Involuntary denied boarding rates from overbooking be banned, described their maximum amounts of denied boarding the Air Travel Consumer Report for the own negative air travel experiences, or compensation were last revised, the Air past ten years and 2007 to date appear commented on other issues (e.g., flight Transport Association (the trade below: delays). association of the larger U.S. airlines) In this Notice of Proposed filed a petition with the Department on Invol. DB’s Rulemaking we are not proposing to ban April 3, 2001, requesting that a Year per 10,000 overbooking as many individual rulemaking be instituted to examine passengers commenters urged. As indicated in the those amounts.1 (Docket DOT–OST–01– section above entitled ‘‘The Current 1997 ...... 1.06 9325). Most recently, the IG on 1998 ...... 0.87 Denied Boarding Compensation Rule,’’ November 20, 2006, issued his ‘‘Report 1999 ...... 0.88 air travelers receive some benefit from on the Follow-up Review Performed of 2000 ...... 1.04 controlled overbooking. Overbooking U.S. Airlines in Implementing Selected 2001 ...... 0.82 makes possible a system of confirmed Provisions of the Airline Customer 2002 ...... 0.72 reservations that can almost always be Service Commitment’’ in which the IG 2003 ...... 0.86 honored. It allows airlines to fill more recommended that we determine 2004 ...... 0.86 seats, reducing the pressure for higher 2005 ...... 0.89 whether the maximum denied boarding 2006 ...... 1.01 fares, and makes it easier for people to compensation (DBC) amount needs to be 2007 through 3rd quarter ...... 1.21 obtain reservations on the flights of their increased and whether the oversales choice. We are not aware of levels of rule needs to be extended to cover (The table above has been updated from consumer harm that require such a the one published in the ANPRM to include aircraft with 31 through 60 seats. data for 2007 to date.) sweeping solution at this time, and The CAB’s decision in 1978 to double banning overbooking is beyond the the maximum amount of denied Likely contributing to this upward scope of our objectives in this boarding compensation to $400 was trend is the fact that flights are fuller: proceeding. We believe that the based on its determination that the from 1978 to 2006 the system-wide load additional oversale protections that we previous maximum was inadequate to factor (percentage of seats filled) for U.S. are proposing here will address the redress the inconvenience to bumped airlines increased from 61.5% to 79.2%, principal issues related to this passengers and that the increase would with most of this increase taking place regulation that require action by the provide a greater incentive to carriers to since 1994. The most-recently reported Department. reduce the number of persons monthly load factors have hovered in The issues that were presented in the involuntarily bumped from their flights. the mid-80% range. ANPRM and a summary of the Following promulgation of the With respect to the denied boarding comments appear below. amendment to the rule in 1978 requiring compensation limits, inflation has the solicitation of volunteers and eroded the $200 and $400 limits that The Maximum Amount of Denied doubling the compensation maximum, were established in 1978. Using the Boarding Compensation the overall industry rate of involuntary Consumer Price Index for All Urban It has been over 20 years since the Consumers (CPI–U, the basis for the rule was last revised, and the existing 1 It is important to note that the maximum inflation adjustor in the Department’s $200 and $400 limits on the amount of involuntary denied boarding amounts set forth in domestic baggage liability rule, 14 CFR required denied boarding compensation Part 250 are amounts below which carriers cannot 254.6), the July 2007 ANPRM noted that set their maximum compensation. Airlines have for passengers involuntarily denied been and continue to be free, as a competitive tool, boarding have not been raised since to set their maximum compensation levels at 2 This report tracks the denied boarding rate of air 1978. The Department has received amounts greater than that provided in the carriers that each account for at least 1% of recommendations from various sources Department’s rule. With the exception of JetBlue domestic scheduled-service passenger revenues for Airways, whose recently changed policy is the previous year. Consequently, the list of carriers that it reexamine its oversales rule and, described below, we are not aware of any carrier whose performance is tracked in this report can in particular, the maximum amounts of that has elected to do so. change from year to year.

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:18 Nov 19, 2007 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20NOP1.SGM 20NOP1 rmajette on PROD1PC64 with PROPOSALS 65240 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 223 / Tuesday, November 20, 2007 / Proposed Rules

