5052 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 11 / Tuesday, January 19, 2021 / Proposed Rules 

1 49 U.S.C. 40102(a)(2). 

HULTN ME WP (Lat. 46°02′22.29′′ N, long. 067°50′02.06′′ W) 

Excluding the airspace within 

Canada. 

* * * * * 

Issued in Washington, DC, on January 5, 

2021. 

George Gonzalez, 

Acting Manager, Rules and Regulations 

Group. 

[FR Doc. 2021–00655 Filed 1–15–21; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Office of the Secretary of 

Transportation 

14 CFR Parts 241 and 298 

[Docket No. DOT–OST–2018–0132] 

RIN 2105–AE45 

Updates to the Origin—Destination 

Survey of Airline Passengers 

AGENCY: Office of the Secretary of 

Transportation (OST), U.S. Department 

of Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM). 

SUMMARY: The Department is proposing 

to update the method of collecting and 

processing aviation traffic data in the 

Origin-Destination Survey of Airline 

Passenger Traffic (O&D Survey), as well 

as to expand the number of reporting air 

carriers, the sample size collected, and 

the scope of the data reported. These 

changes would align the current O&D 

Survey with modern industry business 

and accounting practices, enable cost 

savings, reduce burden through 

automation, and provide enhanced 

utility for users of the data. In addition, 

DOT is proposing to change the timing 

of the release of the Form 41, Schedule 

T–100(f) ‘‘Foreign Air Carrier Traffic 

Data by Nonstop Segment and On-flight 

Market’’ from a 6-month delay to a 3- 

month delay to match that of Form 41, 

Schedule T–100 ‘‘Air Carrier Traffic and 

Capacity Data by Non-Stop Segment and 

On-Flight Market.’’ 

DATES: Submit comments on or before 

March 19, 2021, 11:59 p.m. Eastern 

Time. The Department will consider late 

comments to the extent practicable. 

ADDRESSES: To ensure that you do not 

duplicate your docket submissions, 

please submit all comments by only one 

of the following means: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to 

http://www.regulations.gov and follow 

the online instructions for submitting 

comments. 

• Mail: Docket Management Facility, 

U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 

New Jersey Ave. SE, West Building, 

Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 

Washington, DC 20590–0001. 

• Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of 

Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Ave. 

SE, West Building, Ground Floor, Room 

W12–140, Washington, DC 20590–0001, 

between 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. ET, 

Monday through Friday, except Federal 

holidays. 

Instructions: At the beginning of your 

comments, include the agency name, 

docket name, and docket number (DOT– 

OST–2018–0132) or Regulation 

Identifier Number (RIN) for this 

rulemaking (2105–AE45). All comments 

received will be posted without change 

to http://www.regulations.gov, including 

any personal information provided. 

Physical access to the Docket is 

available at the Hand Delivery address 

noted above. 

Electronic Access and Filing: You can 

view this document by going to the 

Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://

www.regulations.gov and search for 

docket DOT–OST–2018–0132. The 

website is available 24 hours each day, 

365 days each year. Electronic 

submission and retrieval help and 

guidelines are available under the help 

section of the website. An electronic 

copy of this document is available for 

download from the Office of the Federal 

Register’s home page at: http://

www.archives.gov/federal-register and 

the U.S. Government Publishing Office’s 

web page at: https://www.gpo.gov/ 

fdsys/. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Mark Raggio, Office of Aviation 

Analysis, 1200 New Jersey Ave. SE, 

Room W86–470, Washington, DC 

20590–0001, 202–366–1271 (phone) or 

Mark.Raggio@dot.gov (email). 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

A. Legal Authority 

Section 429(b)(1) of Title 49, U.S.C., 

requires the Department to collect and 

disseminate information on the origin 

and destination of airline passengers 

including, at a minimum, information 

on: (1) The origin and destination of 

passengers in interstate air 

transportation, and (2) the number of 

passengers traveling by air between any 

two points in interstate air 

transportation. In addition, 49 U.S.C. 

40101(a)(7) states that the Secretary 

shall respond to the needs of the public, 

including the airline industry, all levels 

of government, and airports, by 

disseminating information to foster a 

national air transportation system 

capable of meeting the present and 

future needs of U.S. commerce. In 

fulfillment of these responsibilities, 

DOT collects data submitted under: 

• 14 CFR part 217: Reporting Traffic 

Statistics by Foreign Air Carriers in 

Civilian Scheduled, Charter, and 

Nonscheduled Services, whereby 

foreign air carriers that are authorized 

by DOT to provide scheduled passenger 

services to or from the U.S. must file 

Form 41 Schedule T–100(f), 

accumulated in accordance with the 

data elements prescribed in § 217.5. 

• 14 CFR part 241: Uniform System of 

Accounts and Reports for Large 

Certificated Air Carriers, under which 

all large certificated air carriers must 

report their traffic movements by filing 

Form 41 Schedule T–100, Financials 

Information, and O&D fare information. 

• 14 CFR part 298: Exemptions for 

Air Taxi and Commuter Air Carriers, 

whereby air taxi operators and 

commuter air carriers, which are 

provided certain exemptions from some 

of the economic regulatory provisions of 

Subtitle VII of Title 49 of the United 

States Code, are required to submit 

simplified Financials and T–100 traffic. 

In this rulemaking, the Department 

proposes to update its method of 

collecting and processing O&D fare 

information under part 241 to: (1) Allow 

full automation of the reporting of the 

O&D Survey by aligning it with current 

airline passenger accounting practices; 

and (2) enhance the accuracy and 

usefulness of DOT’s collection of 

aviation traffic data. 

B. Background on the O&D Survey 

Currently, the O&D Survey, as 

outlined in 14 CFR part 241, Sec. 19– 

7, collects airline tickets from select air 

carriers,1 ‘‘O&D Survey Reporting 

Carriers,’’ each quarter. The O&D Survey 

Reporting Carriers combine the 

information from tickets with the same 

itinerary and price into a summary 

record reported every 3 months. Under 

49 U.S.C. 329(b)(1), the Department is 

obligated to collect and disseminate this 

information. There are many private and 

public stakeholders that depend on this 

data to make decisions on aviation 

business and policy. For example, this 

data is used by the industry to plan air 

services, develop commercial aviation 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 11 / Tuesday, January 19, 2021 / Proposed Rules 5053 

2Public Law 95–504. 

infrastructure, measure the economic 

impact of passenger flows, and create 

business plans for start-up airlines. The 

O&D Survey is also a primary source of 

information used to quantify and 

evaluate the effectiveness of Federal 

aviation policy and programs as well as 

to develop and implement new policies 

and infrastructure initiatives. 

When the current rules for collection 

of the O&D Survey were established in 

the 1960s, the O&D Survey provided the 

best reasonably obtainable measure of 

passenger aviation activity. The 

mainframe technologies of the era 

dictated many aspects of the O&D 

survey business process and the 

elements selected for collection. A key 

driver of the process was that data 

storage was expensive in that era which 

resulted in a minimum of data elements 

being included. This meant more robust 

descriptive data, such as the time of 

arrival and departure, were not included 

in the collection. Because mainframes 

were centralized computing resources, 

the O&D Survey process was designed 

to route paper tickets to a centralized 

facility for processing and loading into 

the systems. In the intervening years, 

changes in airline business models and 

accounting practices enabled by 

technology improvements were not 

reflected in DOT’s collection 

methodology, leading to a misalignment 

between the rules for reporting the 

information and current accounting 

practices that generally requires human 

intervention to reconcile differences and 

prevents O&D Survey Reporting Carriers 

from fully automating the system of data 

collection. The primary design issue 

that prevents current improvements is 

the regulatory requirement that the 

operating carrier that first touches the 

ticket is the carrier that has 

responsibility to report the ticket, 

known as the ‘‘first reporting carrier 

rule.’’ In the 1960s, this rule was 

selected because the most efficient 

process was physically to detach the 

ticket coupons as they were flown for 

each flight and send all the coupons to 

the centralized processing facility to be 

matched and combined with the 

relevant revenue information. Because 

the carrier that issued the ticket, which 

had all the necessary information on 

hand, often did not first touch the ticket, 

the carrier with the least amount of 

information was by rule responsible for 

reporting the ticket. Modern and 

decentralized E-ticket systems eliminate 

the need for a physical coupon 

matching process and enables more 

efficient reporting rules and access to 

more relevant data. 

DOT has worked with representatives 

of the aviation industry trade 

association Airlines for America (A4A) 

to determine the best way to improve 

the methodology, collection, and utility 

of the O&D Survey. DOT is proposing 

this rule to reform and simplify the O&D 

Survey, principally by reorienting the 

reporting requirements so that air 

carriers report primarily information for 

tickets that they issue. 

II. The Need To Modernize Current 

Data Collection Requirements 

The data collected in the O&D Survey 

provides DOT with the information to 

help foster an air transportation system 

capable of meeting the present and 

future needs of commerce in the United 

States. However, the current O&D 

Survey methodology was designed 

based on accounting processes long 

abandoned by airlines, including 

manual accounting systems that often 

had handwritten records. As a result, 

the Survey’s data collection 

methodology does not reflect today’s 

decentralized and integrated industrywide practices and technologies, and, in 

some cases, it is not capable of 

accurately documenting consumer 

behavior. For example, in today’s 

environment, it is far more efficient for 

the carrier that issues the ticket to be 

responsible for reporting the ticket 

because it is the issuing carrier that has 

all the information about the ticket. 

