[Federal Register Volume 90, Number 219 (Monday, November 17, 2025)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 51230-51232]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2025-20042]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Office of the Secretary
14 CFR Ch. II
[Docket No. DOT-OST-2024-0062]
RIN 2105-AF20
Airline Passenger Rights; Withdrawal
AGENCY: Office of the Secretary (OST), Department of Transportation
(Department or DOT).
ACTION: Advance notice of proposed rulemaking (ANPRM); withdrawal.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Department is withdrawing the ANPRM on Airline Passenger
Rights issued on December 11, 2024. The ANPRM sought public comment on
a potential regulatory action that would require airlines to provide
passengers affected by significant flight disruptions with a variety of
costly measures. The withdrawal of this ANPRM is consistent with
Executive Order (E.O.) 14192, ``Unleashing Prosperity Through
Deregulation,'' which directs Federal agencies to reduce regulatory
burdens, and E.O. 14219, ``Ensuring Lawful Governance and
Implementation of the President's `Department of Government Efficiency'
Deregulatory Agenda,'' which directs Federal agencies to identify and
to repeal or to modify regulations that are unlawful or unauthorized.
DATES: The Department of Transportation is withdrawing the advance
notice proposed rulemaking published December 11, 2024 (89 FR 99760) as
of November 17, 2025.
ADDRESSES:
For more information: Heather Filemyr, John Wood, or Blane A.
Workie, 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). Please include RIN
2105-AF20 in the subject line of the message.
Electronic Access: Docket: For access to the docket to read
background documents and comments received, go to the street address
listed above or visit http://www.regulations.gov. Enter the docket
number DOT-OST-2024-0062 in the search field.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
A. Background
On December 11, 2024, the Department issued an ANPRM titled,
``Airline Passenger Rights.'' \1\ In that ANPRM, the Department
requested public comment on possible measures to address air travel
consumers affected by cancellations and lengthy delays. The Department
explained that it was considering proposing to require airlines to
provide passengers affected by significant flight delays and
cancellations with cash compensation, free rebooking, and amenities
such as meals, lodging for overnight delays, and transportation to and
from lodging. The Department also requested comment on whether it
should require airlines to offer free rebooking to passengers with a
disability (and others in the same travel party) when one or more
accessibility features needed by the passenger with a disability is
unavailable.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 89 FR 99760 (Dec. 11, 2024).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On January 31, 2025, the President signed Executive Order (E.O.)
14192, ``Unleashing Prosperity Through Deregulation,'' to reduce the
private expenditures required to comply with Federal regulations and to
ensure the cost of planned regulations is responsibly managed and
controlled through a rigorous regulatory budgeting process. Pursuant to
E.O. 14192, it is the policy of the executive branch to be prudent and
financially responsible in the expenditure of funds, from both public
and private sources, and to alleviate unnecessary regulatory burdens
placed on the American people. On February 19, 2025, the President
issued Executive Order 14219, ``Ensuring Lawful Governance and
Implementation of the President's `Department of Government Efficiency'
Deregulatory Agenda,'' which states that the policy of the
Administration is to focus the executive branch's limited enforcement
resources on regulations squarely authorized by constitutional Federal
statutes and to commence the deconstruction of the overbearing and
burdensome administrative state. Consistent with these orders, the
Department published a Request for Information (RFI) that sought
comments and information to assist DOT in identifying existing
regulations, guidance documents, paperwork requirements, and other
regulatory obligations that can be modified or repealed, consistent
with law, to ensure that DOT administrative actions do not undermine
the national interest and that DOT achieves meaningful burden reduction
while continuing to meet statutory obligations, and to ensure the
safety of the U.S. transportation system.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ See 90 FR 14593 (Apr. 3, 2025).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This notice discusses the Department's review of public comments,
existing laws addressing the rights of consumers affected by
significant flight disruptions, and the application of executive branch
policies to the Airline Passenger Rights rulemaking.