$400 in 1978 was worth $128 as of (3) Double the maximum amounts of volunteers and consequently no February 2007 ($125 as of October denied boarding compensation from involuntary denied boardings. The 2007). See the Bureau of Labor Statistics $200 to $400 and from $400 to $800; organization stated that the real cost of Inflation Calculator at http:// (4) Eliminate the limits on air fares (i.e., adjusted for inflation) has www.bls.gov/cpi/home.htm. Stated compensation altogether, while fallen since the denied boarding another way, in order to have the same retaining the 100% and 200% compensation limits were last adjusted. purchasing power today as in 1978, calculations; According to ATA, the current caps are $400 would have needed to be $1,248 in (5) Take no action, i.e. leave the likely to exceed the required February 2007 and $1,279 as of October current $200/$400 limits in place. compensation levels (i.e., 100% or 2007. It is important to note that none of 200% of the bumped passenger’s fare) in At the same time, however, air fares these proposals would necessarily the large majority of cases. ATA believes have not risen to the same extent as the require carriers to offer more that no adjustment in the compensation CPI–U. While historical comparisons of compensation to the great majority of caps is warranted at this time, but if air fares are problematic, one frequently- passengers affected by overbooking there is an adjustment, it should be used index for changes in air fares is because most such situations are based on the change in yield (air fares) passenger yield. Yield is passenger handled through voluntary because, the association asserted, revenue divided by revenue passenger compensation, typically at the departure denied boarding compensation amounts miles—the revenue collected by airlines gate. Nor would they affect the have always been tied to the passenger’s for carrying one passenger for one mile. significant proportion of involuntarily fare. According to the Air Transport bumped passengers—possibly the The International Air Transport Association, system-wide nominal yield majority—with fares low enough that Association, which represents (i.e., not adjusted for inflation) for all the formula for involuntary denied international airlines worldwide, reporting U.S. air carriers was 8.29 cents boarding compensation would not reach supported ATA’s position that there per revenue passenger mile in 1978 and the proposed new limits. Finally, even should be no change in the limits. The 12.00 cents per revenue passenger mile with respect to involuntarily bumped Regional Airline Association shared this in 2005 (latest available data at the time passengers whose denied boarding view as well. Like ATA, RAA went on of the ANPRM)—an increase of 44.8%. compensation might increase with to say that if the Department does adjust The figure for 2006, which became higher maximums, many such the limits it should do so based on the available after the ANPRM was passengers accept a voucher for future air fare/yield index rather than the CPI published, is 12.69 cents, an increase of travel on that airline (usually in a face because denied boarding compensation 53.1% from the 1978 figure. amount greater than the legally required has always been tied to airline ticket Applying the CPI-U calculation to the denied boarding compensation) in lieu prices. The Association of Asia Pacific current $200 and $400 DBC limits that of a check. Carriers make such offers Airlines supported an increase in the were established in 1978 would produce because vouchers do not have the same caps based on the fare/yield index, for updated limits of $624 and $1,248 value as cash compensation given high the same reasons cited by ATA and respectively at the time of the ANPRM. rates of non-use and inventory- RAA. However, the ANPRM noted that management restrictions. The National Air Carrier Association applying the 44.8% increase in commented that no change in the Comments passenger yield through 2005 to the compensation limits is necessary. If the current $200 and $400 limits would The vast majority of the comments in Department were to make a change, this produce updated limits of $290 and the docket are from individuals (as organization said that it would $580 respectively ($306 and $612 if the opposed to organizations). On the issue reluctantly support an increase based on 2006 yield figure is used). It is of the denied boarding compensation fares/yields (option #2) or eliminating important to note that the $200 and monetary limits, 79 of these individual the caps altogether (option #4). NACA $400 figures in Part 250 are merely commenters favored option #1— noted that adopting option #4 would limits on the amount of denied boarding increase these limits to approximately remove the need for periodic compensation; the actual compensation $624 and $1,248 based on the increase adjustments in the caps, which was rate is 100% or 200% of the passenger’s in the CPI. 20 of the individual another issue on which the ANPRM had fare (depending on how long he or she commenters were in favor of option #3, sought comment. was delayed by the bumping). In the doubling the current limits to $400 and The American Society of Travel ANPRM, the Department requested $800. Another 146 individual Agents states that adjusting the comment on whether the maximums in commenters expressed the opinion that compensation limits based on the CPI is the rule should be increased so that that the current limits should be increased workable but acknowledges a a higher percentage of denied boarding but did not cite a specific amount. Two disconnect between air fares and the compensation payments are not individual commenters favored an CPI. Consequently, ASTA favors ‘‘capped’’ by the limits. increase in the limits based on the doubling the current limits, to strike a Consequently, in the ANPRM we increase in passenger yield (air fares), balance between the CPI and yield sought comment on five options with and three said that the limits should be options and because of the simplicity of respect to the limits on the amount of eliminated (option #4). None of the this approach. denied boarding compensation, as well individual comments indicated that the The Airports Council International— as any other suggested changes: Department should take no action North America also favors doubling the (1) Increase the $200/$400 limits to (option #5). caps, to $400 and $800. ACI–NA was approximately $624 and $1,248 In its comments, the Air Transport concerned that the CPI option would set respectively, based on the increase in Association (which represents the larger a limit that is inappropriately high the CPI as described above; U.S. airlines) presented arguments it while a limit based on air fares would (2) Increase the $200/$400 limits to said justify the practice of overbooking capture only passengers with an approximately $290 and $580 and keeping compensation level as they ‘‘average’’ fare. respectively, based on the increase in now are. ATA noted that on most Qantas Airways and Qatar Airways passenger yield as described above; oversold flights there are enough supports an increase on the caps that is

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:18 Nov 19, 2007 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20NOP1.SGM 20NOP1 rmajette on PROD1PC64 with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 223 / Tuesday, November 20, 2007 / Proposed Rules 65241