Current process requires the operating 

carrier that flies the first coupon of the 

ticket to report and this is often not the 

issuing carrier. Because current 

reporting does not contain information 

about the length of stay at each 

intermediate point in a ticket, the 

system must impute the intended 

destination of round trip tickets. With 

the advent of large-scale connecting 

services, this has made the 

determination of intended destination 

less accurate. Though the Survey 

remains a unique and foundational 

pillar of industry economic analysis, its 

limitations create high levels of 

uncertainty in certain situations, such as 

identifying the true origin and 

destination of some passengers; the 

month of travel; and the portion of the 

total amount paid that is the revenue 

retained by the air carrier, as opposed to 

taxes and fees remitted to other 

government entities. By aligning the 

O&D Survey with current industry 

technology and integrated business 

process, this proposal would vastly 

simplify the reporting of appropriate 

data elements and increase the utility of 

the Survey to its users. 

A. Changes in Airline and Consumer 

Behavior Since 1978 

The way the airline industry markets 

and delivers air transportation services 

to the public changed significantly 

following the Airline Deregulation Act 

of 1978.2 The 1978 Act enabled airlines 

to set their own fares, flight frequencies, 

and route structure. The current rules 

for the collection of ticket information 

were specifically designed to measure 

the relatively static air travel industry of 

the 1960s, when fares and flight 

frequencies were set by the Federal Civil 

Aeronautics Board and tended to be 

from a single point to a single point. The 

current O&D Survey data collection 

rules do not reflect the increasingly 

dynamic and complex business 

practices that have emerged since 

deregulation, including the 

development of hub-and-spoke systems, 

frequent flier programs, revenue 

management systems, internet 

distribution of tickets, and other 

industry-transforming innovations. For 

example, under the post-deregulation 

hub-and-spoke model developed by 

legacy air carriers, it became 

increasingly common to fly initially to 

a single, large ‘‘hub airport’’ where some 

passengers would change planes to 

complete their journey, while others 

remained on the same plane during 

intervening stop(s), known as a ‘‘direct’’ 

passenger flight. In the case of the 

‘‘direct’’ passenger, the carriers would 

use a single ticket that identifies the 

origin and ultimate destination, but not 

the intermediate stop(s). Furthermore, 

in combination with these changes, new 

airline loyalty programs altered 

passenger ticket purchasing behavior; 

travelers in these programs were 

increasingly incentivized to take longer, 

indirect routes, often through an 

airline’s large hub airport, that would 

allow them to accumulate more mileagebased loyalty points, exacerbating 

reporting issues, such as identification 

of the intended destination of travel, 

with the O&D Survey. The industry 

innovations forged after deregulation 

changed the fundamentals of airline 

competition, but the process used and 

the data DOT collects did not modernize 

concomitant with these changes. 

B. Reevaluation of O&D Survey Burden 

and Data Quality 

Considering these developments, DOT 

initiated a retrospective analysis of its 

aviation traffic reporting rules. The 

Department recognizes that there are 

concerns with the quality of the current 

O&D Survey, and that it is expensive 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
5054 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 11 / Tuesday, January 19, 2021 / Proposed Rules 

3Circular A–130 requires DOT to take affirmative 

steps to ensure data quality objectivity and utility 

of Federal statistics before disseminating them and 

notes that public and private resources are allocated 

inefficiently when uncertainty is introduced due to 

inexact or incorrect data. 4Public Law 106–554 Section 515 charges 

Federal agencies with a responsibility to produce 

the best reasonably obtainable scientific and 

economic information available to measure the 

impact of their regulatory responsibilities. 

5Public Law 106–554, sec. 515. 

6 72 FR 33362 (June 15, 2007). 

7 63 FR 28128. 

8 70 FR 8140. 

9The current regulation places the reporting 

responsibility on the first O&D Survey Reporting 

Carrier in the sequence of travel for a ticket. The 

and burdensome to collect, validate, and 

use. Collaborative discussion with A4A 

representatives revealed that there is a 

substantial hidden cost of compliance in 

reporting aviation statistics due to the 

difficulty in identifying and 

investigating problems that are often 

only revealed during post-submission 

quality control processing. The carriers 

are also often in the position of having 

to interpret how to stay in compliance 

with outdated rules that require them to 

deviate from their current accounting 

practices. For these reasons, the 

Department believes that the O&D 

Survey no longer meets the guidance 

outlined in OMB Circular A–130 3 or the 

data collection standards of the 

Information Quality Act.4 In addition, 

DOT identified instances in the 

reporting regulations that contribute to 

deficiencies in data quality. These 

deficiencies are often not observable 

until after the data from all the carrier 

submissions is combined during postprocessing analysis. Moreover, 

ambiguity in the current regulation may 

lead O&D Survey Reporting Carriers to 

interpret reporting instructions 

differently, contributing to the 

degradation of the O&D Survey data 

quality and increasing the air carrier’s 

reporting burden as they must review 

the suspected data and resubmit once 

the problem is found. 

Furthermore, DOT determined that 

the collection and dissemination of the 

O&D Survey remains justified under the 

regulatory philosophy stated in 

Executive Order (E.O.) 12866, sec. 1(a) 

which is that ‘‘the Federal Government 

should . . . promulgate regulations as 

required . . .’’ It was also determined 

that, given its role and statutory duties, 

DOT is best positioned to collect 

uniform, accurate, and complete data on 

the Nation’s civil aeronautics sector as 

well as ensure widespread 

dissemination of the collected data. 

Diverse public and private stakeholders, 

including air carriers, investors, and 

aircraft manufacturers, rely on this data 

to inform business decisions, 

infrastructure improvements, and 

aviation regulations or public policies. 

For example, the airline industry 

continues to use the O&D Survey to plan 

air services, develop commercial 

aviation infrastructure, measure the 

economic impact of passenger flows, 

and create business plans for start-up 

airlines. The data is also a primary 

source of information used to measure 

and evaluate the effectiveness of Federal 

aviation policy and programs, including 

by: (1) Improving international air 

services by seeking market 

liberalization, (2) ensuring the benefits 

of a deregulated, competitive domestic 

airline industry, and (3) developing 

policies to improve air service and 

access to the national air transportation 

system for small and rural communities. 

Furthermore, the Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA) requires airports 

to use accurate aviation data for 

qualifying, planning, allocating, and 

monitoring of Airport Improvement 

Program (AIP) funds and to justify the 

need for Passenger Facility Charges 

(PFCs). The outdated and cumbersome 

O&D Survey methodologies impose 

excessive burdens on O&D Survey 

Reporting Carriers and diminish the 

data’s utility to its users due to quality, 

objectivity, and completeness issues, 

and therefore requires modernization. In 

addition, ensuring universal 

participation across air carriers and 

collection of the best reasonably 

obtainable measurements of economic 

activity in the aviation sector requires 

updating the O&D Survey 

methodologies. 

C. Meeting Reporting and Data Quality 

Demands 

This proposed rule would modernize 

the O&D Survey to reflect current airline 

passenger behavior and revenue 

accounting practices, which allow air 

carriers to track the sale and the usage 

of every ticket sold, including through 

partner carriers. In doing so, the 

proposed rule would ensure that the 

O&D Survey meets the requirements and 

objectives of the Information Quality 

Act,5 E.O. 12866, E.O. 13771, and OMB 

Implementation Guidance for Title V of 

the E-Government Act, Confidential 

Information Protection and Statistical 

Efficiency Act of 2002.6

III. Development of the Proposed Rule 

A. Prior Related Rulemakings 

The Department initiated a 

retrospective analysis of its passenger 

traffic statistics on July 15, 1998, when 

DOT published an advance notice of 

proposed rulemaking (ANPRM),7

requesting comment on a variety of 

issues related to aviation economic data 

collection. 

On February 17, 2005, DOT published 

a notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM) 8 as part of DOT’s effort to 

revise the rules governing the nature, 

scope, source, and means for collecting 

and processing aviation traffic data as 

well as modernize the collection, 

processing, and dissemination of this 

data. While there was considerable 

support for these changes among 

stakeholders, the comments from the 

airlines indicated that the burdens of 

reporting the data would be 

unacceptably high relative to the current 

collection. The 2005 proposal to collect 

all relevant data on the ticket was overly 

broad and too costly to implement. The 

Department withdrew the proposal on 

June 1, 2011, stating that the proposed 

approach did not adequately address 

some issues, including measures that 

could both enhance the utility, integrity, 

and accuracy of the data and reduce the 

cost of reporting. The current proposal, 

by comparison, is more narrowly 

tailored to address specific well-known 

quality problems that have been 

identified by both producers and users 

of the data over a long period of time, 

maintains the same data structure of the 

current reporting allowing for reuse of 

as much of the existing infrastructure as 

possible, removes elements that are no 

longer required, adds new useful 

elements, and improves reporting rules. 

B. Summary of Modifications Suggested 

by the Industry 

This proposed rule renews DOT’s 

effort to revise its aviation statistical 

reporting process. In an October 5, 2015, 

letter to DOT, A4A recommended 

changes to the reporting regulation that 

would increase the utility and accuracy 

of the data while simplifying reporting. 

Representatives of A4A notified DOT 

that their members favored updating the 

rule governing the collection of the O&D 

Survey under prescribed circumstances. 