B. Public Comments
The Department received approximately 350 comments on the ANPRM
during the public comment period. Commenters included airlines and
airline associations, consumer advocacy groups, disability rights
groups, individual consumers, a ticket agent association, and an
organization that submits compensation claims to airlines on behalf of
consumers. After the public comment period on the ANPRM, the Department
also received eight comments in response to the Department's RFI that
specifically addressed the ANPRM.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ The Department also received several comments on the RFI
from airlines that expressed general support for the comments of the
International Air Transport Association without specifically
mentioning this rulemaking. Comments on the RFI are available at
https://www.regulations.gov/docket/DOT-OST-2025-0026.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 51231]]
In their comments on the ANPRM, airlines and airline associations
unanimously opposed new passenger rights requirements. These commenters
stated that new requirements for services and compensation for
significant flight disruptions would greatly increase costs for
passengers and airlines, with Airlines for America (A4A) and the
International Air Transport Association providing an estimate that
annual costs to airlines would be $5 billion dollars or more. A few
individual commenters also expressed concern with the potential costs
of new passenger rights requirements for airlines and consumers, with
one noting that compensation requirements would create an unsustainable
financial burden on airlines, ultimately harming consumers through
reduced service and higher fares. Airline and airline association
commenters further stated that airlines are highly competitive and
already incentivized to provide the highest level of customer service
and that any new requirements would exceed the Department's authority
and would result in airlines offering reduced services. They further
added that requirements similar to those discussed in the ANPRM would
reduce operational reliability and had generally not improved
operations in Europe or Canada. Some of these commenters stated that
new requirements may incentivize airlines to risk safety in favor of
timeliness. A4A commented that the ANPRM was ``directly contrary to
President Trump's policy to alleviate unnecessary regulatory burdens
and significantly reduce the private expenditures required by Federal
regulations.'' Airlines and airline associations made comments in
response to the RFI similar to those they made in response to the
ANPRM. They emphasized that the ANPRM was inconsistent with Executive
Orders 14192 and 14219, and asserted that deregulation, not
prescriptive rules, leads to improved services for travelers, lower
fares, and more competition. The airline associations and airlines
requested that the Department ``terminate'' or ``abandon'' this
rulemaking.
On the other hand, consumer advocacy groups and hundreds of
individual commenters supported new regulations requiring services and
compensation for significant flight disruptions. The groups cited the
cost of flight disruptions to passengers as a rationale for continuing
with this rulemaking and stated that the Department's regulatory
precedent and legal authority also justify the rulemaking. They argued
that voluntary commitments by airlines to care for passengers affected
by controllable flight disruptions are insufficient because airlines
may remove these commitments or fail to inform passengers about them,
leaving consumers with inadequate protection. They also pointed out
that no large U.S. airline currently guarantees cash compensation for
significant flight disruptions. These commenters further stated that
this rule would incentivize competition and improve on-time
performance. AirHelp made similar comments to those from consumer
advocacy groups and estimated that imposing a similar regime in the
United States would cost each consumer under one dollar per ticket and
would not impact airline profitability. Disability rights advocacy
groups (the Muscular Dystrophy Association, Paralyzed Veterans of
America, and the United Spinal Tap Association) and some individual
commenters supported new rebooking requirements for passengers with
disabilities who face significant changes to their itineraries
affecting accessibility, explaining the unique hardships they face
under these circumstances.
C. DOT Response
In light of the comments, applicable legal authorities, and
Department and Administration policies, the Department has decided to
withdraw the ANPRM on Airline Passenger Rights.
