[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 154 (Friday, August 9, 2024)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 65272-65294]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-17323]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Office of the Secretary
14 CFR Parts 259 and 261
[Docket No. DOT-OST-2024-0091]
RIN 2105-AF15
Family Seating in Air Transportation
AGENCY: Office of the Secretary (OST), Department of Transportation
(DOT).
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of Transportation (Department or DOT) is
proposing to require U.S. and foreign air carriers to seat children
aged 13 and under adjacent to at least one accompanying adult at no
additional cost beyond the fare, subject to limited exceptions. The
Department considers family seating to be a basic service, essential
for the provision of adequate air transportation, that must be included
in the advertised fare. Under this proposal, a carrier's failure to
provide family seating would subject it to civil penalties on a per
passenger (child) basis, and if the carrier charged families a fee
beyond the fare to secure family seating, the carrier would be subject
to civil penalties for each fee imposed.
DATES: Comments should be filed by October 8, 2024. Late-filed comments
will be considered to the extent practicable.
ADDRESSES: You may file comments identified by the docket number DOT-
OST-2024-0091 by any of the following methods:
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 or Courier: West Building Ground Floor, Room
W12-140,
[[Page 65273]]
1200 New Jersey Ave. SE, between 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. ET, Monday
through Friday, except Federal Holidays.
Fax: (202) 493-2251.
Instructions: You must include the agency name and docket number
DOT-OST-2024-0091 or the Regulatory Identification Number (RIN) for the
rulemaking at the beginning of your comment. All comments received will
be posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided.
Privacy Act: Anyone can search the electronic form of all comments
received in any of the dockets by the name of the individual submitting
the comment (or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf of an
association, business, labor union, etc.). For information on DOT's
compliance with the Privacy Act, please visit https://www.transportation.gov/privacy.
Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents and
comments received, go to http://www.regulations.gov or to the street
address listed above. Follow the online instructions for accessing the
docket.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Maegan Johnson, Senior Trial Attorney,
Nicole Smith, Trial Attorney, or Blane A. Workie, Assistant General
Counsel, Office of Aviation Consumer Protection, U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Ave. SE, Washington, DC 20590, 202-366-
9342, 202-366-7152 (fax), [email protected], [email protected],
or [email protected] (email).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Executive Summary
A. Background
The FAA Extension, Safety, and Security Act of 2016 (2016 FAA
Extension Act) requires the Department to review U.S. air carrier
family seating policies and, if appropriate, direct air carriers to
establish policies that enable young children, age 13 and under, to sit
adjacent to an accompanying family member, age 14 or over, to the
maximum extent practicable and at no additional cost.\1\ In response to
this directive, in 2017, the Department's Office of Aviation Consumer
Protection (OACP) reviewed family seating complaints received between
June 1, 2016 and June 1, 2017, to better understand the issues facing
consumers. OACP also conducted a review of the nine largest U.S.
airlines' \2\ family seating policies and had discussions with each of
these airlines to learn about their family seating policies, practices,
and procedures. Based on its review of airline family seating policies
and consumer complaints, the Department determined that it was
unnecessary to direct airlines to establish policies that enable a
child to sit next to an adult family member at that time.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Public Law 114-190, codified at 49 U.S.C. 42301 note prec.
\2\ The Department focused its review on the largest U.S.
airlines, i.e., a certificated U.S. air carrier that accounted for
at least one percent of domestic scheduled passenger revenues. OACP
reviewed the following airlines: Alaska Airlines, American Airlines,
Delta Air Lines, Frontier Airlines, Hawaiian Airlines, JetBlue
Airways, Southwest Airlines, Spirit Airlines, and United Airlines.
Together, these airlines and their operating partners accounted for
approximately 95 percent of domestic passenger air traffic.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
OACP conducted a follow-up review in 2019 and learned that airlines
had implemented enhanced approaches for providing family seating (e.g.,
more than one airline had developed an automated system to assign young
children to seats next to an adult family member), but airlines did not
guarantee family seating. Also, the total number of family seating
complaints against U.S. airlines received by the Department trended
slightly higher from July 2017 through June 2019.\3\ In the Joint
Explanatory Statement accompanying the Consolidated Appropriations Act
of 2019, the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations (Committees)
requested that the Department provide a report to the Committees ``on
its review of family seating policies and a justification for its
decision to defer to current airline seating policies,'' noting that
the Department has stated that it completed its review and deferred to
current airline family seating policies.\4\ The Department submitted
the requested report to the Committees on March 12, 2020. In that
report, the Department concluded that ``[i]n lieu of directing airlines
to establish specific seating policies, [it would] continue[ ] to
update the family seating web page . . . [and] monitor and review the
family seating complaints it receives on a regular basis to better
understand what is and is not working.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ In calendar year 2017, 0.38% of complaints (44 complaints)
filed with the Department by consumers against U.S. airlines
concerned family seating. In calendar year 2018, 0.51% of air travel
service complaints (46 complaints) against U.S. airlines concerned
family seating. In calendar year 2019, 2.4% of air travel service
complaints (230 family seating complaints) against U.S. airlines
concerned family seating. This increase corresponded with a consumer
advocacy group's effort to encourage air travelers to file
complaints with the Department if they were dissatisfied with an
experience related to family seating.
\4\ See https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/CRPT-115srpt268/html/CRPT-115srpt268.htm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In July 2021, DOT Secretary Buttigieg and other officials from the
Department met with consumer advocates who, as one of their top
priorities, urged the Department to issue a rule requiring airlines to
seat children next to at least one adult family member at no additional
cost. The consumer advocates emphasized that, while the number of
complaints about children being seated apart from an accompanying adult
on a flight may not be large, the harm to the children who are
separated is significant. After the meeting, the Department publicly
stated that it would review this matter again to determine what other
actions should be taken.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ See Travel Weekly, DOT takes another look at how families
are split on airplanes, available at https://www.travelweekly.com/Travel-News/Airline-News/DOT-reexamining-family-seating-airplanes
(Sept. 13, 2021).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In July 2022, the Department issued a notice encouraging airlines
to review and improve, as needed, their policies and procedures to
ensure young children are seated adjacent to at least one accompanying
adult to the maximum extent practicable and at no additional cost.\6\
In the notice, the Department asked airlines to review and improve
their policies and procedures and stated that, four months from the
date of the notice, it would initiate a review of airlines' family
seating policies to ensure that children aged 13 or younger would be
seated adjacent to an accompanying adult without paying an additional
fee. In November 2022, the Department reviewed the ten largest U.S.
airlines' \7\ family seating policies and discovered that airlines
generally promised to make efforts to seat families together, but many
required families to pay an additional fee to be assured that a young
child traveling in the party would be seated adjacent to an
accompanying adult.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ See https://www.transportation.gov/individuals/aviation-consumer-protection/family-seating/June-2022-notice.
\7\ The Department focused its review on the largest U.S.
airlines, i.e., a certificated U.S. air carrier that accounted for
at least 1-percent of domestic scheduled passenger revenues. OACP
reviewed the following airlines: Alaska Airlines, Allegiant Air,
American Airlines, Delta Air Lines, Frontier Airlines, Hawaiian
Airlines, JetBlue Airways, Southwest Airlines, Spirit Airlines, and
United Airlines.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In February 2023, the President called upon Congress to ban airline
family seating fees and announced that the Department would publish a
family seating fee dashboard and initiate a rulemaking to ban the
practice.\8\ The
[[Page 65274]]
Secretary of Transportation (Secretary) also announced the Department's
plan to launch a dashboard that provides information to air travelers
on the largest airlines' guarantees to seat young children adjacent to
at least one accompanying adult without the traveler having to pay an
additional fee.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ See https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2023/02/01/fact-sheet-president-biden-highlights-new-progress-on-his-competition-agenda/. Also, see https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/speeches-remarks/2023/02/07/remarks-of-president-joe-biden-state-of-the-union-address-as-prepared-for-delivery/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In anticipation of the dashboard's release, some airlines amended
their family seating policies and added language to their customer
service plans guaranteeing that they would provide adjacent seats for
young children 13 or under traveling with an accompanying adult at no
additional cost, subject to limited conditions. When the Department's
family seating dashboard was published on OACP's website on March 6,
2023, only three out of the ten largest U.S. carriers had committed to
guaranteeing adjacent seating for families at no additional cost. Since
then, one additional airline has made that commitment.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ See https://www.transportation.gov/airconsumer/airline-family-seating-dashboard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Because most airlines would not guarantee that they would seat a
parent and a child together at no extra cost, the Department initiated
this rulemaking to ensure a young child is able to sit adjacent to an
accompanying adult. On March 10, 2023, the Secretary also submitted a
legislative proposal to Congress to amend chapter 417 of title 49, U.S.
Code, to ensure that young children are seated adjacent to at least one
accompanying adult at no additional cost, subject to certain
conditions.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ See https://www.transportation.gov/resources/individuals/aviation-consumer-protection/family-seating-legislative-proposal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A. Need for a Rulemaking
The Department views family seating as a basic service, essential
for the provision of adequate air transportation, that should be
provided to passengers at no additional cost. As described in the
Regulatory Impact Analysis (RIA) developed in support of this
rulemaking, the Department estimates the percentage of consumers,
including families with young children, who may pay seating fees.
According to complaints received by DOT, some parents mistakenly assume
that they will be seated next to their young children when they
purchase tickets for air transportation.\11\ These passengers assume
that fee-free family seating is already required because a parent would
need to supervise and tend to their child during a flight, not to
mention the potential harm that may occur from a child being separated
from a parent during a flight.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ See Redacted Sample of Consumer Complaints Related to Seat
Assignment Fees for Families Traveling with Children 13 and Under
Received by the Department of Transportation's Office of Aviation
Consumer Protection between 2019 and 2022: https://www.regulations.gov/document/DOT-OST-2022-0109-0023.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Based on the nature and severity of the complaints the Department
has received, and the reluctance shown by the majority of the largest
U.S. airlines to amend their family seating policies to guarantee
family seating at no additional cost, demonstrates a need for action in
this area. Additionally, the Department received several hundred
comments on its Enhancing Transparency of Airline Ancillary Service
Fees NPRM that urged the Department to ban family seating fees, rather
than requiring that those fees be disclosed to consumers early in the
purchasing process.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ See, e.g., Comment from National Consumers League,
available at https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOT-OST-2022-0109-0097 (``DOT should not assume that air carriers will stop charging
seat reservation fees for family seating following the enactment of
the proposed ancillary fee transparency regulations. To end this
practice, the undersigned consumer and traveler rights organizations
continue to urge the Department to utilize its existing authorities
to require airlines to seat children 13 years old and younger with
accompanying adults at no additional charge.''); Comment from PUBLIC
INTEREST RESEARCH GROUP, available at, https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOT-OST-2022-0109-0383 (``. . . OACP receives complaints
involving children as young as 11 months old not seated next to
their adult travel partner. This is unacceptable. We support the
OACP's position that airlines should not charge additional fees for
a child 13 or younger to be seated next to an accompanying
adult.''); Comment from AARP, available at, https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOT-OST-2022-0109-0093 (``. . . the high
fees for changing or cancelling travel plans and fees for families
to reserve seats together do not promote affordable access to travel
by air. While disclosure is an essential first step, we would
encourage the Department, and the airlines themselves, to reduce or
eliminate such fees wherever possible.''); Comment from Travel Agent
Org, available at, https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOT-OST-2022-0109-0492 (``Suggestion: Follow the way of other counites like
Canada's APPR and require free adjacent seating for families with
kids under 13.'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Specifically, the Department is concerned about the hardship
experienced by families when they are unable to ensure family seating
in advance of travel and about families paying extra fees just to
ensure that they are seated with their children. Furthermore, a
carrier's failure to provide family seating harms not only passengers
traveling with young children, but also other passengers on the
aircraft who may be asked or directed to give up their seats to
accommodate families on the day of travel or who may be required to sit
next to an unsupervised child.
Consumers traveling with young children have reported feeling undue
stress and anxiety when they are unable to receive assurances from
carriers before the date of travel that they will be seated next to
their young children. Although most airlines have indicated that their
gate agents and flight crew will attempt to seat families together
during the boarding process, these attempts are often taxing and,
sometimes, unsuccessful. In one passenger complaint received by the
Department, the passenger alleges that she purchased a ``basic''
ticket, and she was assigned a seat in a different row than her 4-year-
old son.\13\ She states that her son was assigned to a seat in between
two men that she had never met before, and the flight attendant onboard
the aircraft refused to assist her with asking passengers to shuffle
seats because it was a full flight. Similarly, the Department received
another consumer complaint alleging that a 10-year-old child suffered
an anxiety attack when, at the start of boarding, the child was still
assigned to a seat in a separate row from his parents.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ See Redacted Sample of Consumer Complaints Related to Seat
Assignment Fees for Families Traveling with Children 13 and Under
Received by the Department of Transportation's Office of Aviation
Consumer Protection between 2019 and 2022: https://www.regulations.gov/document/DOT-OST-2022-0109-0023.
\14\ See Redacted Sample of Consumer Complaints Related to Seat
Assignment Fees for Families Traveling with Children 13 and Under
Received by the Department of Transportation's Office of Aviation
Consumer Protection between 2019 and 2022: https://www.regulations.gov/document/DOT-OST-2022-0109-0023.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Department is also concerned that the carriers that do not
guarantee family seating advise passengers to purchase advance seat
assignments, purchase seats in a higher fare class, or pay a fee to
receive early boarding on the aircraft, simply to ensure that families
are seated together. Many U.S. airlines offer basic economy, or another
equivalent low-cost economy ticket. These low-cost economy ticket
options typically do not allow passengers to select a seat assignment
for free. Thus, if a passenger wants to ensure that they will receive a
seat assignment next to their child in advance of the flight, carriers
that do not guarantee free family seating typically advise passengers
to either pay the advance seat assignment selection fee, or purchase
seats that cost more than the low-cost economy tickets to be assured of
seats adjacent to their young child. Thus, families traveling with
young children are being forced to purchase a more expensive fare to
[[Page 65275]]
ensure that they are seated with their young children.
Most carriers have indicated to the Department that they would try
to make accommodations at the airport to ensure that families are
seated together, regardless of the fare purchased by the passenger.
Nonetheless, passengers who purchase low-fare economy tickets for their
family have reported having difficulty when attempting to obtain family
seating at the gate, and have, in some instances, been shamed by
airlines for failing to purchase a higher fare ticket to ensure that
their family will be assigned adjacent seats.
To illustrate, one passenger alleged that she purchased inexpensive
seats on a large U.S. carrier and when she approached a gate agent on
the day of travel, the agent initially refused to assign her a seat
next to her two-year old and four-year old children and stated that she
should have booked in a ``higher class.'' \15\ The passenger states
that the agent eventually facilitated new seat assignments for her
family, but she was upset by the lack of empathy shown by the agent and
the unpleasantness of the encounter. In another complaint received by
the Department, a passenger alleges that she was seated eight rows
apart from her 3-year-old child and that the airline stated that it
hoped she would be able to sit with her child on the day of travel or,
in the alternative, that the passenger could pay for upgraded
seats.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ See Redacted Sample of Consumer Complaints Related to Seat
Assignment Fees for Families Traveling with Children 13 and Under
Received by the Department of Transportation's Office of Aviation
Consumer Protection between 2019 and 2022: https://www.regulations.gov/document/DOT-OST-2022-0109-0023.