A4A identified changes to reporting that 

would increase the utility of the data 

and, at the same time, simplify 

reporting. These proposed changes were 

reflective of numerous interactions 

related to the data collection between 

government and industry over many 

years. The series of ideas that stemmed 

from this collaboration are listed below. 

Methodology Changes 

(1) Change the responsibility of 

reporting tickets from the First 

Reporting Carrier Rule to the Issuing 

Carrier; 9


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 11 / Tuesday, January 19, 2021 / Proposed Rules 5055 

proposed regulation will place the reporting 

responsibility on the carrier that issued the ticket. 

It is the carrier that issues the ticket that will have 

the most information about the ticket. 

10For evaluating Category 2 tickets, foreign air 

carriers that have been granted Antitrust Immunity 

under 49 U.S.C. 41308 and 41309 will be 

responsible for reporting Eligible Tickets they issue 

and U.S. air carriers will no longer have to report 

these. 

(2) Classify all Certificated air carriers 

and commuter air carriers holding out 

scheduled passenger service as O&D 

Survey Reporting Carriers by removing 

the exemptions from reporting given to 

U.S.-based air carriers and commuter air 

carriers with a business model that 

limits them to flying aircraft with fewer 

than 60 seats; 

(3) Refrain from requiring foreign air 

carriers to report O&D Survey data, 

other than foreign air carriers granted 

anti-trust immunity under 49 U.S.C. 

41308 and 41309; instead, the 

responsibility to report tickets issued by 

a foreign air carrier (that does not 

submit data under 49 U.S.C. 41308 and 

41309) should remain with the O&D 

Survey Reporting Carrier that appears 

first in the travel sequence of the ticket; 

(4) Change the period of reporting 

from quarterly to monthly; 

(5) Increase the sample size to 40% of 

airline tickets so that the sample size is 

statistically valid for measuring travel to 

small and rural communities; and 

(6) Shorten time lag for the release of 

T–100(f) data from the current 6 months 

to 3 months, consistent with the release 

of T–100 Domestic data. Historically 

this time lag has existed because of 

technological and business practice 

limitations. 

New Data Items To Be Collected 

(1) ‘‘Dwell Time,’’ an indication of the 

hours that the passenger spends at an 

airport between their arriving and 

departure flights; 

(2) ‘‘Via Airport,’’ an entry for airlines 

to report hidden airports or ‘‘via’’ 

airports where a passenger lands, but 

does not necessarily deplane; 

(3) ‘‘Total Tax,’’ a value of the total 

taxes and government-imposed fees 

collected for each ticket, to distinguish 

this value from the Total Amount of the 

fare collected; 

(4) ‘‘Travel Year and Month,’’ to 

include a field detailing the year and 

month the passenger travels for each 

segment of travel; 

(5) ‘‘Exchanged Ticket Indicator,’’ 

alerting data users that a reported fare 

may not comport with the reported 

itinerary; and 

(6) ‘‘Reporting Record Identifier,’’ 

facilitating easier record identification 

by the O&D Survey Reporting Carrier 

when correcting tickets reported with 

errors. 

Data Items the Department Proposed No 

Longer Be Collected 

(1) The fare class the passenger uses 

on each of the flights; 

(2) The cabin class the passenger uses 

on each of the flights; and 

(3) The date of ticket purchase. 

In November 2015, the Airline Tariff 

Publishing Company (ATPCO), the 

leading distributor of airline fares and 

airline fare information for the industry 

notified DOT that it had the ability to 

report the proposed restructured O&D 

Survey as envisioned by A4A and DOT 

and that ATPCO could offer that 

capability as a third-party service to 

airlines. 

C. Goals and Objectives of This 

Regulatory Action 

The Department established the 

following objectives for this rulemaking: 

(1) Reduce the long-term reporting 

burden on the O&D Survey Reporting 

Carriers; (2) make the O&D Survey more 

relevant and useful to airlines, aviation 

policy makers, researchers, and 

stakeholders; (3) obtain more accurate 

ticket data from a broader group of air 

carriers and markets; (4) reduce the time 

it takes to disseminate the O&D Survey 

and the T–100(f); and (5) increase the 

statistical correlation between the O&D 

Survey and the T–100/T100(f) for data 

validation purposes. Taken together, 

this proposed rule would alleviate 

unnecessary regulatory burdens placed 

on the American people and businesses. 

IV. Proposed Changes to the Collection 

of Data 

The Department proposes the 

following modifications to its collection 

of scheduled passenger aviation data: 

D. Altering the Reporting Framework 

The general process for reporting O&D 

data is to collect the ticket information 

once there is an indication that the 

ticket has been flown, combine all the 

ticket coupons to determine all the 

points flown and the sequence of travel 

on the ticket, and integrate the flown 

information with revenue information 

related to the price the consumer paid 

for the ticket. 

1. Selection of Tickets to Report 

a. Making the Ticket the Basic Unit of 

Reporting 

This proposed rule would give O&D 

Survey Reporting Carriers the 

responsibility for reporting a ticket 

when it is the Issuing Carrier for that 

ticket, relieving air carriers of the 

responsibility to report any ticket issued 

by another O&D Survey Reporting 

Carrier. Under the proposed rule, 

Issuing Carriers would know when a 

coupon from one of their tickets is used 

for transportation by any other air 

carrier on the ticket, triggering a 

Reporting Event. Moving the 

responsibility to report to the Issuing 

Carrier would simplify the reporting 

process by establishing one identifiable 

air carrier that has all the information 

on a ticket and is responsible for 

reporting the ticket. These types of 

tickets will account for the majority of 

reported tickets. Tickets issued by an 

O&D Survey Reporting Carrier would be 

referred to as ‘‘Category One Tickets.’’ 

In addition to Category One tickets, 

tickets may be issued by air carriers who 

would not fall under the new definition 

of O&D Survey Reporting Carriers; 

however, those tickets may still present 

information that should be recorded. 

The proposed rule would continue to 

require each O&D Survey Reporting 

Carrier to report these encountered 

tickets issued by Non-O&D Survey 

Reporting Carriers. These tickets would 

be referred to as ‘‘Category Two 

Tickets.’’ Category Two Tickets would 

require a process for recognizing a 

Reporting Event that is different than 

that for Category One Tickets. The 

proposed Category Two reporting 

process would be like the existing 

process, but the expected volume of 

Category Two Tickets will be 

significantly less under this proposed 

rule due to the expansion of the pool of 

O&D Survey Reporting Carriers and the 

Category One reporting rule, which will 

have primacy.10

The Department recognizes that it 

could eliminate Category Two Tickets, 

and therefore the associated burden of 

reporting these tickets, by requiring all 

foreign air carriers providing scheduled 

service to the United States to submit 

O&D Survey data. The Department, 

therefore, seeks comment on whether to 

require all foreign air carriers providing 

scheduled service to the United States 

submit O&D Survey data. 

b. Increasing Sample Size to 40 Percent 

This proposed rule would increase 

the number of passenger tickets air 

carriers are required to report, which 

would create a statistically valid sample 

for meaningful analysis of smaller 

markets that is not available under the 

current O&D Data collection. The 

current sample size of 10 percent is only 

sufficient for analyzing large markets 

and the national air transportation 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
5056 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 11 / Tuesday, January 19, 2021 / Proposed Rules 

11Statistical analyses by Michael Wittman 

(Michael D. Wittman, A Note on the Use of U.S. 

DB1B Passenger Ticket Data for Estimating Airfares 

in Thin Airline Markets or Small Airports, 

Massachusetts Institute of Technology), and Eric 

Amel (Eric Amel, Report on the Results of Different 

Sampling Rates on the Reliability of the US DOT 

O&D Survey, Compass Lexecon, May 18, 2015) are 

available in the Docket. 12 49 U.S.C. 40102(a)(2). 

13 Domestic air carriers may change their business 

model from one of only providing contract lift, not 

holding out scheduled air service and not issuing 

tickets, to selling their own services. When this 

occurs, the carrier will need to be added to the O&D 

Survey Reporting List. The same may happen in 

reverse requiring a carrier to be removed from the 

list. This same process applies to foreign air carriers 

immunized under 49 U.S.C. 41308 and 41309. They 

may also be added or removed from the list 

depending on their immunity status. 

system at a broad level. Studies indicate 

that a 40 percent sample is sufficient to 

allow proper evaluation of small 

aviation markets, and so the Department 

is proposing to increase the number of 

passenger tickets are required to report 

to 40 percent.11 The ability to measure 

small markets is important to air carriers 

and to policy makers in order to monitor 

the effectiveness of Federal dollars 

spent in programs such as the Essential 

Air Service (EAS) and the Small 

Community Air Service Development 

Program (SCASDP), that are designed to 

ensure that small and rural communities 

have access to the national air 

transportation system. The 40 percent 

sample, in combination with expanding 

the universe of O&D Survey Reporting 

Carriers, would substantially improve 

the ability to measure smaller markets 

accurately. 

c. Providing an Unbiased Sample 

Selection 

The proposed rule would designate 

the final, right-most digit of the standard 

ticket document number as the basis for 

the new, random sample size. Analyses 

by DOT suggest that the final digit of a 

ticket number does not pertain directly 

to any particular type of passenger or 

journey, and every digit (0–9) has an 

equal probability of appearing. This 

method ensures that the random 

sampling of 40 percent of Eligible 

Tickets for the O&D Survey would be 

truly unbiased and random, protecting 

the validity and integrity of the data. 