based on fares/yields. Air Pacific, Response to Comments (14 CFR part 254). As in the case of the JetBlue Airways, and Air Tahiti Nui The Department has decided to baggage rule, we stated that the oppose any increase, with the latter propose to amend its oversales rule to Department could review the CPI–U carrier emphasizing the industry’s costs double the limits on involuntary denied every two years, and adjust the and slim profits. JetBlue, which notes boarding compensation from $200 to maximum amounts accordingly. The that it does not intentionally oversell $400 for passengers who are rerouted new maximum DBC amounts could be flights, points out that when it must within two hours (four hours rounded to the nearest $50, for unexpectedly deny boarding internationally) and from $400 to $800 simplicity. We suggested that any increase could be announced by involuntarily, it pays the passenger for passengers who are not rerouted publishing a notice in the Federal $1,000—considerably more than the within these timeframes. As many Register rather than first publishing a current regulatory formulas and limits commenters pointed out, there is a proposed rule to effectuate an increase. and more than most of the proposed significant air-fare component to the We requested comment on this limits. JetBlue urges the Department to denied boarding compensation formula approach. allow carrier competition to govern (100%/200% of the bumped passenger’s denied boarding compensation limits in fare), and air fares have risen less than Comments this manner. the CPI. As indicated above, system- All 34 of the individuals who The International Airline Passengers wide nominal yield (not adjusted for commented on this issue believed that Association advocates option #3, inflation) for all reporting U.S. air the compensation limits should be doubling the current limits. Like other carriers, which is a frequently used adjusted on a regular basis. commenters, it submits that air fares are index for changes in air fares, was 8.29 Many of the comments from not generally tied to inflation. cents per revenue passenger mile in organizations noted that denied The Air Crash Victims Families Group 1978 and 12.69 cents per revenue boarding compensation is based on the advocated increasing the compensation passenger mile in 2006, an increase of bumped passenger’s air fare and that air limits ‘‘to the standard/value existing at 53.1%. Nonetheless, we will not fares have risen more slowly than the the time the Regulation is put into propose the ‘‘fares/yield’’ option from CPI–U. RAA in particular stated that CPI force’’ without specifying a the ANPRM as the sole method for can and often does move in the reverse methodology for the update. This group updating the compensation caps. direction of airline ‘‘yields’’ (average also urged the Department to ban Denied boarding compensation is fares). ATA opposed any periodic overbooking with respect to prepaid intended in part to compensate for the adjustment in the compensation caps. tickets, harmonize its rule with the passenger’s inconvenience, lost time, ASTA supports periodic adjustment oversales rule of the European and lost opportunities. The value of based on the CPI as described in the Community, mandate uniform boarding these considerations is linked to general ANPRM. The Association of Asia Pacific priorities for all carriers, and eliminate inflation as well as to the cost of air Airlines opposes adding an adjustment the exception to compensation for fares. Therefore, the arguments of the mechanism to the rule and recommends passengers bumped as a result of carrier organizations about the decline amending the caps only when substitution of aircraft of lesser capacity. in real (i.e., inflation-adjusted) air fares necessary. The Air Crash Victims during that period are somewhat off the Families Group and the Coalition for an The Coalition for an Airline mark, because consumers live with Airline Passengers Bill of Rights support Passengers Bill of Rights suggests that some of the consequences of denied regular CPI-based adjustment of the the Department mandate denied boarding in today’s dollars, not 1978 caps. The International Airline boarding compensation in a flat amount dollars. As we indicated in the ANPRM, Passengers Association states that the of $1,000 regardless of the passenger’s 30 years of inflation have also taken caps ‘‘should be tied to a periodic fare or the length of his/her delay— their toll on the value of the existing review process to enable adjustments if essentially the JetBlue policy. limits. As noted above, $400 in 1978 is necessary.’’ As indicated earlier, in 2006 over worth $128 today, based on the change Response to Comments 55,000 passengers were denied boarding in the CPI–U. Therefore, we propose to involuntarily by the 19 carriers that base part of an increase in the If the rule is adopted as proposed, we were tracked at that time in the compensation caps on the CPI–U. plan to institute a procedure of Department’s Air Travel Consumer By proposing to double the existing reviewing the compensation caps every Report (i.e., the 17 largest U.S. air limits we would blend these two two years. As part of this review, the carriers and two voluntarily reporting approaches. The proposed limits fall Department would determine if the carriers). We assume that an increase in between the higher figures that would compensation caps should be adjusted the regulatory maximums would result be produced by the CPI option and the based on both the CPI and the change in an increase in amounts paid to such lower numbers that would result from in fare yields as we did in proposing the passengers but we requested comment the ‘‘fares/yield’’ option. We seek doubling of the caps to $400 and $800 on the likely financial impact, including comment on this proposal, including in this NPRM (see above). We are, both the direct impact (increased cash any comments and justifications that however, not proposing the approach compensation), and the indirect impact were not already provided in response described in the ANPRM of the periodic resulting from either lower overbooking to the ANPRM about alternative adjustment in the compensation caps rates or higher voluntary compensation amounts or methodologies. being automatic (no additional comment levels. Although we received useful period provided). Instead, we plan to general comments, commenters Periodic Adjustment of the Limits institute a de novo rulemaking each provided very little data supporting the In the ANPRM we also requested time we seek to adjust the DBC conclusion that any of the increases in comment on whether we should amend maximum amount to allow the public denied boarding compensation on the rule to include a provision for an opportunity to provide input to the which we requested comment would periodic adjustments to the denied Department as to whether there are any have a significant financial impact on boarding compensation maximums, as reasons (not anticipated at the time of any segment of the industry. is required by our baggage liability rule this rulemaking) not to increase the DBC

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:18 Nov 19, 2007 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20NOP1.SGM 20NOP1 rmajette on PROD1PC64 with PROPOSALS 65242 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 223 / Tuesday, November 20, 2007 / Proposed Rules