\16\ See Redacted Sample of Consumer Complaints Related to Seat
Assignment Fees for Families Traveling with Children 13 and Under
Received by the Department of Transportation's Office of Aviation
Consumer Protection between 2019 and 2022: https://www.regulations.gov/document/DOT-OST-2022-0109-0023.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Department also notes that even if a passenger reserves seats
in advance, pays a fee to selects seats, or purchases seats in a higher
class to ensure family seating, the passenger may be later assigned
seats away from a young child in their travel party if the carrier
changes the flight's aircraft. For example, the Department received a
complaint from a passenger who alleges that he booked a flight for
himself and his 8-year-old daughter. He states that when he booked his
flight, he made sure that he reserved a seat directly next to his
daughter, but when the airline changed the flight schedule, they also
changed his seat assignment, and he was no longer seated next to his
daughter.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ See Redacted Sample of Consumer Complaints Related to Seat
Assignment Fees for Families Traveling with Children 13 and Under
Received by the Department of Transportation's Office of Aviation
Consumer Protection between 2019 and 2022: https://www.regulations.gov/document/DOT-OST-2022-0109-0023.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Families have also identified child safety concerns as a major
cause of stress and anxiety when a carrier does not provide passengers
with assurances that they will be seated next to their young child on a
flight.\18\ In one passenger complaint received by DOT, a passenger
alleges that her three children, all under the age of 13, were assigned
seats away from the accompanying adults in their travel party. She
states that she was concerned about the seating arrangement because
there would be no responsible adult available to help her children with
masks or life vests in the case of an emergency, no one to help her
children load baggage into the overhead bin, and no assurances that her
children were protected sitting next to strangers.\19\ No family should
have to worry about the safety of a young child, including during a
potential emergency, because their child is seated rows away and next
to complete strangers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ Hundreds of commenters on the Department's Enhancing
Transparency of Airline Ancillary Service Fees NPRM noted that
family seating ``is a basic human safety right. No child should have
to sit next to strangers on a plane, airlines need to proactively
offer children seating next to an accompanying adult.'' See, e.g.,
https://www.regulations.gov/document/DOT-OST-2022-0109-0696.
\19\ See Redacted Sample of Consumer Complaints Related to Seat
Assignment Fees for Families Traveling with Children 13 and Under
Received by the Department of Transportation's Office of Aviation
Consumer Protection between 2019 and 2022: https://www.regulations.gov/document/DOT-OST-2022-0109-0023.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Additionally, carriers that do not guarantee family seating to
passengers traveling with children cause harm to passengers traveling
without children. When a carrier assigns a young child a seat away from
their accompanying adult, other passengers must make the decision to
sit next to an unsupervised child or to forfeit the seat they may have
paid to obtain, to remedy a situation the carrier created. When a
parent and child are seated apart, carriers rely heavily on the
goodwill of other passengers on the aircraft to relinquish their seats
to allow a child and a parent to be seated next to each other on the
aircraft. However, due to carriers' seating policies, many passengers
may have paid an additional fee for the seat they selected or have paid
an additional fee to board the aircraft early. If the passenger elects
not to relocate, the passenger would then sit next to, and potentially
have to look after, an unsupervised child. Similarly, the Department
views it as unreasonable for passengers who paid for early boarding to
relinquish their seats to families traveling with young children to
remedy the situation the carrier created. The seat switching process
also creates a transaction cost on all parties involved, including
delays in boarding and departure time, that could have been avoided if
the family had already been assigned seats together prior to boarding,
or in the case of open seating carriers, boarded in a manner that
ensured family seating.
As described above, the Department has received various complaints
describing stress-inducing incidents where families with very young
children were assigned seats apart from a parent, and complaints
describing fees that had to be paid to ensure that a parent was seated
adjacent to their child. These additional costs can be a significant
expense and can be a barrier for families who cannot afford to pay
additional fees to ensure that a child in the travel party is seated
adjacent to at least one accompanying adult.
In this rulemaking, the Department proposes to amend 14 CFR part
259, Enhanced Protections for Airline Passengers, and create a new 14
CFR part 261 Family Seating, to require U.S. and foreign air carriers
to seat children aged 13 and under next to at least one accompanying
adult at no additional cost, as defined in this rulemaking, subject to
limited exceptions. Under this proposal, a carrier would be prohibited
from imposing additional charges to provide adjacent seating. Failure
to provide family seating at no additional cost beyond the fare,
including by charging for seat selection or upgraded priority boarding,
would subject the carrier to civil penalties on a per passenger (child)
basis or a per fee basis. If an airline fails to provide adjacent
seating as required by the proposed rule, it would be required to
provide the passengers remedial choices.
[[Page 65276]]
B. Statutory Authority
1. Authority To Regulate Under the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2024
Section 516 of the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2024 (2024 FAA
Reauthorization Act, Reauthorization Act, or Act) \20\ provides that
the Secretary of Transportation ``shall issue a notice of proposed
rulemaking to establish a policy'' that directs assigned seating air
carriers to seat young children, under 14 years of age, adjacent to an
accompanying adult to the greatest extent practicable, if the adjacent
seats are available any time after the ticket has been issued, but
before the first passenger boards the flight.\21\ Additionally, the
Reauthorization Act also prohibits air carriers from charging a fee or
imposing an additional cost beyond the ticket price to provide this
service. Further, the Act states that section 516 should not be
construed in such a way as to ``allow the Secretary to impose a change
in the overall seating or boarding policy of an air carrier that has an
open or flexible seating policy in place that generally allows adjacent
family seating as described in'' that section. Pursuant to Section 516
of the Reauthorization Act, DOT proposes in this NPRM to require
assigned seating carriers to provide family seating to young children
and an accompanying adult on aircraft at no additional cost. The
Department also proposes to require carriers with an open or flexible
seating policy to board passengers in a manner that allows a young
child and an accompanying adult to secure adjacent seatings on the
flight at no additional charge. This proposal, made pursuant to
existing statutory authority at 49 U.S.C. 41702 and 41712 as explained
in the following paragraphs, is consistent with paragraph (c) of
section 516, which prohibits DOT from imposing a change in the overall
seating or boarding policies of open or flexible seating carriers. The
Department's proposals provide open and flexible seating carriers with
the flexibility to work within the framework of their existing seating
policies to determine how to board passengers in a way that would allow
a young child to secure a seat adjacent to an accompanying adult at no
additional charge. For example, a carrier, operating under its existing
open or flexible seating policies could ensure family seating by
blocking off seats in a specific section of the aircraft dedicated to
passengers traveling with families, or by requiring families to be at
the gate at a certain time before boarding to obtain family seating.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ FAA Reauthorization Act of 2024, Public Law 118-63, Sec.
516, 138 Stat. 1025, 1197-1198 (2024).
\21\ In addition to the mandate to issue an NPRM in the 2024 FAA
Reauthorization Act, in 2016 Congress also required DOT to
``establish a policy directing all air carriers . . . to establish
policies that enable young children to sit adjacent to an
accompanying family member over age 13 to the maximum extent
practicable and at no additional cost.'' See section 2309(a) of the
2016 FAA Extension Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Authority To Regulate Under 49 U.S.C. 41702
With respect to the proposed requirements in this NPRM applicable
to air carriers,\22\ the Department issues this NPRM pursuant to
additional authority under 49 U.S.C. 41702, which states that ``an air
carrier shall provide safe and adequate interstate air
transportation.'' \23\ The Civil Aeronautics Board (CAB), the
predecessor to the U.S. Department of Transportation, had the authority
to ensure that air carriers provide ``safe and adequate service,
equipment and facilities'' under section 404(a) of the Federal Aviation
Act of 1958, which was later codified in 49 U.S.C. 41702.\24\ The CAB
relied on section 404(a) to adopt a regulation that restricted smoking
on flights by dividing aircraft cabins into smoking and nonsmoking
sections. The CAB reasoned that its authority to require air carriers
to provide ``adequate service'' under Sec. 41702 includes ensuring
that the service does not cause passenger discomfort and annoyance.\25\
The CAB's regulation and interpretation of ``adequate service'' was
later challenged by a passenger, but the U.S. Court of Appeals for the
Fifth Circuit found that ``adequate service'' referred both to the
number of flights provided by an air carrier and the quality of service
provided to passengers.\26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\22\ Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 70102, an ``air carrier'' means a
citizen of the United States undertaking by any means, directly or
indirectly, to provide air transportation.
\23\ Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 40102(a)(25) ``interstate air
transportation'' means the transportation of passengers or property
by aircraft as a common carrier for compensation, or the
transportation of mail by aircraft--(A) between a place in--(i) a
State, territory, or possession of the United States and a place in
the District of Columbia or another State, territory, or possession
of the United States; (ii) Hawaii and another place in Hawaii
through the airspace over a place outside Hawaii; (iii) the District
of Columbia and another place in the District of Columbia; or (iv) a
territory or possession of the United States and another place in
the same territory or possession; and (B) when any part of the
transportation is by aircraft.
\24\ Codification was effectuated in Public Law 103-272 (enacted
July 5, 1994).
\25\ ``[T]he extent and depth of passenger discomfort and
annoyance from unsegregated and unregulated smoking on aircraft
compels the conclusion that service which does not provide for the
effective separation of smokers constitutes neither adequate service
nor reasonable practice and cannot be permitted under the act.'' 38
FR 12209 (May 10, 1973).
\26\ See Diefenthal v. Civil Aeronautics Bd., 681 F.2d 1039 (5th
Cir. 1982) (adequate service can refer both to the number of flights
scheduled as well as the quality of service provided).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
More recently, the Department relied on its authority to provide
safe and adequate interstate transportation in Sec. 41702 in its 2016
final rule prohibiting the use of e-cigarettes on-board aircraft.\27\
In that final rule, the Department reasoned that it had the authority
to rely on the ``adequate'' prong in Sec. 41702 to ban the use of e-
cigarettes. The Department argued that discomfort from e-cigarettes was
like the discomfort described by the CAB when it chose to restrict
smoking on aircraft in 1973.\28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\27\ 81 FR 11415 (March 4, 2016).
\28\ 81 FR 11415, 11421 (March 4, 2016).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Department's proposal in this NPRM promotes ``adequate'' air
transportation because requiring airlines to ensure that young children
are seated adjacent to an accompanying adult at no additional cost
would decrease the significant hardship, stress, and anxiety
experienced by families when a young child is not seated next to an
accompanying adult on an aircraft. Passenger complaints received by DOT
allege that both parents and their children have experienced anxiety
and significant stress when faced with the risk of being separated
during their flights.\29\ Failing to provide family seating also causes
discomfort and harm to passengers who are not traveling with young
children since these passengers may be asked to voluntarily give up
their seats on the day of travel to accommodate a young child and
accompanying adult. Forcing passengers, especially those passengers who
paid for a specific seat assignment, to choose either to sit next to an
unsupervised child or to relinquish their seat and move to a
potentially undesirable location on the aircraft causes discomfort and
annoyance.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\29\ See Redacted Sample of Consumer Complaints Related to Seat
Assignment Fees for Families Traveling with Children 13 and Under
Received by the Department of Transportation's Office of Aviation
Consumer Protection between 2019 and 2022: https://www.regulations.gov/document/DOT-OST-2022-0109-0023.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition, the rule promotes ``adequate'' service because
ensuring that young children are seated adjacent to an accompanying
adult is an essential component of basic air transportation service
that passengers reasonably believe should be included in their air
transportation fare. Adequate service includes the quality of the
service
[[Page 65277]]
provided to passengers.\30\ Current carrier practices of encouraging
families to pay fees for a basic service that should be included with
the air transportation purchased degrades the quality of the service
provided to passengers by the carrier and can ultimately be harmful to
any passengers on the aircraft. As such, the Department's authority to
ensure adequate service under Sec. 41702 supports the proposed
requirements in this NPRM.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\30\ See Diefenthal, 681 F.2d at 1044 (adequate service can
refer both to the number of flights scheduled as well as to the
quality of service provided).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Also, in light of passenger complaints received by DOT, the
Department's proposal in this NPRM promotes ``adequate'' air
transportation under Sec. 41702 by establishing further protections
for young children traveling in air transportation. According to
passenger complaints, young children who are separated from an
accompanying adult may be more vulnerable to harm when traveling on an
aircraft. Unlike children traveling as unaccompanied minors, who
benefit from a service provided by airlines that typically involves the
airline charging a fee to monitor and supervise the transport of a
young child, young children who travel unsupervised because the airline
failed to provide family seating may undergo unnecessary emotional
trauma,\31\ may be harmed by another passenger during air
transportation,\32\ or may not receive the requisite assistance to
protect themselves during an emergency on the aircraft. Passenger
concerns about protecting children traveling alone on aircraft
therefore justify the Department's use of its authority to ensure
adequate transportation under Sec. 41702.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\31\ See Redacted Sample of Consumer Complaints Related to Seat
Assignment Fees for Families Traveling with Children 13 and Under
Received by the Department of Transportation's Office of Aviation
Consumer Protection between 2019 and 2022: https://www.regulations.gov/document/DOT-OST-2022-0109-0023.
\32\ Press Release, U.S. Fed. Bureau of Investigation, Sexual
Assault Aboard Aircraft: Raising Awareness About a Serious Federal
Crime, (April 26, 2018), https://www.fbi.gov/news/stories/raising-awareness-about-sexual-assault-aboard-aircraft-042618.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. Authority To Regulate Under 49 U.S.C. 41712
The Department is also issuing this NPRM pursuant to its authority
in 49 U.S.C. 41712 to prohibit unfair or deceptive practices by air
carriers, foreign air carriers, or ticket agents in air transportation
or the sale of air transportation.
On December 7, 2020, the Department issued a final rule that, among
other things, requires the Department to provide its reasoning for
concluding that a certain practice is unfair or deceptive to consumers
when issuing aviation consumer protection rulemakings that are not
specifically required by statute and are based on the Department's
general authority to prohibit unfair or deceptive practices under
section 41712.\33\ That final rule adopted definitions for the terms
``unfair'' and ``deceptive.'' A practice is ``unfair'' to consumers if
it causes or is likely to cause substantial injury, which is not
reasonably avoidable, and the harm is not outweighed by benefits to
consumers or competition.\34\ A practice is ``deceptive'' to consumers
if it is likely to mislead a consumer, acting reasonably under the
circumstances, with respect to a material matter. A matter is material
if it is likely to have affected the consumer's conduct or decision
with respect to a product or service.\35\ Proof of intent is not
necessary to establish unfairness or deception.\36\ The Department
elaborated further on the elements of ``unfair'' and ``deceptive'' in a
2022 guidance document.\37\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\33\ See Final Rule, Defining Unfair or Deceptive Practices, 85
FR 78707, Dec. 7, 2020. See also https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2022-08-29/pdf/2022-18170.pdf.
\34\ 14 CFR 399.79(b)(1).
\35\ 14 CFR 399.79(b)(2).
\36\ 14 CFR 399.79(c).