Any O&D Survey Reporting Carrier 

that does not assign ticket numbers to 

passenger journeys or does not assign 

ticket numbers such that the final, rightmost digit is not randomly assigned 

would be required to develop an 

alternative method of creating a valid 40 

percent sample. Those O&D Survey 

Reporting Carriers would need to 

submit their alternative sample methods 

to DOT for approval within 90 days of 

the date that the O&D Survey Reporting 

Carrier recognizes that it must make use 

of the alternative sample selection 

method to comply with the proposed 

reporting regulation for determining an 

Eligible Ticket. 

2. Removing the Requirement for 

Summarization 

Under the proposed rule, O&D Survey 

Reporting Carriers would report 

individual tickets as separate records, 

rather than aggregating tickets with 

identical characteristics into a single 

reporting record. Currently, the number 

of tickets in each grouping is tracked 

and reported as a passenger count. This 

process was initially instituted because 

the cost of data transmission and storage 

exceeded the cost of processing the 

records into summarized records. 

However, due to significant advances in 

data transmission and storage 

technology, any such savings are now 

minimal. The process of grouping and 

summarizing similar tickets into one 

summary reporting record creates an 

additional, unnecessary step for the 

O&D Survey Reporting Carriers, and is 

inconsistent with modern revenue 

accounting practices. Combining the 

tickets also increased the difficulty of 

correcting the occasional, inevitable 

mistakes that arise in reporting to the 

O&D Survey because the individual 

records that cause the problem are not 

identifiable in the summary record that 

is provided. 

E. Modification to O&D Survey 

Reporting Carriers 

The proposed rule would simplify the 

identification of the air carriers 

responsible for reporting a ticket, 

correcting the current onerous and 

burdensome process. It would also all 

but eliminate the need for an air carrier 

that may not have information on a 

ticket in its internal systems to obtain 

the information from other sources 

outside its normal business process. 

1. U.S. Air Carriers 12 as O&D Survey 

Reporting Carriers 

The proposed rule would require that 

all U.S. air carriers that hold either a 

certificate of public convenience and 

necessity for scheduled passenger air 

transportation pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 

41102 or that hold a Commuter Air 

Carrier Authorization pursuant to 14 

CFR part 298 and that hold out a 

schedule and issue tickets for scheduled 

passenger air transportation be 

considered O&D Survey Reporting 

Carriers for the O&D Survey. This 

proposed rule would require all O&D 

Survey Reporting Carrier to submit O&D 

Survey data to capture travel in markets 

served by all types of air carriers. 

However, by making the reporting 

regulation compatible with industry 

accounting structures, DOT expects this 

reporting would add minimal additional 

burden to affected air carriers. Carriers 

would only report tickets that satisfy the 

reporting criteria. In most cases, air 

carriers operating as contract lift 

providers (i.e., code-share branded 

regional partners) would not have to 

report tickets. If necessary, DOT would 

work with outside third-party vendors, 

such as ATPCO, to make data collection 

and reporting services available to all 

O&D Survey Reporting Carriers. The 

Department seeks comment on whether 

any further accommodation is necessary 

for these smaller air carriers. 

2. Foreign Air Carriers That Are Not 

O&D Survey Reporting Carriers 

Under the proposed rule, foreign air 

carriers would not report passenger 

O&D data under 14 CFR part 241, Sec. 

19–8, which is consistent with current 

reporting requirements. However, 

foreign air carriers would still need to 

report data as required by a grant of 

antitrust immunity under 49 U.S.C. 

41308 and 41309, which represent a 

separate set of reporting regulations. 

O&D Survey Reporting Carriers will 

determine if a foreign air carrier that 

reports under 49 U.S.C. 41308 and 

41309 issued a ticket, and if so, the O&D 

Survey Reporting Carrier will not be 

responsible for reporting the ticket. 

3. O&D Survey Reporting Carriers List 

The proposed rule would require that 

DOT post the O&D Survey Reporting 

Carriers List one month in advance of its 

monthly effective date to ensure that 

O&D Survey Reporting Carriers are 

aware of all updates and give the O&D 

Survey Reporting Carriers time to 

update their internal processes to 

comply with reporting requirements.13

For example, an update to the list 

posted January 31st would be effective 

for reporting beginning in March. The 

O&D Survey Reporting Carriers List 

would be updated as soon as 

administratively possible when an O&D 

Survey Reporting Carrier becomes 

qualified or is disqualified as an O&D 

Survey Reporting Carrier. 

F. Increasing the Frequency of Reporting 

The proposed rule would require O&D 

Survey Reporting Carriers to report data 

monthly instead of the current quarterly 

reporting period. Information would 

have to be reported to the Department 

no later than 45 days after the last day 

of a reporting month. This would make 

the data available to stakeholders on an 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 11 / Tuesday, January 19, 2021 / Proposed Rules 5057 

expedited basis compared to the 

existing quarterly reporting and enables 

users to validate it against other data 

disseminated monthly, such as the T– 

100. 

G. Expanding Data Elements Collected 

Through discussions with A4A, the 

Department determined the expanded 

data elements selected below are 

already collected and maintained by 

industry and therefore are minimally 

burdensome to collect. The Department 

may expand or change the regulatory 

language to include further definition of 

the requirements for submission, subject 

to the comments received for the final 

rulemaking. 

1. Reporting Scheduled Year and Month 

of Travel 

The proposed rule would require the 

O&D Survey Reporting Carriers to report 

the scheduled year and month of 

departure of each flight coupon. 

Providing this level of granularity 

would increase the utility of the O&D 

Survey by enabling users to, for 

example, better compare economic 

activity in the aviation sector against 

other measures of economic activity in 

the economy that are reported monthly, 

or with other aviation traffic data 

collected by DOT. Including month of 

travel also would make it easier to 

validate the submissions against other 

data sources, such as the T100 and T– 

100(f). Data in the O&D Survey currently 

cannot properly support a direct 

comparison to 3 months of T–100/T– 

100(f) data because the current survey 

reporting includes data with travel dates 

outside of the three months of the 

quarterly O&D reporting window that 

cannot be identified in the collected 

data; therefore, the data cannot be 

accurately segmented on specific time 

periods for comparison with the T–100 

or T–100(f). 

2. Reporting All Airports in the Itinerary 

Including Via Airports 

The proposed rule would require 

reporting of Eligible Tickets to include 

all airports wherein the passenger is 

scheduled to travel, even when the 

passenger does not deplane. Whereas 

most tickets document travel that 

consists of flight coupons with one 

aircraft take-off and one aircraft landing, 

sometimes the passenger is on a flight 

that lands at an airport but the 

passenger remains on board. This 

airport is not expressly identified in the 

ticket, and is generally referred to as a 

‘‘via’’ airport. The current rules of the 

O&D Survey do not allow for the 

reporting of ‘‘via’’ airports. Collecting 

this information would enable data 

users to understand better how 

passengers travel through various airline 

networks, and would provide the 

necessary information for relating T100/ 

T100(f) segment data directly to O&D 

Survey information. 

Identifying the ‘‘via’’ airports, 

currently hidden in an itinerary, 

requires knowledge of the flight 

number, because each flight number has 

its own unique routing, as well as the 

date of the scheduled travel, because 

schedules change within monthly 

boundaries and some flight number 

schedules change by day-of-week (e.g., 

differing weekday and weekend flight 

itineraries). The Department is not 

proposing to require the reporting of 

flight number and flight date. Instead, 

DOT proposes that the O&D Survey 

Reporting Carriers report the ‘‘via’’ 

airport in a ‘‘Via Airport’’ field because 

the O&D Survey Reporting Carrier 

knows the flight number and flight date 

while the Department does not. 

3. Reporting Dwell Time 

The proposed rule would assist DOT 

in creating a more accurate record of the 

passenger’s intended destination (i.e., 

true O&D) by requiring O&D Survey 

Reporting Carriers to report the number 

of hours elapsed between the 

passenger’s arrival at an airport on a 

flight and the passenger’s departure 

from the next airport in the tickets travel 

sequence. The standard measure of 

continuity of a journey in the industry 

is time between flights at an airport, or 

‘‘dwell time.’’ Reporting ‘‘dwell time’’ 

would enable users to make an accurate 

determination of when a passenger has 

reached a destination versus when the 

passenger is simply waiting for a 

connecting flight to the intended 

destination. For example, when a 

passenger stays only an hour or two at 

an airport, the airline assumes that this 

airport is not an intended destination 

but, instead, the passenger was only at 

that airport to travel onward to an 

intended destination. 

As the O&D Survey Reporting Carrier 

knows the flight dates and flight times 

on an individual ticket, the Department 

proposes that the O&D Survey Reporting 

Carriers report in one hour increments 

the number of hours elapsed between a 

passenger’s arrival and the passenger’s 

departure from an Airport, rounding up 

to the nearest whole hour. This measure 

of time would be reported as a new 

element, ‘‘Dwell Time.’’ 

4. Reporting an Exchanged Ticket 

Indicator 

The proposed rule adds a new 

element, the ‘‘Exchanged Ticket 

Indicator,’’ to notify O&D Survey data 

users that a ticket may warrant further 

examination. The proposed rule would 

continue to require that tickets issued in 

exchange for unused coupons of a 

previously issued ticket be reported. For 

Exchanged Tickets, the user of the data 

would be alerted that the value reported 

as the Total Amount may include a form 

of payment from unused coupons of a 

previously issued ticket. 