maximum amounts based on DOT’s jets now make up 59% of the regional- compensation in operations with analysis. We seek comment on the carrier fleet. Although many regional aircraft having 30 through 60 seats by advantages or disadvantages of the jets have more than 60 passenger seats both certificated and non-certificated Department continually adjusting the and thus are subject to Part 250, the carriers, to the extent it is available. denied boarding compensation ubiquitous 50-seat and smaller regional Comments maximum amounts through notice and jet models have driven much of the comment rulemaking. Also, commenters growth of the regional-carrier sector. All 155 individuals who commented who think that the proposed two-year Moreover, most regional jets are on this issue advocated extending the period for considering adjustments to operated by regional carriers affiliated rule to aircraft with 30 through 60 seats. the compensation caps is not with a major carrier via a code-share A couple of these commenters said it appropriate, or believe the frequency agreement and/or an equity stake in the should only be extended to aircraft that should be more or less than two years, regional carrier. RAA asserts that 99% operate flights in the name of a major should explain why and suggest of regional airline passengers traveled carrier. More than half of the 155 alternate approaches. on code-sharing regional airlines in individual commenters on this issue 2005. said that the rule should also apply to The Small-Aircraft Exclusion DOT statistics demonstrate the growth aircraft with fewer than 30 seats. The oversales rule originally issued in traffic on flights operated by aircraft Among the organizations that by the CAB did not contain an exclusion with 31 through 60 seats. The ANPRM commented, ATA urges the Department for small aircraft. In 1981 that agency provided statistics through the fourth not to change the current exception for amended Part 250 to exclude operations quarter of 2005, but information for aircraft with 60 or fewer seats. It asserts with aircraft seating 60 or fewer 2006 has subsequently become that these aircraft not only are more passengers. The CAB determined that available. From the fourth quarter of susceptible than larger airplanes to without this exclusion the denied 2002 (earliest available consistent data) unpredictable operational constraints, boarding rule imposed a proportionately to 4Q 2006 the number of flights using but that these aircraft often operate at greater financial and operational burden aircraft with 31 through 60 seats smaller airports where shorter runways on these small-aircraft operators than on increased by 13.5% while the number of can limit capacity on hot days. RAA carriers operating larger aircraft. In flights using aircraft with more than 60 echoed the latter comment and also addition, because of the lower revenues seats rose only 3.4%. The number of quoted from the preamble to the Civil generated by these small aircraft, the passengers carried on flights using Aeronautics Board’s 1981 oversales financial burden of denied boarding aircraft with 31 through 60 seats exemption for aircraft with 60 or fewer compensation placed certificated increased by 34.9% from 4Q 2002 seats that acknowledged that these carriers operating aircraft with 60 or through 4Q 2006, while the number of aircraft were ‘‘assuming an increasingly fewer seats at a competitive passengers carried on flights using significant role in the national air disadvantage relative to commuter aircraft with more than 60 seats rose by transportation system’’ but concluded carriers (non-certificated) operating only 12.1% during that period.4 that the denied boarding compensation similar equipment and on similar routes The increased use of jet aircraft in the levels in the regulation would be a which were not subject to Part 250. The 30-to-60 seat sector accompanied by the disproportionate penalty relative to the number of flights that was excluded by increase in the ‘‘branding’’ of those typical short-haul fare. RAA also noted the amendment was small and most operations with the codes and livery of the costs of complying with the same such flights were operated by small major carriers has blurred the FAA rules as operators of larger aircraft carriers that operated small aircraft distinction between small-aircraft and and the disproportionate cost impact of exclusively. Thus, Part 250 currently large-aircraft service in the minds of suggested per-aircraft user fees. applies to certificated U.S. carriers and many passengers. There would seem to The Air Carrier Association of foreign carriers holding a permit, or be little, if any, difference to a consumer America (which represents certain low- exemption authority, issued by the bumped from a small aircraft or a large fare airlines), the American Society of Department, only with respect to aircraft—the effect is the same. The Travel Agents, the Association of Asia operations performed with aircraft Department therefore sought comment Pacific Airlines and JetBlue Airways are seating more than 60 passengers. on whether we should extend the in favor of extending the oversales rule While largely exempt from the denied consumer protections of Part 250 to to operations using aircraft with 30 boarding rule, the regional airline these flights (including flights of non- through 60 seats for the reasons industry has experienced tremendous certificated commuter air carriers) and described in the ANPRM. JetBlue notes growth. According to the Regional thus scale back the small-aircraft that even large aircraft are susceptible to Airline Association 3, passenger exception that was added to the rule in load limits based on heat and altitude, enplanements on regional carriers have 1981. Specifically, the Department and it asserts that 57% of the flights increased more than 100% since 1995, requested comment on whether it operated in August 2007 for American, and regional airlines now carry one out should reduce the seating-capacity Continental, Delta, Northwest, United of every five domestic air travelers in exception for small aircraft from ‘‘60 and U.S. Airways were on regional jets. the United States. RAA states that seats or less’’ to ‘‘less than 30 seats’’ and [Some of those regional jets no doubt revenue passenger miles on regional add commuter carriers to the list of have more than 60 seats and thus are carriers have increased 40-fold since carriers to which Part 250 applies. Since already subject to the oversales rule, but 1978 and increased 17 percent from the Department is aware that many many are not.] ACAA provided data 2004 to 2005 alone. Regional jets have regional carriers already voluntarily showing that regional jets account for fueled much of the recent growth. provide DBC to passengers bumped half or nearly half of all departures at According to RAA, from 1989 to 2004 from their 30-to-60-seat aircraft, most hub airports. It notes that regional the number of turbofan aircraft (regional commenters were specifically asked to jets with more than 60 seats are subject jets) in the regional-airline fleet include in their comments data to the rule while those with 60 or fewer increased from 54 to 1,628 and regional regarding oversales and denied boarding seats are not. Peninsula Airways urges the 3 See www.raa.org. 4 DOT Form 41, schedule T–100. Department not to extend the rule to