\37\ 87 FR 52677 (August 28, 2022).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
a. Unfair Practice
Pursuant to its authority to prohibit unfair practices under
section 41712, the Department proposes to ensure that carriers allow
young children to be seated adjacent to an accompanying adult on a
flight at no additional cost. In support of its proposal, the
Department reasons that a carrier's practice of not allowing a young
child or young children to be seated adjacent to an accompanying adult
unless they pay a fee to ensure adjacent seating is unfair because it
causes substantial harm to consumers, the harm is not reasonably
avoidable, and the harm is not outweighed by the benefits to consumers
and competition. Although the number of family seating complaints that
the Department has received is low, a substantial harm may be
demonstrated by a large amount of harm to a small number of people \38\
or unwarranted health and safety risk.\39\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\38\ A parent attempting to travel on a major U.S. airline in
2021 complained to the Department that the airline seated her 11-
month-old and 4-year-old children by themselves. The airline did not
dispute this occurred and stated that DOT had yet to put any
directives in place for U.S. airlines about family seating. In
another example, a complaint against another major airline alleged
that in 2020 the airline seated a six-year-old apart from a parent
and that the traveler next to the child proceeded to watch R-rated
content. The airline did not dispute this occurred. Further, one
complaint alleges that a child with autism was initially separated
from his parents, which caused the child's mother to suffer a panic
attack. While another complaint alleges that a 10-year-old child
suffered an anxiety attack when initially separated from their
parents. Another family alleged being asked to pay $200 per ticket
after being separated from a 5-year-old. Redacted Sample of Consumer
Complaints Related to Seat Assignment Fees for Families Traveling
with Children 13 and Under Received by the Department of
Transportation's Office of Aviation Consumer Protection between 2019
and 2022: https://www.regulations.gov/document/DOT-OST-2022-0109-0023.
\39\ FTC has found actions to be unfair if they pose a risk of
physical harm to children or enticed children to engage in risky or
dangerous activities. FTC Policy Statement on Unfairness, available
at, https://www.ftc.gov/legal-library/browse/ftc-policy-statement-unfairness (Dec. 17, 1980) (citing to Philip Morris, Inc., 82 F.T.C.
16 (1973) (approving consent decree to cease distributing
unsolicited razor blades directly to homes: ``[T]he distribution of
the razor blades, constitutes a hazard to the health and safety of
persons . . . particularly young children.'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Department believes there is substantial harm whenever a young
child is separated from an accompanying adult on a flight due to
unwarranted health and safety risks to the child. Consumers report
experiencing significant stress and anxiety when they are assigned
seats apart from their young children, who, in some circumstances, are
too young to feed themselves, fasten their own seatbelt, go to the
bathroom, and, in some cases, communicate. Furthermore, as discussed
above, young children who travel unsupervised because the airline
failed to provide family seating may undergo unnecessary emotional
trauma,\40\ may be harmed by another passenger during air
transportation,\41\ or may not receive the requisite assistance
[[Page 65278]]
to protect themselves during an emergency on the aircraft.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\40\ See Redacted Sample of Consumer Complaints Related to Seat
Assignment Fees for Families Traveling with Children 13 and Under
Received by the Department of Transportation's Office of Aviation
Consumer Protection between 2019 and 2022: https://www.regulations.gov/document/DOT-OST-2022-0109-0023https://www.regulations.gov/document/DOT-OST-2022-0109-0023.
\41\ Press Release, U.S. Fed. Bureau of Investigation, Sexual
Assault Aboard Aircraft: Raising Awareness About a Serious Federal
Crime, (April 26, 2018), https://www.fbi.gov/news/stories/raising-awareness-about-sexual-assaultaboard-aircraft-042618. See also
https://www.fbi.gov/news/stories/raising-awareness-about-sexual-assault-aboard-aircraft-042618.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Department also considers the monetary harm to parents, who are
required to purchase adjacent seats to ensure the safety of their
children, to be substantial and to satisfy the first prong of the
unfairness test. Other travelers may choose to purchase adjacent seats
for convenience or companionship, but they would not face the same
concerns that parents with young children would if they are not seated
together because young children are not able to defend and protect
themselves from harm in the same way as an adult. A parent traveling
with young children may feel compelled to pay for adjacent seating,
even though the cost is high, to ease their minds about the health and
safety of their children. For similar reasons, parents traveling with
young children are currently not able to take advantage of basic
economy fares that do not include the ability to select seats or to be
seated together, thereby creating higher travel costs for those with
young children.
Furthermore, the practice of not guaranteeing that young children
will be seated adjacent to at least one accompanying adult at no
additional cost harms other passengers on the aircraft. Most carriers
have moved to a seating model where people may pay to select their seat
in advance or pay for early boarding. Airlines charge different fees
for different seats based on perceived benefits. Despite passengers
paying these fees, airlines may ask these passengers to ``voluntarily''
forfeit their seats for families traveling with young children and move
to a less desirable seat, with the alternative of being seated next to
an unsupervised child and causing stress and anxiety for that child's
parent.
For families traveling with young children, the monetary harm
suffered by consumers who are coerced into paying more to sit adjacent
to their children is not reasonably avoidable because the only way for
families to ensure that they are seated together on carriers that do
not guarantee family seating is to pay a seat-selection fee, book a
seat in a higher fare class, or pay an early boarding fee. For many
parents, sitting apart from their child is not an option, and those
parents feel compelled to pay the fee or may even be unable to travel
altogether because of the additional cost. Furthermore, as discussed
above, even those paying fees for adjacent seats may be separated from
their children in the event of an aircraft change and would also be
unable to avoid the harm of being seated apart from their young
children. In addition, the harm to passengers not traveling with young
children is not reasonably avoidable because these passengers do not
know, prior to travel, if they will be asked to relinquish their seat
to accommodate a family traveling with a young child or if they will be
seated next to an unsupervised child.
The Department believes that the tangible and significant harm to
consumers is not outweighed by countervailing benefits to consumers or
competition. As noted above, consumers face substantial harm when a
carrier refuses to seat families traveling with young children together
at no additional cost, or when the carrier relies on other passengers
to choose between sitting next to an unsupervised child or giving up
their preferred seat. Further, the countervailing benefits to consumers
and competition of permitting family seating fees do not outweigh this
substantial harm to consumers. The Department does not believe the harm
outweighs any benefit to consumers, such as any potential slight
increase in fare cost for consumers traveling without children or
families that do not currently pay advance seat fees.
In fact, the Department believes that its proposal will promote
competition. Today, airlines are required to state the full price of a
ticket, inclusive of all mandatory fees, in their published fares.
However, airlines are not required to include fees for adjacent seats
in the advertised fare, as they are considered optional services.\42\
Many families with young children consider fees for adjacent seats as
not truly optional and effectively part of the price. Fees for adjacent
seats can quickly add up and transform what seemed like a cheap airline
ticket into a pricey one. The addition of a seating fee to the
advertised fare effectively raises the final cost of air transportation
for families traveling with young children. Banning fees for seating
young children adjacent to an accompanying adult will enhance
competition, as families will be able to use the published fare to
accurately comparison shop between airline offers. Effective
competition is enabled when consumers have the information necessary to
make informed choices.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\42\ Optional Services is a service the airline provides, for a
fee, beyond passenger air transportation. See defined in 14 CFR
399.85(d).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Department also proposes to prohibit unfair practices by
requiring a carrier to disclose that it provides family seating at no
additional cost and to disclose any carrier-imposed requirements that
attach to its family seating policy and are permitted under the
proposed rule that may impact the consumer's ability to secure adjacent
seats, including carrier requirements for check-in or boarding. These
disclosures would be required on a carrier's online platforms and when
a consumer calls the carrier's reservation center to inquire about a
fare or seating or to book a ticket.
A carrier's failure to disclose that it provides family seating at
no additional cost would result in substantial monetary harm to
families because uninformed consumers would be likely to needlessly
purchase seats assignments, or seats in a higher fair class to, secure
family seating, which would result in higher costs to families
traveling in air transportation. Additionally, failing to disclose the
exceptions to the carrier's family seating policy would cause
significant harm to consumers because uninformed families run the risk
of unwittingly forfeiting their ability to secure adjacent seats e.g.,
a family may be refused family seating, resulting in a young child or
young children sitting apart from a parent or other responsible adult,
if the family was unaware of the need to check-in at the boarding gate
at a specific time.
The harm is not reasonably avoidable because consumers would have
no way of learning the parameters of a carrier's family seating policy
if a carrier failed to make the disclosures proposed in this NPRM. The
only way that a consumer would learn that a carrier provides family
seating for free, or that certain exceptions to the carrier's family
seating policy exist, would be if the consumer made a direct inquiry to
the carrier. The Department believes that such an inquiry is unlikely
to occur because an ordinary consumer would reasonably assume that a
carrier has provided pertinent information about its seating policies,
including for family seating to enable young children to sit next to a
parent or other responsible adult, on its online platform.
Finally, the harm to consumers is not outweighed by the benefit
because, as discussed above, the additional cost of purchasing assigned
seats or seats in a higher fare class would raise the cost of air
transportation for families traveling with young children.
Additionally, uninformed consumers run the risk of failing to secure
family seating.
b. Deceptive Practice
Pursuant to its authority to prohibit deceptive practices under
section 41712, the Department is proposing to require carriers to
disclose that they will seat a young child adjacent to an accompanying
adult at no additional cost with limited exceptions and disclose the
exceptions that may impact
[[Page 65279]]
the consumer's ability to secure adjacent seats, if the proposal to ban
family seating fees is adopted in final. The Department is proposing to
require this disclosure on carrier's online platforms and when a
customer calls the carrier's reservation center to inquire about a fare
or seating or to book a ticket. Without this disclosure, it is likely
that a consumer, acting reasonably under the circumstances, would be
misled and unnecessarily pay for adjacent seats or inadvertently not
take the required steps to secure adjacent seats. The carrier's
disclosure that it will provide family seating at no additional cost,
and disclosure of the applicable exceptions to its policy, is a
material matter for consumers, as the disclosure prevents unnecessary
payment of fees and ensures families know what they need to do to
ensure they are seated together.\43\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\43\ See Fed. Trade Comm'n, FTC Policy Statement on Deception,
103 F.T.C. 174, 182 (1984) (``Information has been found material
where it concerns the purpose, safety, efficacy, or cost, of the
product or service. Information is also likely to be material if it
concerns durability, performance, warranties, or quality'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. Hearing Procedures
For the reasons discussed in the Statutory Authority section of
this NPRM, the Department proposes that failing to provide family
seating at no additional cost is an unfair practice. The Department
also proposes that, if family seating fees are banned, it would be a
deceptive practice for carriers not to disclose to families that they
will seat a young child adjacent to an accompanying adult at no
additional cost with limited exceptions.
Pursuant to 14 CFR 399.75(b)(1), any interested party may file a
petition to hold a hearing on the proposed rule prior to the close of
the comment period. As stated in the DATES section, petitions must
therefore be received by October 8, 2024.
14 CFR 399.75(b)(2) provides that the Department will grant a
petition if the petitioner makes a clear and convincing showing that
granting the petition is in the public interest. Factors considered in
determining whether a petition is in the public interest include: (1)
Whether the proposed rule depends on conclusions concerning one or more
specific scientific, technical, economic, or other factual issues that
are genuinely in dispute or that may not satisfy the requirements of
the Information Quality Act; (2) whether the ordinary public comment
process is unlikely to provide an adequate examination of the issues to
permit a fully informed judgment; (3) whether the resolution of the
disputed factual issues would likely have a material effect on the
costs and benefits of the proposed rule; (4) whether the requested
hearing would advance the consideration of the proposed rule and the
General Counsel's ability to make the rulemaking determinations
required by Sec. 399.75; and (5) whether the hearing would
unreasonably delay completion of the rulemaking. DOT must also provide
an explanation of the basis for the decision on a petition. (14 CFR
399.75(b)(3)).
D. Summary of Proposed Regulatory Provisions
The Department is proposing to enhance its aviation consumer
protection requirements by adopting a new part under Subchapter A of
Title 14 of the Code of Federal regulations, 14 CFR part 261, which
would require U.S. and foreign air carriers to allow young children to
be seated adjacent to an accompanying adult on a flight at no
additional cost. In addition, the Department seeks to enhance its
aviation consumer protection requirements by amending 14 CFR part 259
to require carriers to notify passengers of their family seating
policies in their customer service plans. The Department's proposed
protections are described in the summary table below.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject Proposal
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applicability................ Would apply to U.S. and foreign air
carriers that operate or market
scheduled passenger flights to, within,
or from the U.S. on at least one
aircraft that has a designed capacity of
30 or more passenger seats.
Family Seating Requirement... Would require adjacent seats for a young
child (age 13 and under) and an
accompanying adult (age 14 and over)
within the same class of service at no
additional cost beyond the fare, with
limited exceptions. This Part clarifies
that family seating is a basic service,
essential for the provision of adequate
air transportation, that must be
included in the advertised fare.
Exceptions to Family Seating Would provide four exceptions to the
Requirements. family seating requirement when: (1) the
young child is not traveling with an
accompanying adult; (2) the booking
party or accompanying adult declines to
accept the adjacent seats or chooses to
sit apart from the young child; (3) the
number of young children traveling makes
it impossible to provide adjacent seats
due to the layout of the aircraft; or
(4) the young child and/or accompanying
adult do not comply with the carrier's
check-in or boarding requirements.
In situations where it is impossible to
seat multiple young children adjacent to
an accompanying adult, carriers must
seat the young children across the aisle
from, or directly in front of or
directly behind the accompanying adult
at no additional cost beyond the fare.
Available Family Seating at If adjacent seats are available at
Booking. booking, would require a carrier that
assigns seats in advance of the date of
departure of a flight (Assigned Seating
Carrier) to make every reasonable effort
to provide adjacent seat assignments to
a young child and accompanying adult at
the time of booking, but no later than
48 hours after the tickets are
purchased, for each flight segment,
unless an exception applies.
No Available Family Seating If adjacent seats are not available at
at Booking--Options, booking, an Assigned Seating Carrier
Notification by Airline, and must provide the booking party the
Decision by Passenger. choice between: (1) a full refund or,
(2) the option to wait for family
seating to become available for the
booked flight closer to the scheduled
departure.
For flights purchased more than two weeks
prior to departure, would require an
Assigned Seating Carrier to contact the
booking party within 48 hours after the
ticket for air transportation has been
purchased and provide the booking party
a minimum of seven days to choose
between: (1) a full refund or, (2) the
option to wait for family seating to
become available for the booked flight
closer to the scheduled departure.
[[Page 65280]]
Requires an Assigned Seating Carrier, for
flights purchased less than two weeks
prior to departure, to contact the
booking party as soon as practical after
the ticket for air transportation has
been purchased and provide the booking
party a reasonable amount of time to
choose between: (1) a full refund or,
(2) the option to wait for family
seating to become available for the
booked flight closer to the scheduled
departure.
Waiting for Available Family Would specify that when a booking party
Seating--Adjacent Seats chooses to wait for available family
Become Available. seating, and adjacent seats become
available before the first passenger
boards the aircraft, an Assigned Seating
Carrier must notify the booking party
and assign the adjacent seats to a young
child and accompanying adult as soon as
the seats become available.
Waiting for Available Family Would specify that when a passenger
Seating--Adjacent Seats Do chooses to wait for available family
Not Become Available. seating, and adjacent seats do not
become available before the first
passenger boards the aircraft, an
Assigned Seating Carrier must offer the
booking party and/or the accompanying
adult the choice between free rebooking
on the next flight with available family
seating at no additional cost or
continuing travel in seats that are not
adjacent.
Disclosure of Family Seating Would require carriers to clearly and
Policy. conspicuously disclose their family
seating policies on their public-facing
online platforms and when a customer
calls the carrier's reservation center
to inquire about a fare or seating or to
book a ticket that the carrier will
allow a young child to be seated
adjacent to an accompanying adult at no
additional cost beyond the fare. The
disclosure is also required to include
any exceptions to the family seating
requirement, including any carrier
requirements for check-in and boarding
that may impact the ability to secure
adjacent seats.
