800 Independence Ave., S.W. 

Washington, DC 20591 

 December 29, 2015 

Mr. Douglas Kidd 

Executive Director 

National Association of Airline Passengers 

2689 Oakton Glen Drive 

Vienna, VA 22181 

Dear Mr. Kidd: 

This is in response to your letter dated September 3, 2014, posted to the public docket 

(No. FAA-2014-0663) petitioning the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to initiate 

rulemaking to amend Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) part 25 to include 

two new sections. In your petition, you request the FAA set uniform minimum standards 

for seat width and seat pitch. You proposed the minimums be 36 or 38 inch seat pitch 

and 19 inch seat width. 

In accordance with 14 CFR 11.73, the FAA must use the following criteria when making 

a decision as to whether or not to amend current regulations based on a petition for 

rulemaking: 

1. The immediacy of the safety or security concerns you raise; 

2. The priority of other issues the FAA must deal with; and 

3. The resources we have available to address these issues. 

After reviewing your request under these criteria, based on the current priorities for the 

FAA and the guidelines found in § 11.73, we determined the issues you raised do not 

meet the criteria to pursue rulemaking. 

First, the issues you identify related to passenger health and comfort, reduction of stress 

for cabin crews and passengers and other benefits do not raise immediate safety or 

security concerns. The chief safety benefit you have proposed is an improvement in 

emergency evacuation. We acknowledge that evacuation time is reduced with fewer 

passengers; however, the existing standards for evacuation time have been demonstrated 

to be safe. We require full-scale evacuation demonstrations and analysis that set the limit 

for the maximum number of passengers for any given airplane model. These 
2

demonstrations have interior configurations that are more critical (less seat pitch and 

higher number of passengers) than most configurations operated by the airlines. No 

airline configurations can exceed the tested number of passengers. 

Regarding the second and third factors in § 11.73, each year the FAA prioritizes its 

rulemaking projects based on issues that are crucial to the safety of the aviation 

community and the traveling public. 

In addition to the guidelines in § 11.73, Executive Order 12866 requires all rules to be 

cost-beneficial. It appears that your estimate of cost information does not consider all 

relevant factors. For example, you state that you do not anticipate additional regulatory 

costs to establish this standard. However, your proposal would result in a substantial cost 

impact. For example, on a typical Boeing 737 there are about 144 economy class seats (6 

abreast, 24 rows). Your proposal would effectively change that configuration to about 5 

abreast and 20 rows for an approximate loss of 44 seats, resulting in a 30 percent 

reduction in seats per flight and a loss of potential revenue. 

Also, as you mention in your petition, many operators are offering greater legroom as an 

extra cost option. Passengers who value comfort over cost already have the option of 

selecting those seats. However, decreasing the number of seats on an airplane would 

result in increased costs for all passengers, not only those who would choose to pay more 

for comfort. 

Although we are declining to initiate rulemaking on your petition, your comments and 

arguments for the proposed rule change will be placed in a database, which we will 

examine when we consider future rulemaking. If the FAA does pursue rulemaking in this 

area in the future, you would be able to find out and track it through one of the two 

following websites: 

 For significant rulemakings, you can find the status on the Department of 

Transportation’s (DOT) website (http://www.dot.gov/regulations/report-onsignificant-rulemakings). 

 For non-significant rulemakings, you can find the status on the DOT’s semi-annual 

regulatory agenda, through the Office of Management and Budget’s (OMB) Office of 

Information and Regulatory Affair’s (OIRA) Unified Agenda website 

(http://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/eAgendaMain). 
3

For the reasons above, we are dismissing your petition for rulemaking in accordance with 

14 CFR 11.73 and E.O. 12866. 

Sincerely, 

//s// 

Dorenda D. Baker 

Director, Aircraft Certification Service