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:18 Nov 19, 2007 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20NOP1.SGM 20NOP1 rmajette on PROD1PC64 with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 223 / Tuesday, November 20, 2007 / Proposed Rules 65243

commuter operations solely within the Boarding Priorities and Notice to • Special priorities for passengers state of Alaska, or in the alternative to Volunteers with disabilities, within the meaning of expand the rule only to regional jets, Boarding priority rules determine the 14 CFR part 382, or for unaccompanied e.g., by extending the regulation to order in which various categories of minors. aircraft with 35 or more seats rather passengers will be involuntarily We stated in the ANPRM that the five than 30 or more, thereby continuing to bumped when a flight is oversold. Part examples proposed here are illustrative exempt the vast majority of propeller 250 states that boarding priority rules only, and not exclusive. We did not aircraft. Hawaii Island Air must not provide any undue or intend by these examples to foreclose the use by carriers of other boarding recommended that the rule only be unreasonable preference. The IG in his priorities that do not give a passenger extended to 30-through-60 seat aircraft 2000 report identified possible undue preference or unjustly prejudice operated by a carrier that also operates ambiguities in the Department’s requirements regarding boarding any passenger. large aircraft. Accurately notifying passengers of priority rules, and he recommended that their rights in an oversale situation is Response to Comments we provide examples of what we important, so that they can make an consider to be an undue or unreasonable informed decision. Part 250 already For the reasons described in the preference. The IG was also concerned contains requirements designed to ANPRM, we are proposing to extend the that the amounts of compensation accomplish that objective and to protect applicability of the oversales rule to provided passengers who are passengers from being involuntarily flights using aircraft with 30 or more involuntarily bumped was in some bumped if they have not been accorded seats. Since the time that the CAB cases less than the face value of adequate notice. Section 250.2b(b) exempted this sector of the industry vouchers given to passengers who prohibits a carrier from denying from the rule in 1981, the vast majority volunteer to give up their seats. He boarding involuntarily to any passenger of operations at this level have become therefore recommended, in addition to who was earlier asked to volunteer affiliated and integrated with the raising the maximum compensation without having been informed about the ‘‘brand’’ of a major carrier. A higher amounts for involuntarily bumped danger of being denied boarding percentage of these flights than was the passengers, as discussed above, that we involuntarily and the amount of require carriers to disclose orally to case in 1981 are operated with larger compensation that would apply if that passengers, at the time the airline makes aircraft in this under-60 seat exempted occurred. While this provision would an offer to volunteers, what the airline range (to a large extent regional jets), appear to provide adequate incentive for is obligated to pay passengers who are and are affected by weather constraints airlines to provide complete notice to involuntarily bumped. less frequently than aircraft with less passengers who are asked to volunteer, than 30 seats. In recent times, aircraft Our boarding priority requirement was designed to give carriers the and to protect those passengers not with 30 through 60 seats have been maximum flexibility to set their own provided such notice, we see some substituted for larger airplanes on procedures at the gate, while affording merit in making this notice requirement numerous routes. The vast majority of consumers protection against unfair and more direct. Accordingly, we seek the traffic that would be covered by this unreasonable practices. Thus, the rule comment on whether we should amend initiative is carried by airlines that are (1) requires that airlines establish their section 250.2b to affirmatively require owned by or affiliated with a major own boarding priority rules and criteria that, no later than the time a carrier asks carrier or its parent company. Moreover, for oversale situations consistent with a passenger to volunteer, it inform that a significant amount, if not most, of the Part 250’s requirement to minimize person whether he or she is in danger service on such flights is provided involuntary bumpings and (2) states that of being involuntarily bumped and, if under a ‘‘fee-for-service’’ arrangement, those boarding priority rules and criteria so, the compensation the carrier is where a major carrier dictates the ‘‘shall not make, give, or cause any obligated to pay. market, the schedule, and the price of undue or unreasonable preference or Comments advantage to any particular person or the flight, and the tickets may not even There were only a handful of subject any particular person to any be sold under the regional carrier’s code individual comments on the issue of unjust or unreasonable prejudice or so that the passenger’s contract of boarding priorities; most of them disadvantage in any respect carriage covering the transportation is favored the Department’s proposal. whatsoever.’’ (14 CFR 250.3(a)) solely with the major carrier. In such There was virtually no comment from circumstances, the flights are for all Although we are not aware of any problems resulting from this rule as individuals about the volunteer notice. legal and practicable purposes flights of Most of the commenters from the written, we agree that guidance the major carrier, not the regional airline industry and IAPA stated that it regarding this provision would be useful is not necessary to list specific airline, in which case the major carrier to the industry and public alike. is responsible for providing denied Accordingly, in the ANPRM we permissible boarding priorities. Some of boarding compensation on the flights of requested comment on whether the the industry commenters said that they the smaller carrier. While we are Department should list in the rule, as do not oppose this as long as it’s clear sensitive to the operational challenges examples of permissible boarding that the list is illustrative and does not faced by operators of aircraft with 30 priority criteria, the following: restrict carriers from having other through 60 seats, we now believe that • A passenger’s time of check in boarding priorities. (Boarding priorities consumers who purchase transportation (first-come, first-served); must be disclosed in the written notice in this aircraft class are entitled to the • Whether a passenger has a seat required by section 250.9 of the rule.) protections of the oversales rule. assignment before reaching the The Air Crash Victims Families Group Because this is a proposal, however, we departure gate for carriers that assign urged the Department to mandate uniform boarding priorities for all invite additional comment on the issue seats; • carriers. The Coalition for an Airline of the seating capacity of the aircraft to A passenger’s fare; • A passenger’s frequent flyer status; Passenger Bill of Rights stated that which the rule should apply. and carriers should be required to make