5. Reporting a Frequent Flyer Program 

Ticket 

The Department seeks comment on 

whether O&D Survey Reporting Carriers 

should report whether a ticket was 

purchased in part or in whole by 

redemption through a Frequent Flyer 

Program (FFP). The user of the data 

would be alerted that the value reported 

as the Total Amount may include a form 

of payment by redemption of FFP miles 

or points. 

6. Reporting Total Amount and Tax 

Amount 

The rule proposes adding a data 

element for the ‘‘Tax Amount’’ to 

understand the effect of government 

policy on aviation and allow data users 

the ability to separate taxes paid from 

the total fare. The rule also proposes to 

rename the currently reported element 

‘‘Total Dollar Value’’ to ‘‘Total 

Amount.’’ 

a. Total Amount 

The proposed rule would keep the 

reporting element ‘‘Total Dollar Value’’ 

but change the name of the reporting 

element to the industry standard term 

‘‘Total Amount’’ and clarify the 

instructions for populating the data 

element. For all Eligible Tickets, the 

O&D Survey Reporting Carrier would 

report the Total Amount paid for the 

ticket that was mandatory for the 

passenger to board the aircraft. The 

Department proposes that the Total 

Amount would include all mandatory 

carrier-imposed charges and 

government-imposed fees and taxes. 

Carrier-imposed charges, which are 

variously described as fuel surcharges, 

ticketing, check-in, seat, or other fees or 

charges that are mandatory, that a 

passenger must pay to board the aircraft 

would be included. In addition, the 

amount of non-airline imposed taxes 

and fees for the ticket would be 

included. The Total Amount would not 

include charges for optional or ancillary 

services such as baggage fees, premium 

seat fees, or ticket change fees. For 

example, if a consumer can choose a nocost seat or seating category, but chooses 

to purchase a particular seat or seating 

category, that fee should not be 

included. However, if a passenger has a 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
5058 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 11 / Tuesday, January 19, 2021 / Proposed Rules 

choice of seats or seating categories, but 

there is a cost associated with all the 

options and the consumer must pay a 

fee regardless of which option is chosen, 

the fee is mandatory and that fee should 

be included in the total cost of the 

ticket. Regarding mandatory ticket 

purchase fees, if the passenger must pay 

a fee the amount of which depends on 

the outlet from which the ticket is 

purchased (e.g., one fee for online 

purchases, a slightly higher (or lower) 

fee for telephone purchases, and a 

slightly lower (or higher) fee for 

purchases at the ticket counter), 

payment of one of those fees is 

mandatory, and the fee paid by the 

passenger should be reported. However, 

if there is an outlet for which there is 

no ticket fee (e.g., online purchases) and 

the only additional purchase fees are for 

tickets purchased via the airline’s 

disfavored outlets, such as telephone or 

in-person sales, then the fee is not 

mandatory and would not need to be 

included in the ‘‘Total Amount’’ 

reported to the Department. 

The Department seeks comment on 

whether an ‘‘optional’’ ticket purchase 

fee collected from most tickets sold by 

a carrier should be included in the Total 

Amount of the ticket. For example, if 

there is a disfavored outlet, such as inperson sales, for which there is no ticket 

fee, but a ticket fee is collected from 

tickets sold from the outlet a majority of 

passengers use (e.g., online purchases), 

should this fee be included in the Total 

Amount of the ticket? If yes, what 

should the threshold be—greater than 

50 percent of tickets sold? 

When reporting Category Two 

Tickets, the O&D Survey Reporting 

Carrier may not have access to the 

accounting system of the Issuing Carrier. 

However, because ticket information is 

routinely shared between air carriers 

and foreign air carriers when 

transporting shared passengers, it can be 

expected that the O&D Survey Reporting 

Carrier would report as accurately as 

possible the Total Amount based on the 

information shared by the Issuing 

Carrier. 

b. Tax Amount 

The proposed rule would create a new 

reporting element, ‘‘Tax Amount.’’ 

Along with informing tax policy, this 

change would allow users of the data to 

determine the actual passenger revenue 

retained by an airline. For Category One 

Tickets, the O&D Survey Reporting 

Carrier would report the aggregate of 

fees and taxes imposed by external 

entities (e.g., airport operating 

authorities and government 

jurisdictions) and paid by the passenger 

as the Tax Amount, and would exclude 

all carrier-imposed fees. 

When reporting Category Two 

Tickets, the O&D Survey Reporting 

Carrier may not have access to the 

accounting system of the Issuing Carrier. 

However, since ticket information is 

routinely shared between air carriers 

and foreign air carriers in the normal 

course of business when transporting 

interline passengers, it can be expected 

that the O&D Survey Reporting Carrier 

would report as accurately as possible 

the Tax Amount based on the 

information shared by the Issuing 

Carrier. 

An alternative approach would be to 

require that the O&D Survey Reporting 

Carrier report all taxes and non-carrier 

fees separately, instead of the current 

proposal to aggregate the taxes and fees 

into one lump sum. The Department 

seeks comment regarding the utility to 

users and additional burden to O&D 

Survey Reporting Carriers of reporting 

individual tax and fee amounts instead 

of reporting the aggregate amount of 

taxes and fees. 

c. Currency and Fractions of a Dollar 

The rule proposes all amounts would 

be reported in United States Dollars 

(USD), rounded to two decimal places. 

The rule does not propose to impose a 

uniform methodology for the conversion 

of foreign currency to USD. O&D Survey 

Reporting Carriers would, however, be 

expected to use a currency conversion 

methodology that is generally accepted 

within the industry. 

7. Record Identification Number 

The rule proposes the creation of a 

unique Record Identification Number 

(Record ID) generated by the O&D 

Survey Reporting Carrier for each 

Eligible Ticket submitted to the O&D 

Survey. This would allow the 

Department to communicate precisely to 

the O&D Survey Reporting Carrier any 

records that may have missing or 

incomplete data elements, or are 

otherwise flagged for review. The 

Department seeks comment on how to 

standardize the format of the Record ID 

by incorporating helpful elements, such 

as the month and year of travel, plate 

code of the O&D Survey Reporting 

Carrier, ticket number, or origin/ 

destination, while at the same time 

preserving the number as a unique 

record identifier. 

8. Removal of Fare Basis Code 

The Department seeks comment on 

whether to cease reporting the Fare 

Basis Code as currently collected, the 

usefulness of such a data element, and 

how this data element could be revised 

to minimize the burden on O&D Survey 

Reporting Carriers. Currently, O&D 

Survey Reporting Carriers must map 

their fare types to a standard set of 

government-defined definitions that do 

not always match well with their 

business model-specific products, 

resulting in inconsistent fare basis codes 

being assigned across carriers. Ceasing 

to report Fare Basis Codes would also 

decrease the burden on the O&D Survey 

Reporting Carriers. Alternatively, the 

O&D Survey could collect fare class or 

a replacement data element instead, 

such as cabin class of ticket purchased. 

The Department believes that such a 

data element would prove useful to a 

variety of industry stakeholders, and 

would also allow users of the data to 

segment average fares. 

V. Proposed Changes to Dissemination 

of Data 

A. Changes to Dissemination of O&D 

Survey Data 

By collecting data on a monthly basis, 

instead of quarterly, this proposed rule 

would allow DOT the ability to 

disseminate the O&D Survey statistics 

more frequently. The Department, 

however, must balance the value of 

providing timely information to 

stakeholders with the need to protect 

the business confidentiality of the air 

carriers. Currently, O&D Survey data is 

typically released 90 days from the end 

of the reporting quarter. The Department 

proposes withholding the O&D Survey 

monthly data for a minimum of 60 days 

from the end of the Reporting Year and 

Month. DOT seeks comment on the 

appropriate amount of time to withhold 

data from dissemination that would still 

protect the competitive interests of the 

air carriers. 

Another data dissemination issue is 

the restrictions placed on the release of 

domestic carrier-submitted itineraries 

with foreign origin and destination 

points in the O&D Survey to non-U.S. 

citizens. Currently, because data 

covering the operations of foreign air 

carriers that is similar to the information 

collected in the O&D Survey is not 

available, international itinerary data in 

the Passenger Origin-Destination Survey 

is not generally disclosed because of the 

potential damaging competitive impact 

on U.S. carriers and the adverse effect 

upon the public interest that would 

result from unilateral disclosure of data 

related to foreign markets (14 CFR part 

241, Sec. 19–7(d)). The disclosure 

policy identifies exceptions for 

government interests and for air carriers 

contributing data to the O&D Survey. 

The international travel data is available 

to persons upon a showing that the 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 11 / Tuesday, January 19, 2021 / Proposed Rules 5059 

14 58 FR 51735; September 30, 1993. 

15 76 FR 3821; January 21, 2011. 

release of the data will serve specifically 

identified needs of U.S. users which are 

consistent with U.S. interests (14 CFR 

part 241, Sec. 19–7(d)). 

The Department is not contemplating 

a change to its policy regarding the 

release of international travel data; 

however, DOT proposes adding the 

descriptor ‘‘citizens and non-citizens’’ 

to the other persons offered an 

opportunity to receive the data based on 

specifically identified needs and 

consistency with U.S. interests. The 

Department seeks comment on the 

advisability of this clarification of 

language, and whether to grant noncitizens access to the O&D Survey data 

under these circumstances. Finally, 

DOT seeks comment on whether to 

replace the phrase ‘‘specifically 

identified need’’ with a defined list of 

permissible, specifically identified 

needs that would be codified in the 

regulation, and, if so, what that defined 

list should include. 