Mitigating Passenger Harm-- Requires a carrier to mitigate passenger
Options Available. harm if the carrier fails to provide
family seating as proposed by offering a
choice between: (1) rebooking at no
additional cost on the next flight with
available family seating, (2)
transporting the young child or young
children and an accompanying adult on
the flight without adjacent seats, or
(3) a refund.
Mitigating Passenger Harm-- States that the amount of refund that the
Refund Calculation. booking party is entitled to receive
would be the entire cost of the ticket
if family seating as required by this
rule is not provided on any segment of
the outbound flight and the young child
and passengers on that reservation
decide not to travel to destination.
States that the amount of refund in all
other cases would be the cost of the
unused portion of the ticket.
Mitigating Passenger Harm-- Would specify that, if a carrier fails to
Right of Passengers Stuck at provide family seating as specified in
Connecting Airport on this rule and that failure results in
Outbound Trip. the young child and accompanying adult
being stuck at a connecting airport on
the outbound trip and they choose to no
longer travel, the carrier must provide
return transportation to the origination
airport at no cost.
Customer Service Plan........ Would require that carriers update their
Customer Service Plans to include a
commitment to notify passengers that the
carrier will provide adjacent seats to a
young child and accompanying adult at no
additional cost.
Civil Penalty................ States that carriers that violate the
family seating requirements would be
subject to civil penalties. Specifies
that if young children and an
accompanying adult are not provided
adjacent seats as required by the
proposed rule and none of the exceptions
apply, then a separate violation would
occur for each child that is not seated
next to an accompanying adult.
Also, specifies that when a fee beyond
the fare is imposed to secure family
seating, a separate violation occurs for
each fee imposed.
Removal of Passengers for Clarifies that this rule would not
Safety or Operational prohibit carriers from removing or
Reasons. reseating a young child and an
accompanying adult, because of safety or
operational reasons. Proposes that the
selection of passengers for removal must
be non-discriminatory.
Inclusion of Fees for Basic Seeks comments on whether fees for other
Services in Advertised Fare. basic airline services should be
required to be included in the
advertised fare.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
E. Summary of Regulatory Impact Analysis
Summary of Economic Impacts, Annual
[2022 Dollars, millions]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Benefits (+): Benefits (+).
Reduced disutility to passengers Unquantified........................
from separation of families
traveling by air.
Costs (-): Costs (-):
Implementation costs................ $5-21............................... Implementation costs.
Net societal benefits (costs)........... Not applicable...................... Net societal benefits (costs).
Transfers (0): Transfers (0):
Increase in consumer surplus from $910................................ Increase in consumer surplus
elimination of seating fees for from elimination of seating
families (airlines to families). fees for families (airlines
to families).
Decrease in consumer surplus for $760................................
solo air passengers (solo
passengers to airlines).
Decrease in consumer surplus for $51................................. Decrease in consumer surplus
families who do not pay for seat for families who do not pay
reservations in the baseline for seat reservations in the
(families to airlines). baseline (families to
airlines).
Airline revenue loss (airlines to $85................................. Airline revenue loss
consumers). (airlines to consumers)
Benefits (+): Benefits (+):
[[Page 65281]]
Reduced disutility to passengers Unquantified........................ Reduced disutility to
from separation of families passengers from separation
traveling by air. of families traveling by
air.
Costs (-): Costs (-):
Implementation costs................ $5-21............................... Implementation costs.
Net societal benefits (costs)........... Not applicable...................... Net societal benefits (costs).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Benefits, which we did not quantify, are due to the reduction in
disutility to passengers from separation of families traveling by air.
Costs are the upfront costs that carriers will incur to adjust their
ticketing systems to allow them to distinguish passengers traveling as
a family from other passengers. Aside from these implementation costs,
the other quantified effects of the proposed rule are transfers.
Families who currently pay for seat assignments will experience an
increase in consumer surplus when their seating fees are eliminated.
The elimination of seating fees encourages families to increase air
travel, which puts upward pressure on airfares. Passengers that do not
travel as a family and families who do not currently purchase seat
reservations experience a loss in consumer surplus due to an airfare
increase. Airlines initially will incur a loss in revenue primarily
from the loss in seating fee revenue from families, as well as a
smaller amount from the reduced travel on the part of solo passengers
and families who do not pay seating fees in the baselines.
II. Discussion of Proposals
A. Overview of Proposal
In this rulemaking, the Department proposes to require U.S. and
foreign air carriers to ensure that young children aged 13 and under
are seated adjacent to at least one accompanying adult aged 14 or over
at no additional cost, subject to limited exceptions.\44\ Under this
rulemaking, the specific requirements that U.S. and foreign air
carriers would be required to follow to ensure a young child is seated
adjacent to an accompanying adult at no additional cost differ
depending on the carrier's seating method. There are different
requirements for an open seating carrier and an assigned seating
carrier. However, in both cases, carriers would be prohibited from
imposing additional charges for adjacent family seating. Further, under
this proposed rule, carriers would be required to take certain steps to
mitigate passenger harm if they fail to provide family seating as
required by the proposed rule. Additionally, the Department would
consider it a violation each time a young child is not provided the
opportunity to secure a seat adjacent to an accompanying adult as
required by the proposed rule, including each time an additional charge
is incurred to secure an adjacent seat. Each violation could subject an
airline to civil penalties. The Department believes that the proposed
requirements along with the proposed exceptions will ensure that
carriers have policies that enable young children to sit adjacent to an
accompanying adult to the maximum extent practicable and at no
additional cost.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\44\ Although the provisions in the proposed regulation on
family seating do not reference adjacent seating for individuals
with disabilities, the Department has separate regulations in 14 CFR
part 382, pursuant to the Air Carrier Access Act, that specify when
a carrier is permitted to require a passenger with a disability to
travel with a safety assistant, and when a carrier is required to
provide an adjoining seat at no additional cost to a person
assisting a passenger with a disability, such as a personal care
attendant, a safety assistant, or an interpreter. See 14 CFR 382.29
and 14 CFR 382.81(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Department seeks comment on its proposal to require carriers to
provide family seating at no additional cost beyond the fare, and
whether its proposal protects families adequately. Should families
traveling with young children continue to be forced to purchase
adjacent seating in order to ensure that they will sit together, or
should carriers provide this service to passengers traveling with young
children at no additional cost beyond the fare, as is being proposed?
Additionally, the Department seeks comment on whether its family
seating requirements provide needed protections for children on
aircraft. The Department is also examining whether fees for other basic
airline services such as booking a ticket should be required to be
included in the advertised fare and solicits comment in this area, as
described in Section K.
A. Applicability
In this NPRM, the Department proposes to adopt family seating
requirements in 14 CFR part 261 that would apply to U.S. and foreign
air carriers that operate and market scheduled passenger flights to,
from, or within the U.S. using at least one aircraft that has a
designed capacity of 30 or more passenger seats. The Department is of
the view that the rulemaking should apply to both marketing and
operating carriers because they both interact with consumers regarding
seating, including families traveling with young children. Marketing
carriers interact with consumers in advance of travel since they
typically hold out services to the public, ticket passengers, offer
reservation services, and assign seats. Operating carriers interact
with consumers on the date of the travel by assisting families who are
not seated adjacent to their young children. The Department seeks
comment on its decision to apply this rulemaking to both marketing and
operating carriers.
As proposed, this rulemaking would apply to carriers that operate
aircraft with a designed seating capacity of 30 or more seats. This is
consistent with the Department's past practice, as many of the
Department's consumer protection requirements do not apply to small
U.S. carriers that operate passenger service exclusively with aircraft
that have fewer than 30 seats.\45\ Very few passengers travel on
aircraft with fewer than 30 seats.\46\ Although aircraft designed to
have a maximum passenger capacity of 60 seats or fewer are considered
small aircraft,\47\ DOT has not proposed to exclude them because a
substantial number of passengers are transported on flights operated by
aircraft with between 30 and 60 seats. According to data from the
Department's Bureau of Transportation Statistics (BTS), a total of
760,159,634 domestic passengers were transported in 2022, 734,090,772
(or 96.6%) of which
[[Page 65282]]
were on flights using aircraft of more than 60 seats, 23,717,481 (or
3.1%) of which were on flights using aircraft with 30 through 60 seats,
and 2,351,381 (or 0.3%) were on flights using aircraft with fewer than
30 seats.\48\ We solicit comment on whether the Department should cover
carriers as proposed or limit or expand the carriers covered by this
rulemaking. We ask proponents and opponents of any alternative to
provide arguments and evidence in support of their positions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\45\ The requirements relating to tarmac contingency plans and
reporting tarmac delays, specific customer service plan provisions,
and denied boarding compensation also do not apply to these
carriers. See 14 CFR 259.2, 14 CFR 250.2.
\46\ According to data from the Department's Bureau of
Transportation Statistics (BTS), a total of 760,159,634 domestic
passengers were transported in 2022 and 2,351,381 or 0.3% were on
flights using aircraft with less than 30 seats. See Bureau of
Transportation Statistics ``T-100 Domestic Segment Data (World Area
Code)'', https://www.bts.gov/browse-statistical-products-and-data/bts-publications/data-bank-28ds-t-100-domestic-segment-data.
\47\ An air carrier is a small business if it provides air
transportation only with small aircraft (i.e., aircraft with up to
60 seats/18,000 pound payload capacity). See 14 CFR 399.73.
\48\ See Bureau of Transportation Statistics ``T-100 Domestic
Segment Data (World Area Code)'', https://www.bts.gov/browse-statistical-products-and-data/bts-publications/data-bank-28ds-t-100-domestic-segment-data.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Family Seating Requirements (Definitions)
The Department proposes to require carriers to ensure adjacent
seating for a young child and an accompanying adult within the same
class of service at no additional cost with limited exceptions when
there is available family seating. The Department proposes definitions
for each key term.
1. Adjacent Seating
In this NPRM, the Department proposes to define ``adjacent
seating'' as two or more seats positioned next to each other in the
same row of the aircraft and not separated by an aisle. The
Department's family seating dashboard published on its aviation
consumer protection website identifies those carriers that guarantee
adjacent seats for a child 13 or under and an accompanying adult at no
additional cost for all fare types, subject to limited conditions.
However, the Department does not define adjacent seating on the
Dashboard, and some carriers have interpreted adjacent seating to
include a seat across the aisle from another seat. By proposing a
definition of adjacent seats, the Department is ensuring that there is
consistency in the service that families with young children receive
across airlines. Further, the Department believes that its proposed
definition of adjacent seats is necessary to ensure that an
accompanying adult is seated close enough to care adequately for a
young child and to ease anxiety about the seat that a child may be
assigned on the aircraft. The Department seeks comment on its proposed
definition of adjacent. Specifically, should adjacent be defined as two
seats next to each other in the same row and not separated by an aisle
as proposed? Or, conversely, should airlines be permitted to seat a
child across the aisle from or near an accompanying adult, and if the
latter, what should ``near'' mean?
2. Young Child or Young Children
The Department is proposing to define ``young child or young
children'' in this NPRM to mean an individual(s) age 13 or under on the
date of scheduled departure of the purchased flight. This definition is
consistent with section 516 of the 2024 FAA Reauthorization which
defines ``young child'' to mean ``an individual who has not attained 14
years of age.''
The Department considered modeling its definition of young child
after language in FAA Advisory Circular 120-27F \49\ addressing air
carrier weight and balance control programs, which defines a child to
be less than 13 years of age. The Department chose ``13 or under'', as
prescribed in the Act, instead of the ``under 13'' age designation, as
prescribed in FAA Advisory Circular 120-27F, because the definition in
the FAA Advisory Circular was singularly focused on the weight and
balance safety aspects of the aircraft and did not consider the mental
fitness of a child and whether a child is old enough to be safely
seated alone. The Department also considered the age that airlines
permit children to travel unaccompanied as standard passengers. Many
U.S. airlines do not accept children traveling alone as standard
passengers unless they are 15 or older, although some U.S. airlines do
allow children 12 or older to travel alone.\50\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\49\ AC 120--27F--Aircraft Weight and Balance Control, available
at https://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/advisory_circulars/index.cfm/go/document.information/documentID/1035868 (May 6, 2019).
\50\ Allegiant, American, Delta, Frontier, Spirit, and United do
not allow children under 15 to travel alone for safety reasons. See
https://www.allegiantair.com/traveling-with-children, https://www.delta.com/us/en/children-infant-travel/unaccompanied-minor-program, https://www.united.com/en/us/fly/travel/accessibility-and-assistance/unaccompanied-minors.html, https://www.aa.com/i18n/travel-info/special-assistance/unaccompanied-minors.jsp, https://customersupport.spirit.com/en-us/category/article/KA-01160, and
https://faq.flyfrontier.com/help/traveling-with-children-or-pets.
Hawaiian and Southwest allow children ages 12 and up to travel
alone. See https://www.southwest.com/help/flying-with-children/unaccompanied-minors-flying-alone, and https://www.hawaiianairlines.com/legal/domestic-contract-of-carriage/rule-12.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Department believes that children should not be separated from
their families on a flight because, if they are separated, they are not
supervised or monitored by their families or by airline staff. In this
NPRM, the Department proposes to apply family seating policies to
children aged 13 or under. We solicit comment on whether 13 or under is
the appropriate definition for a young child. We encourage commenters
to provide data or other evidence as support for why a particular age
group is appropriate.
The Department also recognizes that there may be situations where
there are multiple young children traveling on the same reservation
record as an accompanying adult. This rule seeks to ensure, to the
extent feasible given the layout of an aircraft, that young children
are seated adjacent to an accompanying adult. We request comment on
whether the Department should specify that airlines must seat the
children across the aisle from, or directly in front of or directly
behind the accompanying adult, when multiple young children are
traveling with an accompanying adult.
3. Accompanying Adult and Booking Party
The Department is proposing to define ``accompanying adult'' as an
individual age 14 or over on the date of the scheduled departure who is
traveling with a young child or young children on the same reservation
record. The Department uses ``individual,'' rather than family member,
when defining an accompanying adult because the adult may not be
related to the young child. For example, the accompanying adult may be
a family friend or caretaker.
When considering the appropriate age to use in the definition of an
accompanying adult, the Department took into account airline policies
on the minimum age for children to travel unaccompanied as young
adults. A review of the policies of the 10 largest U.S. airlines
revealed that airlines' policies vary and that there is no universally
agreed upon age when a child is considered a young adult. Airlines use
12, 13, 14, and 15 as the cutoff for children to travel alone as young
adults.\51\ The Department also considered the cognitive ability of
children and the ages that children are given greater responsibility.
The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) allows individuals who are 15
years of age or older to be seated in an exit seat. This means that the
FAA has determined that a 15-year-old has the capacity to understand
and follow the crew's instruction and perform safety functions without
the assistance of an adult companion or parent. The Department also
considered the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), which sets 14 years old
as the minimum age of
[[Page 65283]]
employment. A 14-year-old is deemed to have the capacity to take on
certain paid responsibilities outside of the home.\52\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\51\ Children who are 12 years old or older can fly alone on
Hawaiian and Southwest, children who are 13 years old or older can
fly alone on Alaska, children who are 14 years old or older can fly
alone on JetBlue, and children who are 15 years old or older can fly
alone on Allegiant, American, Delta, Frontier, Spirit, and United.
\52\ The FLSA allows for the employment of minors between 14 and
16 years of age subject to limitations and if it does not interfere
with their schooling or with their health and well-being. 29 CFR
570.31. Minors 14 and 15 years of age are restricted from employment
in occupations that involve certain tasks, including, but not
limited to, manufacturing, mining, operating a motor vehicle,
working in a boiler room, etc. 29 CFR 570.33. Minors 14 and 15 years
of age may be employed in occupations involving office and clerical
work, cashiering, bagging and carrying out customers' orders, etc.