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:18 Nov 19, 2007 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20NOP1.SGM 20NOP1 rmajette on PROD1PC64 with PROPOSALS 65244 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 223 / Tuesday, November 20, 2007 / Proposed Rules

boarding priorities more widely carriers is not keypunched, B. Executive Order 13132 (Federalism) available; it also urges the Department summarized, published, or routinely This Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to prohibit boarding priorities that are reviewed. has been analyzed in accordance with based on the passenger’s fare. In the ANPRM the Department the principles and criteria contained in The industry commenters as a group requested comment on whether it Executive Order 13132 (‘‘Federalism’’). opposed the proposal to provide should revise section 250.10 to relieve This notice does not propose any additional notice to volunteers, stating all carriers of this reporting requirement regulation that: (1) Has substantial that it was unduly restrictive. The except for the airlines whose data is direct effects on the States, the consumer organizations did not being used, i.e., U.S. carriers reporting relationship between the national comment on this issue. on-time performance under Part 234. government and the States, or the Response to Comments Those airlines account for the vast distribution of power and majority of domestic traffic and responsibilities among the various For the reasons articulated in the bumpings, so the Department will still ANPRM and summarized above, and levels of government; (2) imposes receive adequate information and the substantial direct compliance costs on consistent with the recommendation of public will continue to have access to the IG, we propose to revise the rule to State and local governments; or (3) published data for the same category of preempts state law. Therefore, the affirmatively require that, no later than carriers as before. Such action would be the time a carrier asks a passenger to consultation and funding requirements consistent with the Paperwork of Executive Order 13132 do not apply. volunteer, it inform that person whether Reduction Act and the Regulatory he or she is in danger of being Flexibility Act. It would also result in C. Executive Order 13084 involuntarily bumped and, if so, the consistent carrier reporting This notice has been analyzed in compensation the carrier is obligated to requirements for all four sections of the accordance with the principles and pay, and to list the following examples Air Travel Consumer Report. criteria contained in Executive Order of permissible boarding priority criteria: • A passenger’s time of check in Comments 13084 (‘‘Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments’’). (first-come, first-served); Only four of the individual • Because none of the options on which Whether a passenger has a seat commenters expressed an opinion on assignment before reaching the we are seeking comment would this issue; all four of them favored the significantly or uniquely affect the departure gate for carriers that assign Department’s proposal. ATA and seats; communities of the Indian tribal • JetBlue believe that this reporting governments and would not impose A passenger’s fare; requirement should be retained. The • A passenger’s frequent flyer status; substantial direct compliance costs, the other industry commenters supported funding and consultation requirements and the proposal to eliminate this • Special priorities for passengers of Executive Order 13084 do not apply. requirement for all but the ATCT- with disabilities, within the meaning of reported carriers. The consumer D. Regulatory Flexibility Act 14 CFR part 382, or for unaccompanied organizations did not weigh in on this minors. The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 issue. As we stated in the ANPRM, we U.S.C. 601 et seq.) requires an agency to propose that these five examples be Response to Comments review regulations to assess their impact illustrative only, and not exclusive. on small entities unless the agency For the reasons articulated in the determines that a rule is not expected to Reporting ANPRM and summarized above, we have a significant economic impact on Section 250.10 of the current rule propose to revise the rule to relieve all a substantial number of small entities. requires all carriers that are subject to carriers of this reporting requirement Certain elements of these proposed rules Part 250 to file a quarterly report (Form except for ‘‘reporting carriers’’ as may impose new requirements on 251) on oversale activity. Due to staffing defined in 14 CFR 234.2 and any carrier certain small air carriers, but the limitations, for many years the only that voluntarily submits data pursuant Department believes that the economic carriers whose oversale data have been to section 234.7 of that part. At the impact would not be significant. All air routinely reviewed, entered into an present time this is 20 airlines. carriers have control over the extent to automated system, or published by the Regulatory Notices which the rule impacts them since they Department are the airlines that are control their own overbooking rates. subject to the on-time performance A. Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory Carriers can mitigate the cost of denied reporting requirement. Those are the Planning and Review) and DOT boarding compensation by obtaining U.S. carriers that each account for at Regulatory Policies and Procedures volunteers who are willing to give up least 1 percent of total domestic This action has been determined to be their seat for less compensation than scheduled-service passenger revenues— significant under Executive Order 12866 what the rule mandates for passengers currently 20 airlines (see 14 CFR 234). and the Department of Transportation who are bumped involuntarily, and by For a current list of these carriers, see Regulatory Policies and Procedures. It offering travel vouchers in lieu of cash the Department’s Air Travel Consumer has been reviewed by the Office of compensation. Report at http:// Management and Budget under that The vast majority of the traffic that airconsumer.ost.dot.gov/reports/ Order. A preliminary discussion of would be covered by the oversales rule index.htm. This report provides data for possible costs and benefits of the for the first time as a result of the these airlines in four areas: On-time proposed rule is presented above and in options on which we seek comment is performance, baggage mishandling, the accompanying Regulatory carried by airlines that are owned by or oversales, and consumer complaints. Evaluation. The Regulatory Evaluation affiliated with a major carrier or its The oversale data for that report are concluded that the benefits of the parent company. Moreover, a significant derived from the Form 251 reports proposals appear to exceed the costs. A amount, if not most, of the service on mandated by Part 250. The data in the copy of the Regulatory Evaluation has such flights is provided under a ‘‘fee- Form 251 reports filed by the other been placed in the docket. for-service’’ arrangement, where a major

