[Congressional Record Volume 145, Number 134 (Wednesday, October 6, 1999)]
[Senate]
[Page S12097]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                           CABIN AIR QUALITY

  Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I rise to draw attention to a problem 
my colleagues on both sides of the aisle have no doubt encountered--
poor air quality on commercial airline flights.
  Cabin environmental issues have been a part of air travel since the 
inception of commercial aircraft almost 70 years ago. However, with the 
exception of the ban on smoking on domestic flights in 1990, no major 
changes have occurred to improve the quality of air on commercial 
flights.
  Commercial airplanes operate in an environment hostile to human life. 
According to Boeing, the conditions existing outside an airplane cabin 
at modern cruise altitudes off 35,000 feet, are no more survivable by 
humans than those conditions that would be encountered outside a 
submarine at extreme ocean depths.
  To make air travel more conducive to passengers and flight crews, 
airplanes are equipped with advanced Environmental Control Systems. 
While these systems are designed to control cabin pressurization, 
ventilation and temperature control, they have not diminished the 
number of health complaints reported by travelers.
  It should come as no surprise to my colleagues that the most common 
complaints from passengers and flight crew are headaches, dizziness, 
irritable eyes and noses, and exposure to cold and flu. With the amount 
we travel, I would not be surprised to learn some of my friends in the 
Senate have suffered some of these symptoms themselves. But complaints 
of illness do not stop there. Some passengers complaints are as serious 
as chest pains or nervous system disorders. This is a serious 
consideration and should be addressed.
  Airlines say the most common complaints are a result of the reduction 
in humidity at high altitudes, or of individuals sitting in close 
proximity to one another. Airlines even say the air on a plane is 
better than the air in the terminal. But the airplane cabin is a 
unique, highly stressful environment. It's low in humidity, pressurized 
up to a cabin altitude of 8,000 feet above sea level and subject to 
continuous noise, vibration and accelerations in multiple directions. 
Air in the airplane cabin is not comparable with air in the airport 
terminal. It's apples and oranges.
  The American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning 
Engineers--or ASHRAE--recently released standards it found suitable for 
human comfort in a residential or office building. ASHRAE determined 
that environmental parameters such as air temperature and relative 
humidity--and nonenvironmental parameters such as clothing insulation 
and metabolism--all factored in to create a comfortable environment. 
Airlines immediately chimed in, saying average cabin temperatures and 
air factors fell within the ASHRAE guidelines for comfort.
  But once again, the air in an airplane cabin is not comparable to air 
in an office building. The volume, air distribution system, air 
density, relative humidity, occupant density, and unique installations 
such as lavatories, galleys all make for a unique condition. The ASHRAE 
guidelines simply do not translate to the airplane cabin.
  It is high time we make a concerted effort to study the air quality 
on our commercial flights and make some changes. Studies done by the 
airlines are simply not thorough enough. My amendment directs the 
Secretary of Transportation--in conjunction with the National Academy 
of Sciences--to conduct a study of the air on our flights. After 
completion of the 1-year study, the results will be reported to 
Congress. It is my sincere hope this will be a step toward more 
comfortable travel conditions for everyone.
  I thank the Chair.

                          ____________________