29 CFR 570.34.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In evaluating whether to propose an accompanying adult to be a 14-
or 15-year-old, the Department factored in the benefit of avoiding an
age gap between the age of a young child and accompanying adult.
Avoiding such a gap would ensure that the family seating protections
would also apply to a young child traveling with an older teenager,
like a sibling. For these reasons, the Department is proposing to
define an accompanying adult to be an individual age 14 or over on the
scheduled departure date.
The Department requests comment on its definition of an
accompanying adult. Specifically, is a 14-year-old too young to act as
an accompanying adult to a young child? And if so, what should be the
appropriate minimum age of an accompanying adult? Comments that are
most useful provide information regarding the reasons why a particular
age is appropriate. We also seek comment on the proposed use of the
term ``accompanying adult.''
The Department is proposing to define the term ``booking party'' as
the person who booked the reservation for air travel. Since the booking
party may or may not be an accompanying adult, we believe that it is
important to define ``booking party'' to draw a distinction between the
roles, rights, and responsibilities of the booking party versus the
accompanying adult. For example, a parent may book tickets for her two
children aged 11 and 16 without the intent for the parent to travel.
The Department seeks comment on its definition of booking party and
defining the booking party separate from an accompanying adult.
4. No Additional Cost
The Department is proposing to define ``no additional cost'' to
mean no added charge beyond the fare. Additionally, the Department is
proposing to define ``fare'', a term used in the Department's
definition of no additional cost, to mean the price paid for air
transportation, including all basic services and all mandatory
government taxes and carrier-imposed fees. The proposed definition of
``fare'' does not include ancillary service fees for optional services
that have been determined by the Department not to be basic services.
Furthermore, the Department is proposing to define the term ``ancillary
service fee'' as a fee charged for any optional service that a carrier
provides beyond passenger air transportation. Such fees may include,
but are not limited to, charges for checked or carry-on baggage,
canceling or changing a reservation, advance seat selection, in-flight
beverages, snacks and meals, lounge access, bedding or other amenities,
or seat upgrades so long as the fees are not for basic services.
The Department's proposed definition of ``no additional cost'' is
consistent with the 2024 FAA Reauthorization Act, which ``prohibits an
air carrier from charging a fee, or imposing an additional cost beyond
the ticket price of the additional seat, to seat each young child
adjacent to an accompanying adult within the same class of service.''
Under this proposal, airlines would be prohibited from charging parents
traveling with young children any additional fees to sit with their
children beyond what they would pay for the tickets. While this
proposed rule would require airlines to provide adjacent seats for a
young child and an accompanying adult at no additional cost beyond the
fare, airlines would have the flexibility to select which adjacent
seats to provide. To the extent that a family with a young child wanted
specific seats or wanted to be seated in a specific area of the
aircraft, nothing in the proposal would prohibit an airline from
charging for those seats.
The Department's proposed definition of ``fare'' in this rulemaking
is consistent with the meaning of that term in other aviation consumer
protection regulations.\53\ This definition does not consider ancillary
service fees for optional services paid by passengers, such as baggage
fees, to be part of the fare. However, this definition clarifies that
the term fare includes all basic services. ``Basic service'' is a
defined term under this proposal and is discussed below. In addition,
the proposed definition of ``ancillary service fee'' is consistent with
the Department's existing definition of ``optional services'' in 14 CFR
399.85(d),\54\ although the proposed definition of ancillary service
fee clarifies that the term does not include fees for basic services.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\53\ 14 CFR 250.1; 76 FR 23161 (April 25, 2011); See also 14 CFR
399.84.
\54\ ``Optional services'' is defined as any service the airline
provides, for a fee, beyond passenger air transportation. Such fees
include, but are not limited to, charges for checked or carry-on
baggage, advance seat selection, in-flight beverages, snacks and
meals, pillows and blankets and seat upgrades. 14 CFR 399.85(d).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Department seeks comment on its proposed definitions of ``no
additional cost'', ``fare'', and ``ancillary service fee.'' The
Department also requests comment on continuing to permit airlines to
charge fees to families who wish to secure specific seats. Comments
that are most helpful will provide information and explain why a
particular definition or action is best.
5. Class of Service
The Department is proposing to define class of service as seating
in the same cabin class such as First, Business, Premium Economy, or
Economy class, based on seat location in the aircraft and seat
characteristics such as pitch size, features, or amount of legroom.
Under this proposal, Premium Economy would be considered a different
class of service from standard Economy, while Basic Economy would not.
Consumers who purchase Premium Economy seats are often physically
separated from other seats by a partition or bulkhead, they are
provided seats with extra legroom than standard Economy, and their
seats are often wider and recline further than standard Economy seats.
They may also receive perks like free checked bags, special meals, or
priority boarding. However, Basic Economy seats do not differ in pitch
size or legroom from standard Economy. Typically, consumers who
purchase a Basic Economy ticket face restrictions that those who
purchase standard Economy do not, such as not being allowed to change
or cancel tickets, select seats, or check-in bags. The Department seeks
comment on whether Premium Economy or Basic Economy should be
considered as a separate class of service from standard Economy under
the proposed rule. The 2024 FAA Reauthorization Act prohibits fees ``to
seat each young child adjacent to an accompanying adult within the same
class of service'' but does not define class of service. Under this
proposal, carriers would be obligated to provide family seating within
the same class of service, at no additional cost. Carriers would not be
required to upgrade the family to a higher class of service, like
First, Business, or Premium Economy, to ensure family seating.
Furthermore, the Department is proposing a requirement that family
seating must be provided in every class of service. This would mean
that
[[Page 65284]]
carriers cannot define classes of service in a way that would limit the
availability of family seating, such as by defining a class of service
as consisting of only middle seats, only aisle seats, or only window
seats. The Department wants to ensure that carriers do not
intentionally limit the ability for passengers to achieve family
seating in all classes of service. At the same time, the Department is
concerned that a proposal that adjacent seats be available in all
classes of service may not always be feasible. For example, a carrier's
first-class cabin may consist of single seats that are separated by an
aisle, which would make providing adjacent seats as defined in this
rulemaking impossible. For this reason, the Department has included as
an exception for circumstances when an aircraft seating configuration
would make it impossible to provide adjacent seating to a young child
and an accompanying adult. The Department solicits comment on whether
there are instances when family seating may not be physically possible
in all classes of service and what remedial efforts could be made to
address these constraints.
6. Available Family Seating
The Department is proposing to define ``available family seating''
as two or more adjacent seats located in the purchased class of service
that have not been assigned to other passengers, and to which a young
child or children and an accompanying adult may be assigned. Under this
definition, an airline would not be required to seat a young child with
both child's parents to accomplish the family seating requirements in
the proposed rule. So long as the airline seats the young child with at
least one accompanying adult, the airline would fulfill its
responsibility to provide family seating. The Department seeks comment
on its decision to define family seating as seating each child with one
accompanying passenger, which may result in a child sitting with only
one parent, as opposed to the entire party.
Also, the Department is proposing to define available family
seating, rather than just using the term ``available'', to create a
distinction between seats that are available for families (capable of
assignment to a young child and an accompanying adult) and seats that
are vacant but may not be available for seating a young child. For
example, young children are not permitted to sit in certain seats on an
aircraft. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) regulations on exit
row seating prohibit a carrier from seating children under the age of
15 in an exit row because they are unable to perform certain duties
that a passenger seated in an exit row may be called upon to perform in
an emergency.\55\ Thus, although these seats may be vacant and capable
of assignment when a passenger makes a reservation for air
transportation, a carrier would not be able to assign a young child to
a seat in the exit row of an aircraft given the age requirements to sit
in these seats. We note that, if exit row seats are the only vacant
adjacent seats in the purchased class of service, we would consider
family seating to be unavailable for purposes of this proposed rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\55\ See Exit Seating, 14 CFR 121.585(b)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The proposed definition of ``available family seating'' would also
not include seats that are in a different class of service or have
already been assigned to other passengers. Specifying that the seat
must be in the same class of service is consistent with the 2024 FAA
Reauthorization Act prohibits fees ``to seat each young child adjacent
to an accompanying adult within the same class of service.'' The
Department also does not require carriers to move other passengers who
have been assigned seats, some of whom have paid for the seats, as
those passengers are entitled to the seats assigned to them. The
Department seeks comment on the definition of available family seating
as seats that are in the same class of service, are capable of
assignment to a young child, and have not already been assigned to
other passengers.
C. Assigned Seating Carriers
Under this rulemaking, the specific requirements that U.S. and
foreign air carriers would be required to follow to ensure a young
child is seated adjacent to an accompanying adult differ depending on
the carrier's seating method. There are different requirements for an
open seating carrier and an assigned seating carrier. The Department is
proposing that the following requirements apply to assigned seating
carriers, which are carriers that assign seats or allow individuals to
select seats on a flight, in advance of the date of departure of a
flight.
1. Available Family Seating at Time of Booking
When there is available family seating at the time of booking,
assigned seating carriers would be required to make every reasonable
effort to assign adjacent seats to a young child and accompanying adult
at the time of booking the reservation, but no later than 48 hours
after the tickets are purchased, at no additional cost, unless an
exception applies. The proposed rule provides carriers up to 48 hours
to assign family seating if the carrier is unable to assign the seats
during the booking process (e.g., the carrier does not have an
automated reservation system to assign seats, ticket was purchased
through a ticket agent). The Department seeks comment on its proposal
to require airlines to make every reasonable effort to assign adjacent
seating assignments at the time of booking, and, if the airline is
unable to assign the seats at the time of booking, to allow airlines up
to 48 hours after a ticket has been issued to assign adjacent family
seating. Specifically, is 48 hours too long for families to wait to
receive an assigned seat if the carrier is unable to assign the seats
during the booking process? Alternatively, should carriers be given
more time to provide advance family seating assignments if the carrier
is unable to assign the seats during the booking process? If so, how
long, and based on what rationale? Should families be allowed to select
their seats at no additional charge during the booking process? The
Department also seeks comment on whether passengers would be able to
determine that there is available family seating at booking by looking
at a carrier's seat map or if carriers would block certain seats,
including those a carrier may put aside for families with young
children, as unavailable on its seat map.
2. No Available Family Seating at Booking
a. Options Provided by Carrier
When there is no available family seating at the time of booking/
when the passenger purchases the reservation, the proposed rule would
require assigned seating carriers to offer passengers the option to
either: (1) obtain a refund, or (2) wait for adjacent seating to become
available. The Department is proposing different time periods for
assigned seating carriers to notify passengers of these options and for
passengers to notify the carriers of their choice based on when the
tickets were purchased. For tickets purchased two or more weeks prior
to departure, the Department is proposing that assigned seating
carriers contact the booking party within 48 hours after the tickets
were purchased to offer passengers a choice between a full refund and
waiting for available family seating on that flight. The booking party
would then have a minimum of seven days to choose between the options.
For tickets purchased less than two weeks prior to departure, the
Department is
[[Page 65285]]
proposing that carriers contact the booking party as soon as practical
after the tickets have been purchased and provide the booking party a
reasonable amount of time to choose between receiving a full refund or
waiting for available family seating on that flight. If the booking
party fails to make a choice within the specified period, carriers
would be able to proceed with the reservation as though the passenger
chose to wait for available family seating on that flight.
The Department seeks comment on whether providing passengers the
choice between a refund or waiting for available family seating on that
flight are sufficient options for carriers to provide to families if
there is no available family seating at the time of booking. For
example, should carriers be required to reserve a seating option that
places the young child as close as possible to an accompanying adult,
while a family waits for available family seating? If so, what should
constitute ``as close as possible''? Must the carrier seat the young
children and accompanying adult across the aisle from each other, or
seat the young children directly in front of or directly behind the
accompanying adult, or some other option?
Under the proposal, if the family chooses to wait for adjacent
seats to become available before the first passenger boards the
aircraft, the carrier would not be required to offer the family an
additional opportunity to receive a refund if adjacent seats do not
become available later. Should carriers be obligated to disclose,
before the passenger makes the choice between a refund and waiting for
available family seating, that they may not have another opportunity to
receive a refund? Further, should airlines be required to inform
passengers about the probability of their obtaining available family
seating before boarding based on historical data about previous similar
flights? If so, what process, if any, should carriers be required to
follow to make this disclosure?
The Department also seeks comment on its proposal to give
passengers a minimum of seven days to choose which option to accept for
tickets purchased more than two weeks prior to departure as well as its
proposal for airlines to determine what a reasonable time is for
passengers to choose their preferred option when tickets are purchased
less than two weeks prior to departure. Finally, in those situations
where the booking party fails to decide whether to receive a refund or
wait for available family seating within the specified timeframe, the
Department seeks comment on whether the default option should be that
the reservation stays in place and the carrier would proceed as though
the booking party chose to wait for available family seating on that
flight.
b. Choosing a Refund
If there is no available family seating at the time of booking and
the booking party chooses to receive a full refund for their
reservation under the proposed rule, a carrier would be required to
refund any ancillary service fees paid under that reservation, in
addition to the fare. Furthermore, the proposed rule also specifies
that each individual in the booking party has the option to receive a
refund, or to travel on the reservation, regardless of whether the
accompanying adult and young child choose to receive a refund. The
Department seeks comment on its proposal to allow the entire booking
party to receive a refund if there is no available family seating at
booking. The Department also requests comment on its proposal to allow
passengers to recoup the entire cost of the reservation, including any
ancillary service fees that the passenger paid.
c. Choosing To Wait for Available Family Seating
If the booking party chooses to wait for available family seating
in lieu of a refund and adjacent seats become available before the
first passenger boards the aircraft, the carrier would be required to
notify the booking party and assign the adjacent seats to the young
child and accompanying adult as soon as the seats become available.
Conversely, if adjacent seating does not become available before the
first passenger boards the aircraft, the proposed rule would require
carriers to provide passengers the option to rebook seats on the next
flight with available family seating at no additional cost, or to
travel on their originally scheduled flight in non-adjacent seats.
Under this proposal, passengers would not have the option to receive a
refund at this point. The Department is of the tentative view that
passengers chose to wait for available family seating in lieu of
receiving a refund and carriers should not be required to provide a
refund at this late date because they would not have sufficient time to
sell the seats to other passengers.
The Department seeks comment on its proposal not to require
airlines to provide refunds to passengers who initially refused a
refund and, instead, opted to wait for available family seating when
there was no available family seating at booking. The Department also
seeks comment on its proposal to require air carriers to offer
passengers waiting for available family seating the option to either
rebook on the next available flight with adjacent seats, or travel on
their originally scheduled flight without adjacent seats.
In addition, this proposed rulemaking is intended to avoid, as much
as possible, last-minute scrambles for seats at the gate or carriers
having to ask other passengers to give up their seat to allow a parent
and child to sit together. The Department is of the tentative view that
the proposed requirements would make it unnecessary for carriers to ask
passengers in the cabin to shift seats to allow the child and
accompanying adult to sit together or be in seats located as close
together as possible. Nevertheless, should there be a requirement for
carriers to make best efforts to seat families traveling with young
children together even after passengers are on the aircraft? Why or why
not?
In the event that there is no available family seating by the time
the first passenger boards the aircraft and the family chooses to
continue travel in seats that are not adjacent, should carriers be
required to provide a seating option that places the young child as
close as possible to an accompanying adult? If so, what should
constitute ``as close as possible''? Must the carrier seat the young
children and accompanying adult across the aisle from each other, or
seat the young children directly in front of or directly behind the
accompanying adult, or some other option?
