Tarmac Delay Rule

and its Enforcement

Office of Aviation Enforcement and Proceedings

Presentation Before the 

Advisory Committee for Aviation Consumer Protection

August 7, 2012 
Outline

• Background• Consumer Rules I & II• Enforcement• Tarmac Delay Data• FAA Reauthorization• Cancellations
Setting the Stage

• January 1999

– Detroit Incident (1999)– Passenger Bill of Rights?– Congressional Hearings– Airlines Promised to:

• Adopt customer service plans to meet customers’ 

needs during long, on-board delays

• Prepare contingency plans to address such circum• Establish a task force of representatives, from airli

airports and the FAA to develop and coordinate coplans to deal with lengthy delays
Winter of 2006-2007

• Thousands of Passengers Experienced Lengthy Tarmac Delays D

Winter of 2006-2007

– December 29, 2006 – Severe Thunderstorms at DFW– February 14, 2007 – Snow/Ice Event at JFK

• Many Consumer Complaints Received by DOT.• Secretary Peters Requested Report from DOT Inspector Genera

– Investigate Delays– Provide Recommendations

• IG Audit Report (Report no. AV-2007-077)

– “Actions Needed to Minimize Long On-Board Ground Delays”– Issued September 25, 2007– Recommended that DOT Establish a Task Force to Deal with Lengt

Delays

• Task Force Established – January 3, 2008• Recommendations to DOT Secretary – November 12, 2008

– “Development of Contingency Plans for Lengthy Airline On-Board 

Delays”

– Available on Aviation Consumer Protection Division website [http://http://airconsumer.ost.dot.gov/SA_FlightDelays.htm]– Regulations.gov [Docket No. DOT-OST-2007-0108]
Enhancing Airline Passenge

Protections - Rulemaking Time

• Consumer Rule I

– November 15, 2007 – Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (A– December 8, 2008 – Notice of Proposed Rulemaking– December 30, 2009 – Final Rule– April 29, 2010 – Effective

• Consumer Rule II

– June 8, 2010 – Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

– April 18, 2011 – Final Rule– August 23, 2011 – Effective for Tarmac Delays

• Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) Document
Enhanced Protections for Airline Passeng

CFR 259.2): Applicability

• Consumer Rule I: Applied to covered U.S. carriers operating passenge

(scheduled or public charter) using any aircraft with a design capacity more passenger seats for their operations at large and medium hub aall provisions apply to charters.)

• Consumer Rule II: Expanded the rule to include foreign carriers that o

from the U.S.

• The rule does not apply to foreign charters that operate to and from t

States if no new passengers are picked up in the United States.

• NOTE: The rule applies to all of a covered carrier’s flights, both dome

international involving aircraft with fewer than 30 seats, if a carrier opaircraft with 30 or more passenger seats.

• The rule does not apply to airports directly.
Adoption of Plan (14 CFR 25

• Applies to Covered U.S. and Foreign Carriers at Certain U.S. Air• Applies to Covered Carrier Operations at Large, Medium, Small 

Hub Airports

– Preliminary CY2011 Airport data available on the FAA’s web

http://www.faa.gov/airports/planning_capacity/passengerats/passenger/index.cfm?year=2011

• Note: The requirement to adopt and follow a plan applies only 

delay events that occur at a covered U.S. Airport

• Carriers Must Adhere to Plans
Airport Definitions

• Large Hub Airport

– 1.00 percent of total U.S. Enplanements

• Medium Hub Airport

– At least 0.25 percent but less than 1.00 percent o

U.S. enplanements

• Small Hub Airport

– At least 0.05 percent but less than 0.25 percent o

U.S. Enplanements

• Non-hub Airports

– 10,000 or more annual enplanements but less th

percent of the country’s annual passenger boardi
Contingency Plan: Time Allowab

Tarmac

• At a minimum, the contingency plan must include:• Time Limits:

– (1) Domestic Flights

• 3-Hour Deplaning Rule• Subject to PIC determination of safety/security issue or ATC advice that re

terminal would significantly disrupt airport operations

– (2) International Flights (Including Foreign Air Carriers)

• 4-Hour Deplaning Rule• Same appropriate safety, security, and ATC exception

s

• Clock begins when the aircraft door is closed or pass

are no longer allowed to deplane
Contingency Plan: Food, Water 

Operable Lavs

• (3) Adequate food and potable water (on all flights) i

– Aircraft Leaves the Gate (Departure Delay)– Touches Down if the Aircraft Remains on the Tarmac (Arriv

• (4) Operable lavatory facilities, and adequate medica

attention while on the tarmac (on all flights)
Contingency Plan: Notifications 

295.4(5) &(6)

Carriers must notify passengers:• Regarding status of delay every 30 minutes w

aircraft is delayed, including reasons for delay known)

• Of the opportunity to deplane from an aircra

gate or another disembarkation area...