All itineraries that contain a foreign 

point and involve a U.S. O&D Survey 

Reporting Carrier in the itinerary, 

regardless of whether a domestic or 

foreign air carrier reports it, would 

continue to be made available under the 

disclosure policy discussed above. 

B. Changes to Dissemination of T–100/ 

T–100(f) 

The Department is considering 

shortening the time that it withholds 

public release of the T–100(f). Such a 

change would not only expedite public 

access to O&D Survey data, but it would 

also make the T–100(f) release more 

consistent with T–100 domestic data by 

having each released on the same 

schedule. This would simplify the 

process of using DOT’s aviation data 

products by making it easier to 

harmonize domestic and international 

planning tasks. Considering the 

increased utility of the data in the O&D 

Survey, DOT is requesting comment on 

shortening the time that T–100(f) is 

withheld from the current 6 months to 

3 months. 

VI. Complete List of Elements To Report 

Below is the proposed list of all 

elements that would be reported in the 

O&D Survey. Elements marked with an 

asterisk (*) indicate new or significantly 

changed elements. Elements for each 

submitted report would be submitted 

only once with each report; elements for 

each submitted ticket would be 

submitted once for each ticket; and 

elements submitted for each airport in 

the ticket sequence of travel would be 

submitted once for each airport in the 

sequence of travel. 

A. Elements for Each Submitted Report 

• O&D Survey Reporting Carrier 

Identifier: The two-character 

International Air Transport Association 

(IATA) identifier of the air carrier that 

reports the ticket. 

• Reporting Year: Year in which a 

coupon in a ticket is used for air 

transportation for the first time. 

• Reporting Month:* Month in which 

a coupon in a ticket is used for air 

transportation for the first time. 

B. Elements for Each Submitted Ticket 

• Record Identification Number:* A 

unique number assigned by the O&D 

Survey Reporting Carrier to each 

Eligible Ticket submitted to the O&D 

Survey, allowing DOT to precisely 

communicate to the O&D Survey 

Reporting Carrier any records that may 

have missing or incomplete data 

elements, or are otherwise flagged for 

review. 

• Issuing Carrier:* The two character 

IATA/DOT identifier of the air carrier or 

foreign air carrier that issued the ticket. 

• Total Amount: The gross total of 

funds collected on a ticket by the 

Issuing Carrier for the transportation of 

a passenger, inclusive of taxes and fees 

imposed by non-carrier entities or air 

carriers, and exclusive of ancillary fees 

not required to board the plane charged 

by the air carrier. 

• Tax Amount:* The portion of the 

Total Amount that is imposed by and 

remitted to a non-air carrier entity, such 

as a government. This value may also 

include airport-imposed taxes or fees 

assessed by privately operated airports. 

• Exchanged Ticket Indicator:* A 

record indicator when at least one form 

of payment for the ticket is one or more 

Coupons of a previously issued ticket. 

C. Elements for Each Airport in the 

Ticket Sequence of Travel 

• Airport: The IATA/DOT airport 

code of the station in the ticket’s 

sequence of travel that represents the 

point of embarkation for the flight 

segment indicated by Operating Carrier, 

Marketing Carrier, Scheduled Flight 

Year, Scheduled Flight Month. The 

elements Dwell Time, and Via Airport 

would apply to this Airport. 

• Operating Carrier: The IATA/DOT 

designator code for the air carrier or 

foreign air carrier whose aircraft are 

used to operate from the subject airport. 

• Marketing Carrier: The IATA/DOT 

designator code for the air carrier or 

foreign air carrier which marketed the 

seat on the aircraft that is scheduled to 

depart that appears on the flight 

segment for the subject airport. In the 

case of a Franchise (contract lift) or 

Marketing Codeshare, the Operating 

Carrier would be different than the 

Marketing Carrier. 

• Scheduled Flight Year:* Departure 

year in which the flight is scheduled to 

depart the subject Airport. 

• Scheduled Flight Month:* 

Departure Month in which the flight is 

scheduled to depart the subject Airport. 

• Dwell Time:* A value that describes 

the time reported in one hour 

increments between the time a 

passenger arrived at the subject airport 

and departed from the subject airport. 

When an itinerary shows that the 

passenger arrives at an airport that is 

different from the departure airport (i.e., 

there is a surface segment in the 

itinerary), the Dwell Time would still 

report the elapsed time between arrival 

and departure by air. 

• Via Airport(s):* Any points of 

scheduled stopover or connection at 

airports as part of a ‘‘direct’’ or 

‘‘through’’ flight. 

VII. Implementation and Compliance 

Date 

The Department proposes that the 

compliance date for these improvements 

to the O&D Survey would be no earlier 

than one year from the publication of 

the final rule. The Department envisions 

the submission of 12 months of data 

under Sec. 19–8 for testing and 

validation as sufficient to resolve any 

problems that may arise in the 

submission and processing of data. DOT 

seeks comment on what a reasonable 

compliance date would be based on the 

scope of the proposal in this NPRM. 

Carriers would continue to report 

under Sec. 19–7 until such a time that 

it is determined by DOT that testing and 

validation of data submitted under Sec. 

19–8 is complete and suitable to replace 

data collected under Sec. 19–7 as the 

statistics of record. The Department 

seeks comment on this reporting 

requirement. 

VIII. Regulatory Analysis and Notices 

A. E.O. 12866 (Regulatory Planning and 

Review), E.O. 13563 (Improving 

Regulation and Regulatory Review), E.O. 

13771 (Reducing Regulation and 

Controlling Regulatory Costs), and DOT 

Regulatory Policies and Procedures (49 

CFR Part 5) 

This rulemaking is not considered a 

significant regulatory action under 

section 3(f) of E.O. 12866,14 as 

supplemented by E.O. 13563,15 which 

define a significant regulatory action as 

one that is likely to result in a rule that 

may have an annual effect on the 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
5060 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 11 / Tuesday, January 19, 2021 / Proposed Rules 

economy of $100 million or more or 

adversely affect, in a material way, the 

economy, a sector of the economy, 

productivity, competition, jobs, the 

environment, public health or safety, or 

State, local, or tribal governments or 

communities. The impact on the 

economy would be less than $100 

million; it would create no conflicts 

with actions taken by other agencies; it 

would not alter budgetary impacts of 

entitlements, grants, fees, or loans; nor 

would it raise any unusual legal or 

policy issues. 

This proposed regulatory action 

would modify an existing regulation 

and is expected to result in cost savings 

to producers and users of the data as 

well as to the Federal government. The 

proposed action is also expected to 

result in benefits to users of the data, 

including the O&D Survey Reporting 

Carriers themselves. 

1. Cost Savings 

The net costs of the proposed rule 

were determined by comparing the costs 

of the existing system to the projected 

costs with the proposed modification. 

The Department’s analysis identified 

three primary categories of potential 

cost reductions: 

• Cost reductions to data producers: 

The reduction in the costs of producing 

information for government reporting, 

due to technological simplification of 

data processing and submission. 

• Cost reductions to the government: 

The reduction in costs to edit, 

manipulate, and validate the O&D data 

for release. 

• Cost reductions to the public/users 

of the data: The reduction in time that 

users must spend applying specialized 

analytical skills to manipulate and 

adjust the data to account for current 

deficiencies in the Origin and 

Destination Survey. 

Cost reductions to data producers 

include costs for accounting and 

auditing clerks, computer systems 

analysts, and computer programming 

analysts that are part of the ongoing 

production of data by the air carriers. 

Labor rates were taken based on Bureau 

of Labor Statistic’s Standard 

Occupational Classification (SOC) and 

hours were estimated based on industry 

input for current operations. Average 

cost per airline based on the labor rates 

and estimated hours was then 

calculated, and this was multiplied by 

the expected number of carriers that 

will report over a 10-year timeframe. 

The ‘‘as is’’ costs were then compared 

to the ‘‘to be’’ costs that would be 

achieved under the proposed rule. The 

‘‘to be’’ costs include the transition costs 

from the current system to the new 

system as well as an ongoing cost 

estimate for the processing of the data 

by a third-party fee-for-service provider. 

ATPCO, the leading distributor of 

airline fares and airline fare 

information, notified DOT that it can 

create software to assemble the O&D 

Survey report for any air carrier that 

exchanges ticket information using their 

services. ATPCO is a non-profit industry 

consortium that provides tariff services 

and other ticket-related services to air 

carriers and foreign air carriers ‘‘atcost.’’ ATPCO’s shared software would 

relieve air carriers from the cost of 

maintaining separate systems, each of 

which carries attendant secondary 

expenses for training and technical 

maintenance. This option would not 

only simplify the information 

technology operations, but also amortize 

the cost of creating and maintaining the 

software. Therefore, upfront costs 

resulting from this proposed action are 

expected to include the expenses related 

to developing, installing, and 

maintaining an automated reporting 

system. These upfront costs have been 

accounted for as ongoing payments to a 

third-party provider. 