The Department also recognizes that allowing passengers to wait for
available family seating until the first passenger boards the aircraft
may further complicate the boarding process on the day of travel for
families and airlines. Airline gate agents may work various gates as
needed and have many responsibilities including checking boarding
passes, helping passengers onto the flight, accommodating late
passengers and may not have sufficient time to adequately assist
families at the gate before a flight. Allowing passengers to wait for
available family seating until the first passenger boards the aircraft
may also be problematic for passengers since passengers would be
required to show up at the airport and wait for available family
seating, which they may or not receive. As such, the Department seeks
comment on whether it should require airlines to provide passengers
with the option to wait for available family seating until 24 hours
before the flight, as opposed to allowing passengers to wait until the
first passenger boards the aircraft. DOT seeks comment on whether the
Department
[[Page 65286]]
should alternatively require airlines to provide passengers with a
refund or the option to travel on the flight in seats that are not
adjacent when family seating is not available, instead of giving
passengers the option to wait for available family seating for any
duration.
d. Disclosure of Family Seating Policies for Assigned Seating Carriers
The Department is proposing to require assigned seating carriers to
disclose to consumers that the carriers will provide available family
seating at no additional cost. This disclosure would be required to be
displayed clearly and conspicuously on carriers' online platforms and
the carrier must notify customers of these disclosures when the
customers call the carrier's reservation center to inquire about a fare
or seating or to book a ticket. Under this proposal, carriers would be
required to ask customers if they are traveling with young children,
and would only be required to provide family seating information to
those customers who indicate they are or might be. The airline would
also be required to disclose any exceptions to the airline's family
seating policy permitted under the rule, including carrier requirements
for check-in or boarding. The Department seeks comment on its proposal
to require airlines to disclose their family seating policy on their
online platform and on the telephone and whether there are additional
ways for assigned seating carriers to provide information to passengers
about their family seating policy.
E. Open Seating Carriers
1. General Requirement for Open Seating Carriers
The Department's proposed family seating rule also proposes
requirements for open seating carriers, or carriers that do not assign
or allow individuals to select seats on a flight in advance of the day
of departure. For open seating carriers, the Department proposes to
require that passengers be boarded in a manner that allows passengers
to secure family seating at no additional cost, subject to specified
exceptions. While open seating carriers do not charge fees for advance
seat assignments or fees to book seats in a higher class of service to
ensure family seating, families traveling on open seating carriers may
be advised to pay a fee to board the aircraft early to ensure family
seating.
The Department understands that there is concern that any potential
family seating requirements imposed on open seating carriers would
impact the boarding and open seating models that have been employed by
these carriers for several years. The Department has also been made
aware of concerns that a regulatory proposal that would require open
seating carriers to preboard families or provide early boarding to
families for free may have a disproportionately negative impact on open
seating carriers in comparison to assigned seating carriers because
assigned seating carriers would have no obligation to seat families
together if there is no available family seating at the time of
booking, but an open seating carrier would still have an obligation to
provide family seating on a full flight. There also appears to be
concern that a family seating requirement could diminish the incentive
for non-families to travel on open seating carriers since they would be
forced to board the aircraft after families and the available seating
options for individuals traveling without young children would be
limited.
To address the concerns expressed about the potential negative
impacts of a family seating regulation on open seating carriers, the
Department proposes a generalized requirement that open seating
carriers board passengers in a manner that allows passengers to secure
family seating at no additional cost. This broad requirement is
designed to provide open seating carriers with the flexibility to
determine a way for families to be seated together without impacting
the long-standing open seating model. An airline may consider adopting
various options that would fulfill this proposed requirement. For
instance, carriers could section off a block of seats in a specific
section of the aircraft that would be dedicated to passengers traveling
with families because the carrier would already be aware of how many
families with young children would be traveling on the flight. The
carriers could also require that families be present at the gate at a
certain time in advance of boarding and board them first. The
Department notes that the proposed rule includes as an exception to the
proposed family seating requirement for the failure by passengers to
comply with carriers' check-in and boarding policies, provided that
those polices do not create unreasonably burdensome processes for
individuals traveling with young children. The Department seeks comment
on whether the proposed requirement for open seating carriers to board
families in a manner that allows passengers to secure adjacent family
seating at no additional cost is flexible enough to allow open seating
carriers to fulfill the requirements while preserving traditional open
seating models.
2. Disclosure of Family Seating Policies for Open Seating Carriers
The Department proposes to require open seating carriers to
disclose to consumers that they will board passengers in a manner that
will allow a young child and an accompanying adult to secure adjacent
seats at no additional cost. All other aspects of the disclosure would
mirror the disclosure that assigned seating carriers would be required
to provide to consumers. The Department seeks comment on the disclosure
proposal and whether there are additional ways for open seating
carriers to provide information to passengers about their family
seating policies.
F. Exceptions to the Family Seating Requirements
In this NPRM, the Department proposes four exceptions to the
proposed family seating requirements that apply to both assigned
seating carriers and open seating carriers. These exceptions define how
carriers can provide family seating, as proposed, to the maximum extent
practicable.
The first exception would apply when a young child is not traveling
with an accompanying adult. If a young child is traveling alone, the
young child would be traveling as an unaccompanied minor, and the
family seating provisions in this proposed rule would not apply.
The second exception would apply when a booking party declines to
accept the family seating provided by the carrier or selects a seat for
the young child that is not adjacent to an accompanying adult traveling
on the flight reservation or the aircraft. If the family intentionally
chooses seats on the aircraft that are not adjacent, the airline would
not be responsible for providing family seating. The Department
solicits comment on whether a young child should ever be seated
separately from an accompanying adult even if a family does not wish to
sit in the adjacent seats assigned by the airline.
The third exception would apply when the number of young children
traveling under a reservation or the seating configuration makes it
impossible for the carrier to provide family seating based on the seat
layout of the aircraft. For example, if one accompanying adult is
traveling with three young children, it may not be possible for the
carrier to provide seats adjacent to one another with no aisle
separating the seats. Further, the family's chosen cabin class may not
[[Page 65287]]
contain two adjacent seats that are not separated by an aisle. In these
situations, the carrier should provide adjacent seating for the maximum
possible number of children and seat the accompanying adult and any
other young children on the reservation across the aisle from, or
directly in front of or directly behind the accompanying adult. The
Department requests comment on whether it should impose such an
additional requirement. Also, are there any other seating arrangements
that the Department should consider when adjacent seating is
impossible?
The fourth exception would apply if the young child and
accompanying adult do not comply with the carrier's applicable check-in
or boarding process requirements. Carriers require passengers to check
in at a certain time before the scheduled departure time of the flight.
Additionally, carriers require passengers to be at the gate and ready
to board at a specified time. These airline requirements apply to all
passengers, including families traveling with young children.
Passengers who fail to meet the minimum check-in time or boarding
requirements, including families traveling with young children, may
have their seats reassigned or may not be able to fly. However,
carriers would not be permitted to create specific check-in or boarding
process requirements that are unreasonably burdensome for families.
This rulemaking would not impact airlines' ability to set their own
check-in and boarding process requirement for all passengers, including
for families with young children.
The Department seeks comments on the proposed four exceptions to
its family seating requirements. The Department also seeks comment on
whether there should be any other exceptions. For example, the
Department is of the tentative view that carriers should still be
obligated to provide adjacent family seating, as proposed, when a
larger aircraft is substituted for a smaller aircraft. The Department's
Family Seating Dashboard, however, allows carriers to condition their
family seating guarantee on a larger aircraft not being substituted for
a smaller aircraft. The Department seeks comment on whether it should
include substitution of a larger aircraft for a smaller aircraft as an
exception in this rulemaking. Regardless of whether aircraft
substitution is included as an exception to the family seating
requirements, what procedures, if any, should carriers follow to ensure
that young children are seated adjacent to an accompanying adult or as
close as possible to an accompanying adult?
G. Mitigating Passenger Harm
Under this proposed rule, carriers would be required to take
certain steps to mitigate passenger harm if they fail to provide family
seating at no additional cost as required by the proposed rule.
Specifically, carriers would be obligated to offer the booking party
and/or the accompanying adult(s) a choice between free rebooking on the
next available flight with adjacent seats, continuing travel without
adjacent seats, or receiving a refund.
In the event that a passenger elects to continue travel on the
flight without available family seating, the Department seeks comment
on whether airlines should be required to provide a seating option that
places a young child as close as possible to an accompanying adult. If
so, what should constitute ``as close as possible''? Must the carrier
seat the young children and accompanying adult across the aisle from
each other, seat the young children directly in front of or directly
behind the accompanying adult, or some other option?
Under this proposal, the choice to rebook at no additional cost
would be available to every individual on the reservation with the
young child if the young child and accompanying adult decide to rebook.
This way, a family that wishes to travel together would be able to do
so. At the same time, if a young child and an accompanying adult choose
to be rebooked, but the other passengers on the reservation choose to
remain on the flight, the carrier would be required to accommodate this
choice. The Department believes that it is important for the
individuals on the reservation to have the freedom to decide whether to
travel on their original scheduled flight without adjacent seats or
rebook on the next available flight with available family seating when
the child and accompanying adult chose to be rebooked. The Department
seeks comment on allowing every individual on the reservation to make
this choice.
A carrier that fails to comply with the proposed family seating
requirements must also offer the young child and an accompanying adult
the option to travel on their original flight in seats that are not
adjacent. Although this option may not be preferred, the Department is
of the tentative view that families should be able to decide the choice
that best meets their needs even if that choice is to continue on a
flight without adjacent seats. For example, a parent traveling with a
12-year-old child may decide the best option is to continue on the
flight even though adjacent seats are not available because the child
is seated near the parent and the reason for travel is time sensitive
such as a wedding or funeral. However, if this option is chosen, all
passengers on the reservation would remain on their originally ticketed
flight segment. The Department seeks comment on whether carriers should
be encouraged or required to make best efforts to seat families with
young children together even after boarding by asking other passengers
to switch seats. Although the Department intends for this rulemaking to
prevent last-minute scrambles for seats at the gate or carriers having
to ask other passengers to give up their seat to allow a parent and
child to sit together, are there times when it is beneficial to do so?
Additionally, if the carrier fails to follow the family
requirements as proposed, the carrier would also be required to offer
every individual on the reservation the option to receive a refund of
the airline ticket and any unused ancillary service fees, e.g., baggage
fees, lounge access. Furthermore, if a young child and an accompanying
adult choose to receive a refund, but the other passengers on the
reservation choose to remain on the flight, the carrier would be
required to accommodate this choice.
The refund requirement would apply to the entire cost of the
reservation if a family is unable to receive family seating on any
outbound leg of a trip or a family is informed about the unavailability
of family seating before the start of travel. For example, if a mother
books a roundtrip flight from Richmond, Virginia to Los Angeles,
California with a connection in Chicago, Illinois for her and her young
child and the mother is informed that family seating is available from
Richmond to Chicago but not from Chicago to California, then the mother
would be entitled to a refund for the entire reservation if she decides
not to travel with her child. Similarly, if prior to beginning travel,
the mother is informed that family seating is available on the outbound
but not inbound flights, the mother would be entitled to a refund for
the entire reservation if she decides not to travel with her child.
However, on a direct return flight, or a return flight with a
connection, the carrier would only be required to refund the cost of
the unused portion of the return trip; the carrier would not need to
refund the outbound portion of the ticket if the family already
traveled on this portion of the reservation. For instance, if the
mother and her young child traveled to Los Angeles but adjacent seating
was not available on their return, then the mother would be entitled to
a refund for
[[Page 65288]]
the return trip and not the entire reservation. If a carrier fails to
comply with the family seating requirements as proposed, and a family
is impacted at a connecting airport while on the outbound portion of
their trip, and the family chooses to no longer travel, the carrier
would also be required to provide return transportation to the family's
origination airport, in addition to providing the refund.
The Department seeks comment on its proposal that carriers provide
a full refund of the cost of the reservation to passengers who choose
this option if family seating is not available on any portion of the
outbound trip, and a refund for the cost of the unused portion of the
return flight if family seating is not provided on any leg of the
return reservation. The Department also seeks comment on its proposal
to require carriers to provide return transportation to the family's
origination airport if family seating is not provided on the outbound
trip at a connecting airport.
H. Removal or Reseating of Passengers for Safety or Operational Reasons
Under this proposed rule, carriers would not be prohibited from
removing passengers from the aircraft or reseating passengers,
including a young child and an accompanying adult, for safety reasons
or if failing to do so would be in violation of operational
requirements. The proposal seeks to specify that removal in such cases
must be non-discriminatory. For example, the airline would select the
last passenger to check in for the flight to be removed from the
aircraft.
The Department seeks comment on its proposal to allow airlines to
remove or reseat a young child and their accompanying adult for
aircraft safety or operational issues. The Department also seeks
comments on whether, and if so, what remedies for, or mitigations of
harms to, impacted passengers should be required in the event that
airlines remove or reseat a young child and their accompanying adult
for aircraft safety or operational issues.
I. Customer Service Plans
This NPRM also proposes to amend 14 CFR 259.5 to require carriers
to address family seating in their customer service plans.
Specifically, the rule would require carriers to update their customer
service plans to include a commitment to notify passengers that the
carrier will provide adjacent seats to a young child and an
accompanying adult at no additional cost. The Department believes young
children being able to sit adjacent to an accompanying adult is a basic
service that all carriers should provide at no additional cost beyond
the fare. Carriers notifying passengers that family seating is provided
at no additional cost in their customer service plans would reduce the
chance of customer confusion and better ensure that parents traveling
with young children are able to sit together at no additional cost. We
seek comment on the proposed requirement that carriers must include a
family seating provision in their customer service plans.
J. Civil Penalties
In this NPRM, the Department proposes to include a provision
notifying airlines that violations of the Department's family-seating
requirements subject an airline to civil penalties. The Department
proposes that a carrier's failure to provide family seating as required
by the proposal would subject it to civil penalties on a per passenger
(child) basis. Further, if the carrier imposes fees for family seating,
the carrier would be subject it to civil penalties for each fee
imposed.
The Department's Office of Aviation Consumer Protection (OACP), a
unit within the Office of the General Counsel, has the authority to
assess civil penalties against airlines and travel agents up to $40,272
per violation pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 46301 and 14 CFR 383.2. Further,
the statute provides that ``a separate violation occurs under this
subsection for each day the violation . . . continues or, if
applicable, for each flight involving the violation. . . .'' When OACP
has evidence of systemic violations, or a single or a few egregious
violations, it will take enforcement action.
The Department seeks comment in its proposal to include a provision
in the regulation that notifies airlines that they are subject to civil
penalties for violating any requirement in the family seating rule. The
Department also seeks comment on its proposal that a violation exists
each time a young child and accompanying adult do not have the
opportunity to secure adjacent seats. For example, if two parents are
traveling with three young children and only one parent is provided the
opportunity to be seated adjacent to one of the young children, but a
parent is not provided the opportunity to be seated adjacent to either
of the other two children, should there be two violations? The
Department also seeks comments on whether the accompanying adult
suffers a separate violation when denied the opportunity to sit
adjacent to a young child. As noted above, accompanying adults may
suffer significant stress and anxiety when they are not seated adjacent
to a young child.
K. Inclusion of Fees for Basic Services in Advertised Fare
The Department is examining whether fees for basic airline services
such as booking a ticket \56\ should be required to be included in the
advertised fare. The Airline Deregulation Act of 1978 (ADA), which
preempted State regulation of airlines, removed Federal authority to
set airline fares and fees and ended most regulation of airline rates,
routes, and services. Under the ADA, DOT must consider as being in the
public interest, among other things, having an air transportation
system that relies on competition to determine the price of air
transportation services. The ADA maintained the Department's statutory
authority to prohibit unfair and deceptive practices. DOT continues to
regulate and enforce consumer protections for airline passengers under
its authority to prohibit unfair and deceptive practices. DOT also has
the authority to ensure U.S. carriers provide safe and adequate
interstate air transportation. The Department is relying on these and
other authorities in issuing this rulemaking proposing to require U.S.
and foreign air carriers to seat young children adjacent to at least
one accompanying adult at no additional cost beyond the fare subject to
limited exceptions. The Department is also considering whether, like
family seating, it would be an unfair and deceptive practice to charge
fees beyond the fare for other basic airline services.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\56\ See https://www.spirit.com/optional-services (displays a
``passenger usage fee'' of $3.99 to $22.99 per segment for consumers
who book online and a ``Reservations Center Booking'' fee of $35 per
booking for consumers who book over the phone).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Over the years, airlines have developed a variety of ways to charge
passengers fees for air transportation-related services that were once
included in the ticket price. The airline industry has unbundled
services that traditionally came with a ticket, such as checked bags
and seat reservations. The Department has noticed that the unbundling
of service has continued to expand, with some airlines now charging for
carry-on bags, printing boarding passes \57\ at the airport,
[[Page 65289]]
receiving a paper ticket or a receipt, using a credit card to make a
ticket purchase,\58\ or redeeming, transferring, or redepositing
rewards earned by the customer. Additionally, while most airlines still
provide complimentary water along with other non-alcoholic drinks and
snacks to passengers, some airlines today charge passengers to receive
water \59\ on the aircraft. The Department has also noticed that
carriers are adding charges like a ``carrier interface charge,''
``passenger interface charge,'' ``electronic carrier usage charge,''
``ticketing fee,'' or a ``technology development charge,'' for booking
online or over the phone, and the fees are avoidable only if customers
purchase the ticket in person. Other airlines charge a ticketing fee
for purchasing the ticket at the airport. The Department is concerned
that this unbundling of services will continue to the detriment of
consumers and seeks comment on this issue.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\57\ See https://www.spirit.com/optional-services (displays a
fee of $25 per boarding pass printed), https://www.allegiantair.com/popup/taxes-and-fees (states that a '' $5.00 per boarding pass fee
will apply to passengers who choose to have a boarding pass printed
out at select domestic airport locations.'') https://help.ryanair.com/hc/en-us/articles/12889667116433-What-if-I-do-not-have-access-to-a-printer-to-print-my-boarding-pass- (explains that
consumers will be charged for airline printing boarding pass for
them at the check-in desk).
\58\ Various European carriers charge fees for paying for
airline tickets with credit cards if you commence your journey in
certain countries and your credit card was issued outside the
European Economic Area. E.g., https://www.lufthansa.com/ge/en/opc,
https://www.austrian.com/us/en/service-charges.
\59\ https://content.spirit.com/Shared/en-us/Documents/InFlightMenu_033020.pdf (no complimentary beverage or snack service
on Spirit flights--$4.49 for bottled water).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Department proposes to define ``basic service'' as a service
that is essential for a carrier to provide adequate air transportation
to a passenger as determined by the Department after notice and
comment. The Department is of the tentative view that seating a young
child adjacent to an accompanying adult is a basic service.
This NPRM is seeking comment on fees charged by airlines for basic
services that used to be included in the ticket price, as well as
prospective fees that airlines may charge passengers that the airlines
currently include in the ticket price. For instance, carriers currently
do not charge passengers for the use of lavatories onboard the
aircraft, nor do they charge passengers to carry a small purse or
laptop onto the aircraft, but the Department or the public cannot be
assured that carriers would not do so in the future. Carriers also do
not generally charge for customer service assistance should there be a
flight disruption, though at least one airline charges passengers if
they choose to receive assistance from airport agents when checking in.
Neither the Department nor the public can be assured that airlines
would not charge for all types of customer service assistance in the
future.
The Department seeks comment on its proposed definition of basic
service, and whether seating a young child adjacent to an accompanying
adult is a basic service. What, if any, other services beyond adjacent
family seating should be considered a basic service? Should services
related to the consumers' physical well-being such as access to the
lavatory and the availability of drinking water upon request be
considered basic services? Should services necessary for air
transportation such as booking or paying for a ticket, checking in
online, printing a boarding pass for those unable to do so themselves,
or receiving customer service be considered basic services? Are there
other types or categories of services that should be considered basic
beyond those mentioned? The Department is considering prohibiting
carriers from unbundling and charging passengers separately for basic
services. The information provided by stakeholders--airlines, ticket
agents, consumers, and other affected parties--will assist the
Department in determining what, if any, additional services should be
considered basic services that carriers and ticket agents must include
as part of the fare to avoid engaging in an unfair or deceptive
practice and to ensure safe and adequate service is being provided.
B. Regulatory Analysis and Notices
A. Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review) and DOT
Regulatory Policies and Procedures
Executive Orders 12866 (``Regulatory Planning and Review'') and
13563 (``Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review'') require agencies
to regulate in the ``most cost-effective manner,'' to make a ``reasoned
determination that the benefits of the intended regulation justify its
costs,'' and to develop regulations that ``impose the least burden on
society.'' The Office of Management and Budget has determined that this
proposed rulemaking is a significant regulatory action as defined in
section (3)(f)(1) of Executive Order (E.O.) 12866, as amended by E. O.
14094, ``Modernizing Regulatory Review.'' Accordingly, the Department
has prepared an RIA for the proposed rule, summarized in this section
and available in the docket. Table 1 below provides a summary of the
costs and benefits of this proposed rulemaking.
Table 1--Summary of Economic Impacts, First Year
[2022 Dollars, millions]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Benefits (+): Benefits (+).
Reduced disutility to passengers Unquantified........................
from separation of families
traveling by air.
Costs (-): Costs (-):
Implementation costs................ $5-21............................... Implementation costs.
Net societal benefits (costs):.......... Not applicable...................... Net societal benefits (costs).
Transfers (0): Transfers (0):
Increase in consumer surplus from $910................................ Increase in consumer surplus
elimination of seating fees for from elimination of seating
families (airlines to families). fees for families (airlines
to families).
Decrease in consumer surplus for $760................................
solo air passengers (solo
passengers to airlines).
Decrease in consumer surplus for $51................................. Decrease in consumer surplus
families who do not pay for seat for families who do not pay
reservations in the baseline for seat reservations in the
(families to airlines). baseline (families to
airlines).
Airline revenue loss (airlines to $85................................. Airline revenue loss
consumers). (airlines to consumers).
Benefits (+): Benefits (+):
Reduced disutility to passengers Unquantified........................ Reduced disutility to
from separation of families passengers from separation
traveling by air. of families traveling by
air.
Costs (-): Costs (-):
Implementation costs................ $5-21............................... Implementation costs.
Net societal benefits (costs)........... Not applicable...................... Net societal benefits (costs).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 65290]]
This rulemaking would require U.S. and foreign air carriers to seat
children aged 13 and under adjacent to at least one accompanying adult
without a separate charge. Benefits of the proposed rule, which we did
not quantify, are due to the reduction in disutility to passengers from
separation of families traveling by air. Families can be reassured that
they will be seated together during air travel. Some families could
experience a reduction in stress and anxiety associated with air
travel. Passengers who do not travel with children will no longer be
burdened with being seated next to children who are separated from
their parents and will no longer fear being relocated from their seat
to accommodate families. Airlines will incur implementation costs,
which are quantified. Because benefits are not quantified, it is not
possible to estimate net benefits.
Most quantifiable economic impacts are transfers, which are
benefits and costs that have exactly offsetting effects and do not
contribute to the net benefits calculation. The total price of air
travel for families who currently purchase seat reservations will
decrease, which creates a transfer of consumer surplus to them. The
elimination of seating fees for families encourages additional travel,
and airfares will increase. Solo passengers and families who do not
currently purchase seat reservations will lose consumer surplus due to
the airfare increase. The increase in in airfare offsets the increase
in consumer surplus to families who pay for seat reservation in the
baseline, but the effect is small. Airlines initially will incur
revenue losses as well.
An important determinant of the quantifiable impacts is the
percentage of passengers who purchase seat assignments in the baseline.
This percentage is not known with certainty, and we apply market
research that suggests about 37 percent of consumers might be willing
to pay for a seat reservation. The 37 percent is applied to the
estimated 9.7 percent of passengers who travel as families as well as
the remaining 90.3 percent of passengers who travel solo.
B. Privacy Act
Anyone can search the electronic form of all comments received in
any of our dockets by the name of the individual submitting the comment
(or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf of an association,
business, labor union, etc.) For information on DOT's compliance with
the Privacy Act, please visit https://www.transportation.gov/privacy.
C. Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)
This NPRM has been analyzed in accordance with the principles and
criteria contained in Executive Order 13132 (``Federalism''). This NPRM
does not include any provision that: (1) has substantial direct effects
on the States, the relationship between the national government and the
States, or the distribution of power and responsibilities among the
various levels of government; (2) imposes substantial direct compliance
costs on State and local governments; or (3) preempts State law. States
are already preempted from regulating in this area by the Airline
Deregulation Act, 49 U.S.C. 41713. Therefore, the consultation and
funding requirements of Executive Order 13132 do not apply.
D. Executive Order 13175
This rulemaking has been analyzed in accordance with the principles
and criteria contained in Executive Order 13175 (``Consultation and
Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments''). Because this rulemaking
does not significantly or uniquely affect the communities of the Indian
Tribal governments or impose substantial direct compliance costs on
them, the funding and consultation requirements of Executive Order
13175 do not apply.
E. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) requires an
agency to conduct an initial regulatory flexibility analysis (IRFA) to
assess the impact of a proposed rule 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 conducted an IRFA for this rulemaking as required by 5
U.S.C. 603 and provides a summary of that analysis in the paragraphs
that follow. A description of the reasons the agency is considering the
action and a statement of the objectives and legal basis of the rule
are described elsewhere in the preamble for this proposed rule and not
repeated here.
1. A Description and Estimate of the Number of Small Entities to Which
the Rule Will Apply (or an Explanation of Why No Such Estimate Is
Available)
A carrier is a small entity if it provides air transportation
exclusively with small aircraft, defined as any aircraft originally
designed to have a maximum passenger capacity of 60 seats or less or a
maximum payload capacity of 18,000 pounds or less, as described in 14
CFR 399.73. In 2020, 28 carriers meeting these criteria reported
passenger traffic data to the Bureau of Transportation Statistics.\60\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\60\ Bureau of Transportation Statistics No date. ``T1: U.S. Air
Carrier Traffic and Capacity Summary by Service Class.'' https://transtats.bts.gov/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. A Description of the Compliance Requirements of the Rule and Their
Costs
The proposed rule would require that airlines distinguish families
from other passengers in assessing seating fees, which will involve
some upfront costs. A system to ensure family seating would identify
bookings with children under 14 and accompanying adults and allow those
individuals to reserve seats together in advance with no separate
charge. Airlines would need to personalize the pricing of seats based
on the ages of the individuals in a reservation. Once this capability
is implemented, there should not be other ongoing costs.
The RIA for the proposed rule presented an upper bound cost
estimate for making the necessary changes to ticketing systems as 10
percent of $2.02 per passenger. The analysis also reports that revenue
per passenger, or ticket price, is $248.64 for a domestic fare. Average
ticket prices for small carriers tend to be higher than the market
average and thus, $248.64 underestimates revenue per passenger for
small carriers. From this information, implementation costs as a
percent of revenue amount to 0.008 percent (0.10 * $2.02/$248.64),
which is much smaller than the one percent threshold that the
Department generally applies for determining significant economic
impact. This cost estimate is based upon the assumption that small
airlines will make IT adjustments to automate family seating. However,
given the small size of the affected aircraft, automation might not be
needed. The Department requests comment on the costs to small airlines.
3. A Description of Relevant Federal Rules, if Any, That May Duplicate,
Overlap, or Conflict With the Proposed Rule
The Department is not aware of any other Federal rules that
duplicate, overlap, or conflict with the proposed rule to prohibit
airlines from charging family seating fees.
[[Page 65291]]
4. A Description of Any Significant Alternatives to the Proposed Rule
That Would Accomplish the Stated Objectives of the Rule While
Minimizing Any Significant Economic Impact of the Proposed Rule on
Small Entities
The Department considered continuing to rely on current industry
voluntary efforts. As discussed elsewhere in the preamble, on July 8,
2022, the Department issued a notice that urged airlines ``to do
everything in their power to ensure that children who are age 13 or
younger are seated next to an accompanying adult with no additional
charge.'' The Department launched the Family Seating Dashboard on March
6, 2023. The Dashboard currently shows four airlines (Alaska, American,
and Frontier, and JetBlue) as having committed to guaranteeing family
seating without a separate fee. As outlined above, all other large
domestic carriers have policies to do their best to seat families
together, but they stop short of guaranteeing it.
Given that six of the ten large airlines have chosen not to
guarantee family seating despite the Department's efforts to encourage
the practice and calls from consumer advocacy groups,\61\ it is
unlikely that they would issue such guarantees in the absence of
additional pressure from the market or the government. The four
airlines with family seating policies in line with the proposed rule
could change their policies at any time. The experience with checked
baggage fees shows that airlines adopted baggage fees at a time when
they were under financial pressure and when competition from low-cost
carriers pushed them to unbundle their services and advertise lower
ticket prices. It is possible that airlines would re-consider family
seating policies in the future in times of financial or competitive
pressure. Thus, the no action alternative would not meet the objectives
of the proposed rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\61\ See Airlines: Kids should sit with their parents!
(consumerreports.org), accessed on 10/27/2023.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A second alternative would be to adopt the requirement for airlines
to guarantee family seating but to not impose a requirement that the
airlines eliminate seating fees for families. Airlines would still
incur implementation costs. Families who currently pay seating fees
because they believe that the only way to assure being seated together
is to pay a seating fee could simply stop paying the fees and still be
guaranteed seats together. In general, this alternative would yield the
same result as the proposed rule. The Department did not propose this
option, however, because as described in the proposed rule, the
Department believes that charging families to sit together is an unfair
practice, and if a ban on family seating is adopted in final then it
would also be an unfair and deceptive practice, as described elsewhere
in the preamble, not to disclose that paying additional fees or
purchasing a higher fare ticket to secure adjacent seating for a young
child and accompanying adult is unnecessary.
The Department invites comment on its analysis and the potential
economic impact of this rulemaking on small entities.
F. Paperwork Reduction Act
This NPRM does not propose any new collections of information that
would require approval by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-13, 49 U.S.C.
3501 et seq.).
G. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) requires, at 2
U.S.C. 1532, that agencies prepare an assessment of anticipated costs
and benefits before issuing any rule that may result in the expenditure
by State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the
private sector, of $100 million or more (adjusted annually for
inflation) in any one year. While this proposed rule would not have
such an effect on State, local, and tribal governments, this proposed
rule is estimated to have an annual cost of over 100 million dollars.
Agencies may include the assessment required by UMRA in conjunction
with other assessments, and the Department has prepared RIA that
provides the anticipated cost and benefits of the NPRM.