VerDate Aug<31>2005 16:37 Nov 19, 2007 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20NOP1.SGM 20NOP1 rmajette on PROD1PC64 with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 223 / Tuesday, November 20, 2007 / Proposed Rules 65245

carrier dictates the market, the schedule, aircraft’’ and revising the definition of 6. Section 250.5(a) is revised to read and the price of the flight, and the ‘‘Carrier’’ to read as follows: as follows: tickets may not even be sold under the regional carrier’s code so that the § 250.1 Definitions. § 250.5 Amount of denied boarding passenger’s contract of carriage covering * * * * * compensation for passengers denied boarding involuntarily. the transportation is solely with the Carrier means: major carrier. In such circumstances, the (1) A direct air carrier, except a (a) Subject to the exceptions provided flights are for all legal and practical helicopter operator, holding a certificate in § 250.6, a carrier to whom this part purposes flights of the major carrier, not issued by the Department pursuant to 49 applies as described in § 250.2 shall pay the regional airline, in which case the U.S.C. 41102 or that has been found fit compensation to passengers denied major carrier is responsible for to conduct commuter operations under boarding involuntarily from an oversold providing denied boarding 49 U.S.C. 41738, authorizing the flight at the rate of 200 percent of the compensation on the flights of the scheduled transportation of persons; or fare (including any surcharges and air smaller carrier. The monetary costs of (2) A foreign route air carrier holding transportation taxes) to the passenger’s most of these options result in a a permit issued pursuant to 49 U.S.C. next stopover, or if none, to the corresponding dollar-for-dollar 41302, or an exemption from that passenger’s final destination, with a monetary benefit for members of the provision, authorizing the scheduled maximum of $800. However, the public who are bumped from their foreign air transportation of persons. compensation shall be one-half the confirmed flights and for small * * * * * amount described above, with a $400 businesses that employ some of them. 3. Section 250.2 is revised to read as maximum, if the carrier arranges for The options provide an economic follows: comparable air transportation [see incentive for carriers to use more section 250.1], or other transportation efficient overbooking rates that result in § 250.2 Applicability. used by the passenger that, at the time fewer bumpings while still allowing the This part applies to every carrier, as either such arrangement is made, is carriers to fill seats that would go defined in § 250.1, with respect to flight planned to arrive at the airport of the unsold as the result of ‘‘no-show’’ segments using an aircraft that has a passenger’s next stopover, or if none, passengers. It is worth noting that one designed passenger capacity of 30 or the airport of the passenger’s final of the options on which we are seeking more passenger seats, operating in destination, not later than 2 hours after comment relieves an existing reporting interstate air transportation or foreign the time the direct or connecting flight requirement for all but the largest air transportation with respect to from which the passenger was denied carriers. For all these reasons, I certify nonstop flight segments originating at a boarding is planned to arrive in the case that this rule, if adopted, would not point within the United States. of interstate air transportation, or 4 have a significant economic impact on 4. In § 250.2b paragraph (b) is hours after such time in the case of a substantial number of small entities. amended by removing the last sentence foreign air transportation. E. Paperwork Reduction Act and adding a new first sentence to read * * * * * as follows: The provisions that we are proposing 7. Section 250.9(b) is revised to read impose no new information reporting or § 250.2b Carriers to request volunteers for as follows: recordkeeping necessitating clearance denied boarding. by the Office of Management and * * * * * § 250.9 Written explanation of denied Budget. They relieve a reporting (b) Every carrier shall advise each boarding compensation and boarding priorities. requirement for many carriers that are passenger solicited to volunteer for currently subject to that requirement. denied boarding, no later than the time * * * * * One required handout that airlines the carrier solicits that passenger to (b) The statement shall read as distribute to bumped passengers would volunteer, whether he or she is in follows: require minor revisions. danger of being involuntarily denied Compensation for Denied Boarding F. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act boarding and, if so, the compensation the carrier is obligated to pay if the If you have been denied a reserved seat on The Department has determined that passenger is involuntarily denied (name of air carrier), you are probably the requirements of Title II of the boarding. entitled to monetary compensation. This notice explains the airline’s obligation and Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 5. Section 250.3(b) is added to read as do not apply to this notice. the passenger’s rights in the case of an follows: oversold flight, in accordance with List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 250 § 250.3 Boarding priority rules. regulations of the U.S. Department of Transportation. Air carriers, Consumer protection, * * * * * Reporting and recordkeeping (b) The Department has determined Volunteers and Boarding Priorities requirements. that acceptable boarding priority factors If a flight is oversold (more passengers hold For the reasons set forth in the may include, but are not limited to, the confirmed reservations than there are seats preamble, we propose to amend 14 CFR following: available), no one may be denied boarding part 250 as follows: (1) A passenger’s time of check in; against his or her will until airline personnel (2) Whether a passenger has a seat first ask for volunteers who will give up their PART 250—[AMENDED] assignment before reaching the reservation willingly, in exchange for a departure gate for carriers that assign payment of the airline’s choosing. If there are 1. The authority citation for part 250 not enough volunteers, other passengers may seats; continues to read as follows: be denied boarding involuntarily in (3) The fare paid by a passenger; accordance with the following boarding Authority: 49 U.S.C. chapters 401, 411, (4) A passenger’s frequent-flyer status; priority of (name of air carrier): (In this space 413, 417. and the carrier inserts its boarding priority rules 2. Section 250.1 is amended by (5) A passenger’s disability or status or a summary thereof, in a manner to be removing the definition of ‘‘large as an unaccompanied minor. understandable to the average passenger.)