Section 512 of the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2024 requires the
Department to ``direct'' air carriers providing scheduled passenger
service ``to establish policies regarding reimbursement for lodging,
transportation between such lodging and the airport, and meal costs
incurred due to a flight cancellation or significant delay directly
attributable to the air carrier.'' Subsection 512(c) does not authorize
the Department to regulate further in this area as it states that
``[n]othing in this section shall be construed as providing the
Secretary with any additional authorities beyond the authority to
require air carriers establish the policies referred to in'' subsection
512(a). The Department finds the best reading of section 512 is that
Congress intended the airlines to establish reimbursement policies for
the specific situations listed in the statute, and the statute does not
authorize the Department to require reimbursements or compensations for
flight disruptions. Despite the language of section 512, the Department
sought comment not only on imposing requirements for carriers to
establish policies on reimbursements but also on whether to require
carriers to provide cash compensation, free rebooking, and additional
services not specified in section 512 for passengers impacted by
significant flight disruptions. Therefore, consistent with section
2(a)(iii) of E.O. 14219, the Department finds that the ANPRM was not
based on the best reading of the underlying statutory authority and
must be withdrawn.
In addition, under 49 U.S.C. 40101, the Department must consider
certain factors as being in the public interest in carrying out
economic regulation. Among those factors are ``placing maximum reliance
on competitive market forces and on actual and potential competition''
and ``encouraging, developing, and maintaining an air transportation
system relying on actual and potential competition to provide
efficiency, innovation, and low prices.'' \4\ The Department concludes
that it is consistent with this statute to continue to allow airlines
to compete on the services and compensation that they provide to
passengers rather than imposing new minimum requirements for these
services and compensation through regulation, which would impose
significant costs on airlines, and potentially consumers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ See 49 U.S.C. 40101(a)(6), (a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
According to airline representatives, airlines have strong
incentives to take care of passengers during significant flight
disruptions and already do so voluntarily.\5\ At this time, the 10
largest U.S. passenger air carriers, whose networks account for more
than 97 percent of domestic scheduled passenger enplanements,\6\
maintain voluntary commitments in their customer service plans required
by 14 CFR 259.5 to assist passengers affected by cancellations and
significant delays that are controllable by the carrier. Those
voluntary commitments are reflected on the Department's Delay and
Cancellation Dashboard (Dashboard).\7\
[[Page 51232]]
For example, as reflected on the Dashboard, all 10 of the largest U.S.
airlines guarantee a meal and rebooking without charge on the ticketed
airline, and 9 guarantee hotel accommodation and ground transportation
to and from the hotel for passengers affected by controllable overnight
delays and cancellations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ See, e.g., comment of A4A, available at https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOT-OST-2024-0062-0347 (noting that
``members abide by--and frequently exceed DOT's regulations
regarding consumer protections'').
\6\ The statistic is based on calendar year 2024 on-market
enplanement data for domestic scheduled passenger operations
collected by the Department's Bureau of Transportation Statistics.
See Bureau of Transportation Statistics, Passengers, https://www.transtats.bts.gov/Data_Elements.aspx?Data=1 (last accessed May
12, 2025).
\7\ The Department maintains the Dashboard online as required by
49 U.S.C Sec. 42308. See www.flightrights.gov.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regarding new rebooking requirements for individuals with
disabilities affected by flight disruptions and changes, the Department
recognizes that many airlines will voluntarily rebook passengers
without charge when there are changes to the accessibility features of
a passenger's flight.\8\ In addition, the Department's recent final
rule, ``Ensuring Safe Accommodations for Air Travelers with
Disabilities Using Wheelchairs'' (2024 Wheelchair Rule), issued after
the Airline Passenger Rights ANPRM, has already extended new regulatory
rebooking protections to those passengers with disabilities who use
wheelchairs and scooters.\9\ The 2024 Wheelchair Rule requires airlines
to offer free rebooking on the next available flight of the same or
partner airline if the passenger's wheelchair or scooter is not loaded
onto their scheduled flight or does not fit on the scheduled
flight.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ See, e.g., comment from A4A and IATA on DOT rule, Ensuring
Safe Accommodations for Air Travelers with Disabilities Using
Wheelchairs, available at https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOT-OST-2022-0144-1950 (discussing airline voluntary rebooking practices
for passengers with wheelchairs and other mobility aids).
\9\ RIN 2105-AAF14, 89 FR 102398 (Dec. 17, 2024).