H. 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 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). In analyzing
the applicability of a categorical exclusion, the agency must also
consider whether extraordinary circumstances are present that would
warrant the preparation of an EA or EIS. Id. Paragraph 3.c.6.i of DOT
Order 5610.1C categorically excludes ``[a]ctions relating to consumer
protection, including regulations.'' Because this rulemaking relates to
ensuring that families traveling with children are seated together,
this rulemaking is a consumer protection rulemaking. The Department
does not anticipate any environmental impacts, and there are no
extraordinary circumstances present in connection with this rulemaking.
I. Executive Order 12988, ``Civil Justice Reform''
With respect to the review of existing regulations and the
promulgation of new regulations, section 3(a) of Executive Order 12988,
``Civil Justice Reform,'' 61 FR 4729 (February 7, 1996), imposes on
Federal agencies the general duty to adhere to the following
requirements: (1) eliminate drafting errors and ambiguity; (2) write
regulations to minimize litigation; and (3) provide a clear legal
standard for affected conduct rather than a general standard and
promote simplification and burden reduction. Section 3(b) of Executive
Order 12988 specifically requires that Executive agencies make every
reasonable effort to ensure that the regulation: (1) clearly specifies
the preemptive effect, if any; (2) clearly specifies any effect on
existing Federal law or regulation; (3) provides a clear legal standard
for affected conduct while promoting simplification and burden
reduction; (4) specifies the retroactive effect, if any; (5) adequately
defines key terms; and (6) addresses other important issues affecting
clarity and general draftsmanship under any guidelines issued by the
Attorney General. Section 3(c) of Executive Order 12988 requires
Executive agencies to review regulations in light of applicable
standards in section 3(a) and section 3(b) to determine whether they
are met or it is unreasonable to meet one or more of them. DOT has
completed the required review and determined that, to the extent
permitted by law, this final rule meets the relevant standards of
Executive Order 12988.
J. Short Summary of the Rule Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(4)
As required by 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(4), a summary of this rule can be
found at the entry for RIN 2105-AF15 in the Department's portion of the
Unified Agenda, available at https://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/eAgendaViewRule?pubId=202310&RIN=2105-AF15.
[[Page 65292]]
K. Pay-As-You-Go Act of 2023 (Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2023, Pub.
L. 118-5, Div. B, Title III)
In accordance with Compliance with Pay-As-You-Go Act of 2023
(Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2023, Pub. L. 118-5, div. B, title III)
and OMB Memorandum (M-23-21) dated September 1, 2023, the Department
has determined that this final rule is not subject to the Pay-As-You-Go
Act of 2023 because it will not increase direct spending beyond
specified thresholds.
List of Subjects
14 CFR Part 259
Air Carriers, Consumer Protection, Reporting and Recordkeeping
Requirements.
14 CFR Part 261
Air Carriers, Consumer Protection.
For the reasons stated in the preamble, DOT proposes to amend 14
CFR part 259 and add part 261 as follows:
PART 259--ENHANCED PROTECTIONS FOR AIRLINE PASSENGERS
0
1. The authority citation for part 259 is revised to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 40101(a)(4), 40101(a)(9), 40113(a), 41702,
41708, 41712, 42301, and FAA Reauthorization Act of 2024, Pub. L.
118-63, 516, 138 Stat. 1025, 1197-1198 (2024).
0
2. Amend Sec. 259.5 by revising paragraph (b) introductory text and
adding paragraph (b)(16) to read as follows:
Sec. 259.5 Customer Service Plan.
* * * * *
(b) Contents of Plan. Each Customer Service Plan shall address the
following subjects and comply with the minimum standards set forth:
* * * * *
(16) Disclosing clearly and conspicuously on the carrier's online
platform that the carrier will seat a young child adjacent to an
accompanying adult at no additional cost, as required by 14 CFR Part
261. Requiring carriers to ask whether the customer is traveling with a
young child when the customer calls the carrier's reservation center to
inquire about a fare or seating or to book a ticket, and disclosing to
a customer who answers affirmatively that the carrier will seat a young
child adjacent to an accompanying adult at no additional cost, as
required by 14 CFR Part 261.
* * * * *
PART 261--FAMILY SEATING
0
3. Add part 261 to read as follows:
Sec.
261.1 Purpose.
261.2 Applicability.
261.3 Definitions.
261.4 Assigned Seating Carriers.
261.5 Open Seating Carriers.
261.6 Exceptions to Family Seating Requirements for Assigned Seating
and Open Seating Carriers.
261.7 Traveling with Multiple Children.
261.8 Class of Service.
261.9 Mitigating Passenger Harm.
261.10 Removal or Reseating of Passengers for Safety or Operational
Reasons.
261.11 Violations and Civil Penalties.
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 41702 and 41712, and the FAA
Reauthorization Act of 2024, Pub. L. 118-63, 516, 138 Stat. 1025,
1197-1198 (2024).
Sec. 261.1 Purpose.
The purpose of this Part is to ensure that U.S. and foreign air
carriers allow young children to be seated adjacent to an accompanying
adult on a flight at no additional cost. This Part clarifies seating a
young child adjacent to an accompanying adult is a basic service that
must be included in the advertised fare.
Sec. 261.2 Applicability.
This Part applies to all U.S. and foreign air carriers that operate
and market scheduled passenger flights to or from a U.S. airport using
at least one aircraft that has a designed capacity of 30 or more
passenger seats.
Sec. 261.3 Definitions.
Accompanying Adult means an individual age 14 or over on the date
of the scheduled departure who is traveling with a young child or young
children on the same reservation record.
Adjacent Seats mean two or more seats positioned next to each other
in the same row of the aircraft and not separated by an aisle.
Ancillary Service Fee means a fee charged for any optional service
that a carrier provides beyond passenger air transportation. Such fees
may include, but are not limited to, charges for checked or carry-on
baggage, canceling or changing a reservation, advance seat selection,
in-flight beverages, snacks and meals, lounge access, bedding or other
amenities, or seat upgrades so long as the fees are not for basic
services.
Assigned Seating Carrier means a carrier that assigns seats, or
allows individuals to select seats on a flight, in advance of the date
of departure of a flight.
Available Family Seating means two or more adjacent seats located
in the purchased class of service that have not been assigned to other
passengers and to which a young child or children and an accompanying
adult may be assigned.
Basic Service means a service that is essential for a carrier to
provide adequate air transportation to a passenger as determined by the
Department after notice and comment.
Booking Party means the person who booked the reservation for air
travel. The booking party may or may not also be an accompanying adult.
Class of Service means seating in the same cabin class such as
First, Business, Premium Economy, or Economy class, based on seat
location in the aircraft and seat characteristics such as pitch size,
features, or amount of legroom.
Fare means the price paid for air transportation including all
basic services and all mandatory government taxes and carrier-imposed
fees. It does not include ancillary service fees for optional services
that have been determined by the Department not to be basic services.
No Additional Cost means no added charge for a seat beyond the
fare.
Online platform means any interactive electronic medium, including,
but not limited to, websites and mobile applications, that allow the
consumer to search for or purchase air transportation from a carrier or
ticket agent.
Open Seating Carrier means a carrier that does not assign seats or
allow individuals to select seats on a flight in advance of the date of
departure of the flight.
Young Child or Young Children means individual(s) age 13 or under
on the date of scheduled departure of the purchased flight.
Sec. 261.4 Assigned Seating Carriers.
(a) Available family seating at booking. An assigned seating
carrier must make every reasonable effort to assign available family
seating to a young child and an accompanying adult at the time of
booking a reservation for air transportation on each flight segment of
the reservation at no additional cost, unless an exception in Sec.
261.6 applies. If the carrier is unable to assign available family
seating at the time of booking the reservation and no exceptions in
Sec. 261.6 apply, the carrier must assign available family seating no
later than 48 hours after the tickets are purchased.
(b) When there is no available family seating at booking. For
tickets purchased two or more weeks prior to a flight's departure, an
assigned seating carrier must contact the booking party within 48 hours
after the ticket for air transportation has been purchased and
[[Page 65293]]
provide the booking party a minimum of seven days to choose between the
options in paragraphs (b)(1) and (b)(2) of this section. For tickets
purchased less than two weeks prior to a flight's departure, an
assigned seating carrier must contact the booking party as soon as is
practical after the ticket for air transportation has been purchased
and provide the booking party a reasonable amount of time based on the
circumstances to choose between the options in paragraphs (b)(1) and
(b)(2) of this section.
(1) A full refund to the booking party within the timeframe
required in 14 CFR parts 259, 260 and 399 of the airline ticket and any
ancillary service fees paid for the young child and accompanying adult
as well as any other person on the same reservation who chooses not to
fly; or
(2) The option to wait for the possibility of available family
seating on the flight before the first passenger boards the aircraft.
If the booking party chooses to wait as specified in this paragraph, an
assigned seating carrier must comply with paragraph (i) or (ii) of this
paragraph, whichever is applicable.
(i) Available family seating before first passenger boards
aircraft. An assigned seating carrier must assign adjacent seats to a
young child and an accompanying adult if the seats are available before
the first passenger boards the aircraft and must notify the booking
party and/or the accompanying adult of the new seat assignments as soon
as the seats are assigned.
(ii) No available family seating before first passenger boards
aircraft. An assigned seating carrier must offer the booking party and/
or an accompanying adult the choice between the following options:
(A) Rebooking the young child and accompanying adult as well as any
other person on the same reservation who chooses to fly on the next
flight with available family seating to the same destination at no
additional cost; or
(B) Transporting the young child and accompanying adult as well as
any other person on the same reservation on their original ticketed
flight in seats that are not adjacent.
(c) Family Seating Policy Notifications. (1) Online Platform
Disclosure. An assigned seating carrier must disclose clearly and
conspicuously on its public-facing online platforms that markets air
transportation to the general public in the United States:
(i) That the carrier will provide available family seating at no
additional cost, as required by this Part, and
(ii) Any exceptions permitted by Sec. 261.6, including any carrier
check-in or boarding requirement that may impact the ability to secure
adjacent seats for the young child and accompanying adult.
(2) Oral Disclosure. When a customer calls the carrier's
reservation center to inquire about a fare, seating, or to book a
ticket, an assigned seating carrier must ask whether the customer is
traveling with a young child. If the customer answers affirmatively,
the carrier must disclose:
(i) That it will provide available family seating at no additional
cost, as required by this Part, and
(ii) Any exceptions permitted by Sec. 261.6 that would apply to
that consumer, including any carrier check-in or boarding requirement
that may impact the ability to secure adjacent seats for the young
child and accompanying adult.
Sec. 261.5 Open Seating Carriers.
(a) Boarding. Open seating carriers must board passengers in a
manner that allows a young child and an accompanying adult to secure
adjacent seats on the flight at no additional cost, unless an exception
in Sec. 261.6 applies.
(b) Family Seating Policy Notifications. (1) Online Platform
Disclosure. An open seating carrier must disclose clearly and
conspicuously on its public-facing online platforms that markets air
transportation to the general public in the United States:
(i) That the carrier will board passengers in a manner that will
allow a young child and an accompanying adult to secure adjacent seats
at no additional cost as required by this Part, and
(ii) Any exceptions permitted by Sec. 261.6, including any carrier
check-in or boarding requirement that may impact the ability to secure
adjacent seats for the young child and accompanying adult.
(1) Oral Disclosure. When a customer calls the carrier's
reservation center to inquire about a fare, seating, or to book a
ticket, an open seating carrier must ask whether the customer is
traveling with a young child. If the customer answers affirmatively,
the carrier must disclose:
(i) That it will board the passengers in a manner that will allow a
young child to be seated adjacent to an accompanying adult at no
additional cost as required by this Part, and
(ii) Any exceptions permitted by Sec. 261.6 that would apply to
that consumer, including any carrier check-in or boarding requirement
that may impact the ability to secure adjacent seats for the young
child and accompanying adult.
Sec. 261.6 Exceptions to Family Seating Requirements for Assigned
Seating and Open Seating Carriers.
The family seating requirements in sections Sec. 261.4 and Sec.
261.5 do not apply if:
(a) The young child is not traveling with an accompanying adult;
(b) The booking party declines to accept the adjacent seats for the
young child and accompanying adult offered by the carrier or selects a
seat for the young child that is not adjacent to any accompanying adult
traveling on the flight reservation;
(c) The number of young children traveling under the reservation or
an aircraft seating configuration makes it impossible for the carrier
to provide adjacent seats to young children and the accompanying adult
based on the seat layout of the aircraft; or
(d) The young child and/or accompanying adult do not comply with
the carrier's applicable check-in or boarding requirements, provided
that these requirements do not impose unreasonably burdensome
requirements on families traveling with young children.
Sec. 261.7 Traveling with Multiple Children.
In situations where the number of young children traveling under
the reservation make it impossible for the carrier to provide adjacent
seats to the young children and the accompanying adult as provided in
Sec. 261.6(c), carriers must seat the young children and accompanying
adult across the aisle from each other, or seat the young children
directly in front of, or directly behind the accompanying adult.
Sec. 261.8 Class of Service.
A carrier must provide adjacent seats to a young child and
accompanying adult in the same class of service as the tickets
purchased. A carrier may not construct its classes of service in such a
way that would unreasonably limit the availability of adjacent seats
for a young child and an accompanying adult.
Sec. 261.9 Mitigating Passenger Harm.
(a) A carrier that fails to meet the family seating requirements in
Sec. 261.4 or Sec. 261.5 or that reseats a young child and an
accompanying adult in seats that are not adjacent for aircraft safety
or operational reasons under Sec. 261.10 must, unless an exception in
Sec. 261.6 applies, provide the booking party and/or the accompanying
adult the choice between the following options:
(1) Rebooking the young child and accompanying adult as well as any
other
[[Page 65294]]
person on the same reservation who chooses to fly on the next flight
with available family seating to the same destination at no additional
cost;
(2) Transporting the young child and accompanying adult as well as
any other person on the same reservation on their original ticketed
flight segment in seats that are not adjacent; or
(3) Refunding the booking party within the timeframe required in 14
CFR parts 259 and 399 as follows:
(i) The entire cost of the ticket and ancillary service fees paid
if a young child and an accompanying adult as well as any other person
on the same reservation chooses not to travel on any portion of an
outbound trip.
(ii) The cost of the unused portion of the ticket and ancillary
service fees paid if a young child and an accompanying adult as well as
any other person on the same reservation chooses not to travel on any
portion of a return trip.
(b) If the carrier fails to meet the family seating requirements in
Sec. 261.4 or Sec. 261.5 or reseats a young child and an accompanying
adult in seats that are not adjacent under Sec. 261.10, absent an
exception in Sec. 261.6, and it impacts a young child and an
accompanying adult as well as any other person on the same reservation
at a connecting airport on the outbound trip and they choose to no
longer travel, then the carrier must provide return transportation to
the origination airport at no cost.
Sec. 261.10 Removal or Reseating of Passengers for Safety or
Operational Reasons.
Nothing in this Part prohibits a carrier from removing passengers
from the aircraft or reseating passengers, including a young child and
an accompanying adult, for safety reasons or if failing to do so would
be in violation of operational requirements. Removal in such cases must
be non-discriminatory.
Sec. 261.11 Violations and Civil Penalties.
A carrier that violates any requirement in this Part is subject to
civil penalties as set forth in 49 U.S.C. 46301. In instances when a
young child and an accompanying adult do not have the opportunity to
secure adjacent seats as required in this Part, a separate violation
occurs for each child. In instances when a fee beyond the fare is
imposed to secure adjacent family seating, a separate violation occurs
for each fee imposed.
Issued July 31, 2024, in Washington, DC.
Peter Paul Montgomery Buttigieg,
Secretary of Transportation.
[FR Doc. 2024-17323 Filed 8-8-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-9X-P