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:18 Nov 19, 2007 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20NOP1.SGM 20NOP1 rmajette on PROD1PC64 with PROPOSALS 65246 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 223 / Tuesday, November 20, 2007 / Proposed Rules

Compensation for Involuntary Denied liability to the passenger caused by its failure Issued this 15th day of November, 2007, at Boarding to honor the confirmed reservation. However, Washington, DC. If you are denied boarding involuntarily, the passenger may decline the payment and Michael W. Reynolds, seek to recover damages in a court of law or you are entitled to a payment of ‘‘denied Deputy Assistant Secretary for Aviation and in some other manner. boarding compensation’’ from the airline International Affairs. unless: (1) you have not fully complied with * * * * * [FR Doc. 07–5761 Filed 11–15–07; 4:15 pm] the airline’s ticketing, check-in and reconfirmation requirements, or you are not § 250.10 [Amended] BILLING CODE 4910–9X–P acceptable for transportation under the 8. In the first sentence of § 250.10, the airline’s usual rules and practices; or (2) you word ‘‘carrier’’ is replaced with the are denied boarding because the flight is DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY canceled; or (3) you are denied boarding phrase ‘‘reporting carrier as defined in 14 CFR 234.2 and any carrier that because a smaller capacity aircraft was Federal Energy Regulatory voluntarily submits data pursuant to substituted for safety or operational reasons; Commission or (4) you are offered accommodations in a section 234.7 of that part.’’ section of the aircraft other than specified in 9. Section 250.11(a) is revised to read your ticket, at no extra charge (a passenger 18 CFR Parts 141 and 385 seated in a section for which a lower fare is as follows: [Docket No. RM07–18–000] charged must be given an appropriate § 250.11 Public disclosure of deliberate refund); or (5) the airline is able to place you overbooking and boarding procedures. on another flight or flights that are planned Elimination of FERC Form No. 423 to reach your next stopover or final (a) Every carrier shall cause to be November 2, 2007. destination within one hour of the planned displayed continuously in a AGENCY: arrival time of your original flight. conspicuous public place at each desk, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, DOE. Amount of Denied Boarding Compensation station and position in the United States ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. Passengers who are eligible for denied which is in the charge of a person employed exclusively by it, or by it boarding compensation must be offered a SUMMARY: In this Notice of Proposed jointly with another person, or by any payment equal to their one-way fare to their Rulemaking, the Federal Energy agent employed by such air carrier or destination (including connecting flights) or Regulatory Commission (Commission) is first stopover of four hours or longer, with a foreign air carrier to sell tickets to proposing to amend its regulations to $400 maximum. However, if the airline passengers, a sign located so as to be eliminate the FERC Form No. 423, cannot arrange ‘‘alternate transportation’’ (see clearly visible and clearly readable to Monthly Report of Cost and Quality of below) for the passenger, the compensation is the traveling public, which shall have Fuels for Electric Plants. The doubled ($800 maximum). The fare upon printed thereon the following statement which the compensation is based shall Commission’s infrequent use of the in boldface type at least one-fourth of an include any surcharge and air transportation information no longer justifies the inch high: tax. burden and cost of collecting it. ‘‘Alternate transportation’’ is air Notice—Overbooking of Flights Conversely, the Energy Information transportation (by any airline licensed by Administration has expressed a need for DOT) or other transportation used by the Airline flights may be overbooked, this information and, upon cessation of passenger which, at the time the arrangement and there is a slight chance that a seat is made, is planned to arrive at the the Commission’s collection, proposes will not be available on a flight for to collect the information, as part of its passenger’s next scheduled stopover of four which a person has a confirmed hours or longer or, if none, the passenger’s newly proposed EIA–923. final destination, no later than 2 hours (for reservation. If the flight is overbooked, no one will be denied a seat until airline DATES: Comment deadline: Comments flights between U.S. points, including are due December 20, 2007. territories and possessions) or 4 hours (for personnel first ask for volunteers willing international flights) after the passenger’s to give up their reservation in exchange ADDRESSES: You may submit comments originally scheduled arrival time. for compensation of the airline’s identified by Docket No. RM07–18–000, by one of the following methods: Method of Payment choosing. If there are not enough volunteers, the airline will deny • eFiling: From the Commission’s Except as provided below, the airline must boarding to other persons in accordance Web site: http://www.ferc.gov, follow give each passenger who qualified for with its particular boarding priority. the instructions for submitting involuntary denied boarding compensation a comments electronically found by payment by cash or check for the amount With few exceptions, including failure specified above, on the day and at the place to comply with the carrier’s check-in selecting eFiling under the Documents & deadline (carrier shall insert either ‘‘of Filing heading. the involuntary denied boarding occurs. If • the airline arranges alternate transportation ll minutes prior to each flight Mail: Commenters unable to file for the passenger’s convenience that departs segment’’ or ‘‘(which are available upon comments electronically must mail or before the payment can be made, the request from the air carrier)’’ here), hand deliver an original and 14 copies payment shall be sent to the passenger within persons denied boarding involuntarily of their comments to the Federal Energy 24 hours. The air carrier may offer free or are entitled to compensation. The Regulatory Commission, Secretary of the discounted transportation in place of the complete rules for the payment of Commission, 888 First Street, NE., cash payment. In that event, the carrier must Washington, DC 20426. disclose all material restrictions on the use of compensation and each airline’s the free or discounted transportation before boarding priorities are available at all Please refer to the Comment the passenger decides whether to accept the airport ticket counters and boarding Procedures section for additional transportation in lieu of a cash or check locations. Some airlines do not apply information. payment. The passenger may insist on the these consumer protections to travel FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: cash/check payment or refuse all from some foreign countries, although Lawrence Greenfield (Legal compensation and bring private legal action. other consumer protections may be Information), Office of the General Passenger’s Options available. Check with your airline or Counsel—Energy Markets, Federal Acceptance of the compensation may your travel agent. Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 relieve (name of air carrier) from any further * * * * * First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426,

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:18 Nov 19, 2007 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20NOP1.SGM 20NOP1 rmajette on PROD1PC64 with PROPOSALS