Cost reductions to the government 

include systems investment costs and 

ongoing production costs. Labor rates 

were taken based on Bureau of Labor 

Statistic’s Standard Occupational 

Classification (SOC) and hours were 

based on estimates provided by the 

Bureau of Transportation Statistics 

(BTS), the agency responsible for the 

current processing. The ‘‘as is’’ 

comparison assumed the use of existing 

infrastructure while the ‘‘to be’’ 

assumed a 2-year development and 

implementation window as well as 

ongoing production costs. 

Cost reductions to the public/users 

estimated for the ‘‘as is’’ total hours 

users of the data spend on computer 

systems analysts to further prepare the 

data and the number of hours an analyst 

may take to perform final data quality 

procedures that must be done to ensure 

clean data for final analysis outputs. 

The comparison ‘‘to be’’ calculation 

includes an estimated investment cost 

for creating processes for the new data 

prior to its release to public/users. 

All costs were estimated over 10 years 

and discounted at a 7 percent rate. 

SUMMARY OF COST SAVINGS

Stakeholder 

Costs 

under the 

current 

regulation 

Costs 

under the 

proposed 

regulation 

Cost savings 

Regulated Entities (Data Producers) ........................................................................................... $8,355,747 $7,458,801 $896,946 

Government ................................................................................................................................. 18,127,583 10,912,800 7,214,783 

Public (Data Users) ..................................................................................................................... 2,452,586 196,613 2,255,973 

Total Cost Savings (10 years @7% Discount Rate) ............................................................ ........................ ........................ 10,367,702 

Annualized Cost Savings ..................................................................................................... ........................ ........................ 1,476,128 

This analysis finds that the proposed 

modification would result in annualized 

cost savings of approximately $1.5 

million at a 7 percent discount rate. 

2. Implementation and Transition Costs 

To comply with the proposed revised 

O&D Survey, a certain investment is 

likely necessary by data producers. The 

proposed modification would simplify 

the design of the O&D Survey 

sufficiently, allowing for third-party 

providers to create fee-for-service 

software that would produce the Survey 

reporting records for all air carriers. 

3. Benefits to Users of the Data 

Users of the data include both air 

carriers and industry-related entities, 

such as airports, manufacturers, 

researchers, and investors, who often 

cite the O&D Survey as one of the most 

critical datasets used to formulate shortand long-term business plans and 

forecast industry trends. Improving the 

quality of the O&D Survey data would 

also yield several other unquantified 

benefits to users of the data, including: 

• Reporting the Dwell Time between 

flights would help reduce the 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 11 / Tuesday, January 19, 2021 / Proposed Rules 5061 

16 82 FR 9339; Feb. 3, 2017. 17 2 U.S.C. 1531–1538. 18 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq. 

difficulties and potential errors 

associated with determining when a 

passenger has reached a destination 

(‘‘Trip Break’’) and when the passenger 

is simply waiting for a connecting flight 

to the intended destination. 

• Reporting all the cities in the 

itinerary would better align O&D Survey 

data with the T–100, removing much of 

the uncertainty in market validation 

analysis. This would allow the T–100 to 

facilitate validation of O&D Survey data 

submissions. 

• Reporting a larger sample size to 

capture small and rural markets with 

the statistically significant equivalence 

of larger markets would reduce the need 

to make much less accurate manual 

statistical adjustments as well as 

increase the accuracy of data available 

for the analysis of small markets. 

• Differentiating the amount of tax 

collected from the amount of total fare 

collected would remove uncertainty in 

determining the actual passenger 

revenue retained by the airlines. 

• Reporting the month and year of 

travel would enable determinations of 

market trends that are not discernable 

inside the quarterly data reports and 

would allow direct cross-validation to 

other datasets such as the T–100. 

4. Cost-Benefit Analysis Summary 

Major provisions of this 

regulatory action Benefit 10-Year costs (discounted at 7%) 

Change sample size to 40% ..... Would enable more effective oversight of Congressional programs designed to help small communities and provide 

more accurate market information for a wide variety of research and industry uses.

The estimated total reduction in cost over 10 

years discounted at 7% for all the major 

provisions would provide a reduction of 

$10,367,702 from the cost of continuing the 

current methodology.* 

Report each ticket as a single 

record.

Would simplify reporting and improves quality assurance.

Designate all certificated air 

carriers and commuter air 

carriers holding out scheduled passenger service as 

O&D Survey Reporting Carriers and require them to report the tickets that they sell.

Would simplify the reporting procedures to enable full automation of reporting, which enhances efficiency and accuracy; and eliminate loopholes in collection secure integrity 

of the sample of tickets.

Move to monthly reporting ........ Would create more useful and timely economic information; 

and align the reporting process with the corresponding industry accounting process.

Report the month/year of travel Would create more useful, timely economic information; and 

align reporting process with the corresponding industry accounting process.

Report all airports in the 

itinerary.

Would provide clarity and completeness in passenger movements.

Report Dwell Time as the number of hours between each 

arrival and next departure in 

the itinerary.

Would allow accurate determination of the passenger’s intended destination based on industry standard practice.

Report an Exchanged Ticket Indicator.Would alert data users that the fare on a specific ticket may 

require further investigation.

Elimination of Fare Basis Code 

reporting.

Would remove sensitive business information that is burdensome to report.

Report taxes paid on the ticket Would inform tax policy and allow data users to separate 

taxes paid from the total fare.

Report a Record Identification 

Number.

Would enable communication between a O&D Survey Reporting Carrier and DOT regarding data quality.

* The industry requests to align the regulation with current accounting practices, which means that the system is to be restructured, so all new 

provisions can be included in a one-time programming cost. 

This proposed rule is expected to be 

an E.O. 13771 deregulatory action.16 As 

is described above in the discussion of 

the benefit-cost analysis that was 

conducted for the proposed rule, this 

action is expected to result in 

annualized cost savings (to producers 

and users of the data and the Federal 

Government) of approximately $1.5 

million per year, while also yielding 

additional unquantified benefits to users 

of the data through improved data 

quality and utility. 

B. The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995. 

The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 17 requires Federal agencies to 

prepare a written assessment of the 

costs, benefits, and other effects of 

proposed or final rules that include a 

Federal mandate likely to result in 

expenditures by State, local, or tribal 

governments, in the aggregate, or by the 

private sector, of more than $100 

million annually. The proposed changes 

we are considering making to the 

aviation data collections would not 

result in expenditures by State, local, or 

tribal governments. 

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act 18

requires an agency to assess the impacts 

of proposed and final rules on small 

entities unless the agency determines 

that a rule is not expected to have a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities. 

The Department has evaluated the 

effects of this action on small entities 

and anticipates that the action will not 

have a significant economic impact on 

a substantial number of small entities. 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
5062 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 11 / Tuesday, January 19, 2021 / Proposed Rules 

19 64 FR 43255; August 10, 1999. 

20 49 U.S.C. 41713. 

21 65 FR 67249; November 9, 2000. 

22 44 U.S.C. 3501, et seq. 

The small entities which will begin 

reporting the data collected under this 

proposed rule routinely collect this data 

as a normal course of business, as a 

necessity to common industry 

accounting practices. The Department 

hereby certifies that this action would 

not have a significant economic impact 

on a substantial number of small 

entities. 

D. E.O. 13132 (Federalism) 

E.O. 13132 19 requires agencies to 

ensure meaningful and timely input by 

State and local officials in the 

development of regulatory policies that 

may have a substantial, direct effect on 

the States, on the relationship between 

the National Government and the States, 

or on the distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government. The Department 

has analyzed this action in accordance 

with the principles and criteria 

contained in E.O. 13132. This rule does 

not include any provision that 

substantially directly affect the States, 

the relationship between the National 

Government and the States, or the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government. It imposes no 

direct compliance costs on State and 

local governments nor does it preempt 

State law. States are already preempted 

from regulating in this area by the 

Airline Deregulation Act.20 Therefore, 

the consultation and funding 

requirements of E.O. 13132 do not 

apply. 

E. E.O. 13175 (Consultation and 

Coordination With Indian Tribal 

Governments) 

The proposed changes to the O&D 

Survey would not have tribal 

implications, impose substantial direct 

compliance costs on Indian tribal 

governments, or preempt tribal law. 

Therefore, this NPRM is exempt from 

the consultation requirements of E.O. 

13175, ‘‘Consultation and Coordination 

with Indian Tribal Governments.’’ 21 If 

tribal implications are identified during 

the comment period, the Department 

will undertake appropriate 

consultations with the affected Indian 

tribal officials. 

F. Paperwork Reduction Act 

The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 

(PRA) 22 requires that the Department 

consider the impact of paperwork and 

other information collection burdens 

imposed on the public and obtain 

approval from the Office of Management 

and Budget (OMB) for each collection of 

information it conducts, sponsors, or 

requires through regulations. 

This action contains the following 

proposed amendments to the existing 

information collection requirements 

previously approved under OMB 

Control Number 2105–AE45. As 

required by the PRA, DOT has 

submitted these proposed information 

collection amendments to OMB for its 

review. 

Summary: Origin-Destination Survey 

of Airline Passenger Traffic (O&D 

Survey), which collects information on 

the origin and destination of passengers 

including, at a minimum, information 

on: (1) The origin and destination of 

passengers in interstate air 

transportation, and (2) the number of 

passengers traveling by air between any 

two points in interstate air 

transportation. Modifications to the 

existing requirements would include 

making the air carrier that issues the 

ticket primarily the carrier responsible 

for submitting the ticket, reporting each 

ticket as a single record, expanding the 

O&D Survey Reporting Carrier 

threshold, changing the period of 

reporting to monthly, increasing the 

sample size to 40 percent, reducing the 

lag time for release of T–100(f), adding 

dwell time, adding a Via Airport data 

element, adding a Total Tax element, 

adding Travel Year and Travel Month as 

recorded elements, adding an Exchange 

Ticket Indicator, adding a Reporting 

Record Identifier, and removing the 

requirement to record the Fare Basis 

Code. 