\10\ See 89 FR 102398 (Dec. 17, 2024). The Department published
a Federal Register notice stating that it will not enforce the 2024
Wheelchair Rule before August 1, 2025.See 90 FR 24319 (June 10,
2025). On September 30, 2025, the Department published another
Federal Register notice that temporarily delays enforcement of
certain provisions in the 2024 Wheelchair Rule but does not impact
enforcement of the majority of the requirements, including this
rebooking requirement. 90 FR 46751.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
With respect to passenger compensation requirements, four of the
largest U.S. airlines have already chosen voluntarily to commit in
their customer service plans to provide passengers compensation for
cancellations and significant delays that are controllable by the
airline in the form of credits, travel vouchers, or frequent flyer
miles.\11\ Based on the Department's enforcement experience, some
airlines may even offer compensation to accommodate passengers on a
case-by-case basis to encourage loyalty despite not being obligated to
do so.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ See www.flightrights.gov.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Further supporting that airline commitments for cancellations and
delays should be addressed without additional regulatory requirements
on airlines, the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2024 requires the
Department to ``establish, maintain, and make publicly available'' a
``dashboard that displays information regarding the services and
compensation provided by each large air carrier to mitigate any
passenger inconvenience caused by a delay or cancellation due to
circumstances in control of such carrier.'' \12\ The Department has
continued to publicize airlines' voluntary commitments to provide
services and compensation on the Dashboard consistent with this
statutory mandate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ See Public Law 118-63, 138 Stat. 1025 (2024).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition, the Department is not convinced that a new regulatory
regime that includes passenger compensation requirements would yield
meaningful improvements in airline flight performance. Over 20 year
ago, the European Union (EU) imposed requirements similar to those
explored in the Department's ANPRM, and the public comments and data
presented do not demonstrate conclusively that those requirements have
resulted in meaningful improvements to the reliability of flights
covered by the EU regime.\13\ Rather than issuing burdensome and
complex new regulations not supported by data, the Department is
focusing its efforts on helping airlines improve performance for
consumers through improvements to the National Air Space (NAS). DOT's
efforts to increase the number of air traffic controllers and create a
state-of-the-art, brand new air control system will provide airlines a
better operational environment to serve air travelers reliably. In
addition, the Department is concerned that regulations, such as those
discussed in the ANPRM, may discourage airlines from focusing on
investments in new technologies to address cancellation and delays
directly. This is a tradeoff that the Department is not prepared to
accept. The Department therefore finds, consistent with section
2(a)(vi) of E.O. 14219, that the ANPRM risks harm to the national
interest by significantly and unjustifiably impeding technological
innovation. In addition, with some annual cost estimates projected to
exceed $5 billion dollars (which could potentially be passed down to
American consumers in the form of higher ticket prices), with no
appreciable data documenting operational improvements, the Department
finds, consistent with section 2(a)(v) of E.O. 14219, that the ANPRM
would impose significant costs upon private parties that are not
outweighed by public benefits.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ See 89 FR 99760, 99773 (Dec. 11, 2024) (comparing a working
paper by the European University Institute finding ``an economically
important and statistically significant effect of EC261 regulation
[covering compensation and services] on both departure and arrival
delay, as well as on-time performance'' with a study contracted by
the European Commission that concluded that it was ``possible'' that
the EU regulation ``has a marginal impact on the proportion of
flights delayed'' but stating that the impact ``does not appear to
be significant compared to other factors'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Given the foregoing considerations, the Department concludes that
regulatory action requiring specific services and compensation for
significant flight disruptions would result in unnecessary regulatory
burdens, does not correspond with the policies and priorities of the
Department and Administration, and is inconsistent with E.O. 14192 and
E.O.14219 and is thus withdrawing the ANPRM.
Signed in Washington, DC.
Gregory D. Cote,
Principal Deputy General Counsel.
[FR Doc. 2025-20042 Filed 11-14-25; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-9X-P