• ...beginning 30 minutes after scheduled depa

time and every 30 minutes thereafter (if oppactually exists)
Contingency Plan: Notifications (

• NOTE: Carriers are not required to re-board a passe

elects to deplane.

• Carriers are encouraged to announce to passengers t

deplaning will be at their own risk and the flight couwithout them.
Contingency Plan: Sufficient Reso

and Coordination

• (7) Assurance of sufficient resources to implement the pl• (8) Assurance that the plan has been coordinated with air

authorities (including terminal facility operators where ap

at each U.S. large hub airport, medium hub airport, small 

airport and non-hub airport that the carrier serves, as weregular U.S. diversion airports

• (9) Assurance that the plan has been coordinated with U.

and Border Protection (CBP) at each large U.S. hub airporhub airport, small hub airport and non-hub airport that is used for that carrier’s international flights, including dive

airports

• (10) Assurance that the plan has been coordinated with t

Transportation Security Administration (TSA) at each U.S. 

airport, medium hub airport, small hub airport and non-hthat the carrier serves, including diversion airports.
Code Share Responsibility 

(Part 259.4 (c))

• Carrier under whose code the service is marketed go

different from the operating carrier)...

• ...UNLESS, marketing carrier specifies in its contract o

carriage that the operating carrier’s plan governs
Unfair and Deceptive Pract

• A carrier’s failure to comply with the 

assurances required by this rule and coin its Contingency Plan for Lengthy TarmDelays will be considered to be an unfadeceptive practice within the meaning U.S.C. 41712 that is subject to enforcemaction by the Department.
Record Retention: Part 259.

• Covered carriers must retain for at least two y

information about any on-ground delay that least three hours.

• The records must include information about

(1) the length of the delay;(2) the cause of the delay; (3) the steps taken to minimize hardships fpassengers; (4) whether the flight ultimately took off oreturned to the gate; and (5) an explanation for the tarmac delay
Posting Tarmac Delay Plan Website

CFR 259.6)

• Each U.S. air carrier that has a website a

each foreign air carrier that has a websmarketed to U.S. consumers, and that irequired to adopt a contingency plan folengthy tarmac delays, shall post its curcontingency plan on its website in easilaccessible form.
Enforcement

• Pre-Tarmac Delay Rule – Rochester Tarmac Delay Incident• Current Enforcement Efforts – More than 300 reports of violations of variou

provision of the rule investigated – Sources of Reports

• Consumer Complaints Filed Directly with the Depa• BTS On-time Performance Numbers• Federal Aviation Administration• News Media
Orders and Warning Lette

– Orders

• American Eagle (May 29, 2011)

– $900K assessed civil penalty– 608 passengers delayed on tarmac on 15 inbound at ORD for more than 

– Order included a single tarmac delay incident that occurred at JFK Intern

in which 34 passengers delayed on tarmac for more than 3 hours

• Part 234 – Reporting Violations

– United– Pinnacle

• Foreign Carrier (Air India)

– Website posting (Contingency Plan/Customer Service Plan)– Optional Fee notice

– Warning Letters 

• 5 carriers involving multiple flights and multiple aspects of the Ta

Rule
BTS Tarmac Delay Times

August 2011 is the fwhich data included domestic flights and international flights United States (U.S. abeginning Aug. 23. July 2011 was the lawhich data included flights operated by areporting on-time dBureau of TransportMay 2010 was the fafter the 3-hour rule effect.Source: Bureau of Transpor

First Full Month After Rule
FAA Reauthorization

• FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2

– Section 42301 requires U.S. carriers and o

of large hub, medium hub, small hub, or nU.S. airports, to submit tarmac delay contiplans to the Department for review and ap

• 390 airport plans received• 61 carrier plans received
Rule Impact on Cancellatio

• Supplemental review and analysis of th

Impact of the tarmac delay rule currentunderway

• Results expected end of summer
Questions??