Use: The Department is obligated by 

statute to collect and disseminate this 

information. There are many private and 

public stakeholders that depend on this 

data to make decisions on aviation 

business and policy. For example, this 

data is used by the industry to plan air 

services, develop commercial aviation 

infrastructure, measure the economic 

impact of passenger flows, and create 

business plans for start-up airlines. The 

O&D Survey is also a primary source of 

information used to quantify and 

evaluate the effectiveness of Federal 

aviation policy and programs as well as 

develop and implement new policies 

and infrastructure initiatives. 

Respondents (including number of): 

All certificated air carriers and 

commuter air carriers holding out 

scheduled passenger service. The 

Department currently estimates 

approximately 27 air carriers will 

qualify to submit data to the O&D 

Survey as envisioned by this 

rulemaking. 

Frequency: Monthly. 

Annual Burden Estimate: The 

Department is soliciting comments to— 

(1) Evaluate whether the proposed 

information requirement is necessary for 

the proper performance of the functions 

of the agency, including whether the 

information will have practical utility; 

(2) Evaluate the accuracy of the 

agency’s estimate of the burden; 

(3) Enhance the quality, utility, and 

clarity of the information to be 

collected; and 

(4) Minimize the burden of collecting 

information on those who are to 

respond, including by using appropriate 

automated, electronic, mechanical, or 

other technological collection 

techniques or other forms of information 

technology. 

Individuals and organizations may 

send comments on the information 

collection requirement by March 19, 

2021, 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time, and 

should direct them to the address listed 

in the ADDRESSES section at the 

beginning of this preamble. Comments 

should also be submitted to the Office 

of Management and Budget, Office of 

Information and Regulatory Affairs, 

Attention: Desk Officer for OST, New 

Executive Building, Room 10202, 725 

17th Street NW, Washington, DC 20053. 

G. National Environmental Policy Act 

The Department has analyzed the 

environmental impacts of this proposed 

action pursuant to the National 

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 

(NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321, et seq.) and has 

preliminarily determined that it is 

categorically excluded pursuant to DOT 

Order 5610.1C, Procedures for 

Considering Environmental Impacts (44 

FR 56420, Oct. 1, 1979). Categorical 

exclusions are actions identified in an 

agency’s NEPA implementing 

procedures that do not normally have a 

significant impact on the environment 

and therefore do not require either an 

environmental assessment (EA) or 

environmental impact statement (EIS). 

The purpose of this rulemaking is to 

update the method of collecting and 

processing aviation traffic data as well 

as expanding the number of reporting 

air carriers, the sample size collected, 

and the scope of the data reported in the 

O&D Survey. The Department does not 

anticipate any environmental impacts, 

and there are no extraordinary 

circumstances present in connection 

with this rulemaking. 

H. Regulation Identifier Number 

2105–AE45. 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 11 / Tuesday, January 19, 2021 / Proposed Rules 5063 

List of Subjects 

14 CFR Part 241 

Air carriers, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, Uniform 

system of accounts. 

14 CFR Part 298 

Air taxis, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements. 

Issued in Washington, DC. 

Elaine L. Chao, 

Secretary of Transportation. 

Proposed Rule 

Accordingly, the Department 

proposes to amend 14 CFR parts 241 

and 298 as follows: 

PART 241—UNIFORM SYSTEM OF 

ACCOUNTS AND REPORTS FOR 

LARGE CERTIFICATED AIR CARRIERS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 241 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 329, 41101, 41708, 

and 41709. 

Sec. 19–7 [Removed] 

■ 2. Remove Sec. 19–7. 

■ 3. Add Sec. 19–8 to read as follows: 

Sec. 19–8 Passenger Origin—Destination 

Survey applicability. 

(a) All U.S. certificated and commuter 

air carriers conducting scheduled 

passenger services (except helicopter 

carriers) shall participate in a Passenger 

Origin-Destination (O&D) Survey 

covering domestic and international air 

carrier operations, as prescribed by the 

Department’s Bureau of Transportation 

Statistics (BTS), Office of Airline 

Information (OAI). 

(b) A statistically valid sample of 

flight coupons shall be selected for 

reporting purposes. The sample shall 

consist of a selection of all Tickets 

involving a Reporting Carrier that meet 

the reporting criteria as defined in the 

Instructions, or further defined in 

Directives, except those participating 

O&D carriers with nonstandard ticketing 

procedures, or other special operating 

characteristics, may propose alternative 

procedures. Such departures from 

standard O&D Survey practices shall not 

be authorized unless approved in 

writing by the Director, Office of Airline 

Information under the procedures in 

Sec. 1–2. The data to be recorded and 

reported, as stipulated in the 

Instructions and Directives, shall 

include at a minimum the following 

data elements: Reporting Carrier, 

Reporting Month, Reporting Year, 

Record Identification Number, Issuing 

Carrier, Total Amount, Tax Amount, 

Exchanged Ticket Indicator, Airport, 

Operating Carrier, Marketing Carrier, 

Scheduled Flight Year, Scheduled 

Flight Month, Dwell Time and Via 

Airport(s). 

(c) Any Ticket that is submitted that 

involves a O&D Survey Reporting 

Carrier providing service in whole or in 

part under this part or 49 U.S.C. 41308 

or 41309 and any data covering the 

operations of foreign air carriers that are 

similar to the information collected in 

the Passenger Origin-Destination Survey 

are generally not available to the 

Department, the U.S. carriers, or U.S. 

interests. Therefore, because of the 

damaging competitive impact on U.S. 

carriers and the adverse effect upon the 

public interest that would result from 

unilateral disclosure of the U.S. survey 

data, the Department will not disclose 

the international data in the Passenger 

Origin-Destination Survey except: 

(1) To an air carrier directly 

participating in and contributing input 

data to the Survey or to a legal or 

consulting firm designated by an air 

carrier to use on its behalf O&D data in 

connection with a specific assignment 

by such carrier; 

(2) To parties to any proceeding 

before the Department to the extent that 

such data are relevant and material to 

the issues in the proceeding upon a 

determination to this effect by the 

Administrative Law Judge or by the 

Department’s decision-maker. Any data 

to which access is granted pursuant to 

this section may be introduced into 

evidence subject to the normal rules of 

admissibility of evidence. 

(3) To agencies and other components 

of the U.S. Government. 

(4) To other persons upon a showing 

that the release of the data will serve 

specifically identified needs of U.S. 

users which are consistent with U.S. 

interests. 

(5) To foreign governments and 

foreign users as provided in formal 

reciprocal arrangements between the 

foreign and U.S. Governments for the 

exchange of comparable O&D data. 

(6) Or as otherwise determined by the 

Department as consistent with its 

regulatory functions and 

responsibilities. 

(d) Each O&D Survey Reporting 

Carrier shall maintain its prescribed 

reportable records in a manner and at 

such locations as will permit ready 

accessibility for examination by 

representatives of DOT. The record 

retention requirements are prescribed in 

part 249 of this chapter. 

PART 298—EXEMPTIONS FOR AIR 

TAXI AND COMMUTER AIR CARRIER 

OPERATIONS 

■ 4. The authority citation for part 298 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 329 and chapters 401, 

411, and 417. 

■ 5. In § 298.60, revise paragraph (a) to 

read as follows: 

§ 298.60 General reporting instructions. 

(a) Each commuter air carrier and 

each small certificated air carrier shall 

file the applicable schedules of Form 

298–C, ‘‘Report of Financial and 

Operating Statistics for Small Aircraft 

Operators’’, Schedule T–100, ‘‘U.S. Air 

Carrier Traffic and Capacity Data by 

Nonstop Segment and On-Flight 

Market’’, and the ‘‘Passenger Origin— 

Destination Survey’’ prescribed in part 

241, Sec. 19–8, of this subchapter. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2020–29229 Filed 1–15–21; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–9X–P 

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE 

COMMISSION 

17 CFR Parts 230, 232, 239, and 249 

[Release Nos. 33–10911; 34–90773; File No. 

S7–24–20] 

RIN 3235–AM78 

Rule 144 Holding Period and Form 144 

Filings 

AGENCY: Securities and Exchange 

Commission. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Securities and Exchange 

Commission (‘‘Commission’’) is 

proposing to amend Rule 144 to revise 

the holding period determination for 

securities acquired upon the conversion 

or exchange of certain market-adjustable 

securities of issuers that do not have 

securities listed on a national securities 

exchange. Under the proposed 

amendments, the holding period for 

those securities would not begin until 

the securities are acquired upon the 

conversion or exchange of the marketadjustable security. The Commission is 

also proposing to mandate electronic 

filing of Form 144 with respect to 

securities issued by issuers subject to 

Exchange Act reporting requirements, to 

amend the filing deadline for Form 144 

to coincide with the filing deadline for 

Form 4, and to streamline the filing 

process in cases where both Form 4 and 

Form 144 are required to report the 

same transaction. Finally, the 

Commission is proposing to eliminate 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS