[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 207 (Friday, October 25, 2019)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 57370-57378]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-22973]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Office of the Secretary

14 CFR Parts 244 and 259

[Docket No. DOT-OST-2019-0144]
RIN 2105-AE47


Tarmac Delay Rule

AGENCY: Office of the Secretary (OST), Department of Transportation 
(DOT).

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This rulemaking would modify U.S. and foreign air carrier 
obligations with respect to tarmac delays and conform carrier 
obligations with respect to departure delays with the changes made to 
the FAA Extension, Safety, and Security Act of 2016. This rulemaking 
would also make changes to the notification requirements regarding the 
status of the tarmac delay and the opportunity to deplane as well as 
carrier tarmac delay reporting and record retention requirements.

DATES: Comments should be filed by December 24, 2019. Late-filed 
comments will be considered to the extent practicable.

ADDRESSES: You may file comments identified by the docket number DOT-
OST-2019-9144 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, 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-2019-0144 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 is able to 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.) You may review DOT's 
complete Privacy Act statement in the Federal Register published on 
April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-78), or you may visit http://DocketsInfo.dot.gov.
    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: Ryan Patanaphan, Senior Trial Attorney 
or Blane A. Workie, Assistant General Counsel, Office of Aviation 
Enforcement and Proceedings, U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 
New Jersey Ave. SE, Washington, DC 20590, 202-366-9342, 202-366-7152 
(fax), ryan.patanaphan@dot.gov or 5f3d333e313a7128302d34363a1f3b302b71383029 (email).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Current Tarmac Delay Requirements

    On April 25, 2011, the Department published the ``Enhancing Airline 
Passenger Protections'' rule to improve the air travel environment for 
passengers.\1\ Under this rule, carriers are required to adopt and 
adhere to tarmac delay contingency plans. DOT's regulations require 
that these plans contain assurances that covered carriers will not 
allow aircraft to remain on the tarmac for more than three hours for 
domestic flights and four hours for international flights without 
providing passengers the option to deplane subject to exceptions for 
safety, security, and Air Traffic Control related reasons. Carriers' 
plans must also contain assurances such as assurances that carriers 
will provide adequate food and drinking water within two hours of the 
aircraft being delayed on the tarmac, provide notifications regarding 
the status of the delay and the opportunity to deplane if the 
opportunity to deplane exists, maintain operable lavatories and, if 
necessary, provide medical attention.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Enhancing Airline Passenger Protections Rule, 76 FR 23110, 
Apr. 25, 2011.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Need for a Rulemaking

    Section 2308 of the FAA Extension, Safety, and Security Act of 
2016, Public Law 114-190 (FAA Extension Act) requires the Department to 
issue regulations and take other actions necessary to carry out the 
amendments made by Section 2308. These amendments include new language 
requiring air carriers to begin to return an aircraft to a suitable 
disembarkation point no later than 3 or 4 hours after the main aircraft 
door is closed for departure. In response, the Department's Office of 
Aviation Enforcement and Proceedings (Enforcement Office) issued an 
``Enforcement Policy on Extended Tarmac Delays'' (Enforcement Policy) 
\2\ on November 22, 2016. The Enforcement Policy states that, as a 
matter of prosecutorial discretion, the Department will not take 
enforcement action against U.S. and foreign air carriers with respect 
to departure delays if U.S. and foreign air carriers begin to return 
the aircraft to a gate or another suitable disembarkation point no 
later than three hours for domestic flights and no later than four 
hours for international flights after the main aircraft door has closed 
in preparation for departure. The Enforcement Policy further provides 
that the process of beginning to return to the gate or a suitable 
disembarkation point varies based on whether the aircraft is in a 
carrier-controlled part of the airport or a non-carrier-controlled part 
of the airport. The Enforcement Policy is intended to be a temporary 
fix until the Department issues a final rule that specifically 
addresses lengthy tarmac delays pursuant to the FAA Extension Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ https://www.transportation.gov/airconsumer/enforcement-policy-extended-tarmac-delays.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In October 2017, the Department published a Notification of 
Regulatory Review (82 FR 4570, October 2, 2017), seeking public input 
on existing rules and other agency actions that are good candidates for 
repeal, replacement,

[[Page 57371]]

suspension, or modification.\3\ DOT received comments from various 
regulated entities regarding the Department's tarmac delay rule.\4\ 
Further, on January 30, 2019, the Department issued a notice inviting 
the public to identify and provide input on existing guidance documents 
that are good candidates for repeal, replacement, or modification.\5\ 
American Airlines and jointly A4A and IATA filed comments related to 
the 2016 Enforcement Policy.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=DOT-OST-2017-0069-0001.
    \4\ The Department received comments from Airlines For America 
(A4A), United Airlines, International Air Transport Association 
(IATA), Kuwait Airways, National Air Carrier Association (NACA), 
Etihad Airways, Association of Asian Pacific Airlines (AAPA), 
Lufthansa Group, Qantas, El Al, WestJet, Airlines Association of 
Southern Africa, and Air France/KLM related to the tarmac delay 
rule. In addition, the Department met with A4A and various U.S. 
airlines to hear their views of the tarmac delay rule.
    \5\ https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=DOT-OST-2017-0069-2855.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Department has reviewed these comments and is proposing certain 
changes to the tarmac delay rule, primarily a new exception for 
departure delays to conform the regulations to the FAA Extension Act, 
provide greater flexibility to airlines, and alleviate concerns about 
the existing rule's potential effects on cancellations. DOT is also 
proposing several changes to reporting requirements and other carrier 
obligations with respect to tarmac delays. The proposals are described 
in more detail below. The Department plans to consider the comments 
received on the tarmac delay rule that are not addressed in this 
proposal at a later time.

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

1. Departure Delay Exception

    On July 15, 2016, the FAA Extension Act was signed. Section 2308 of 
the FAA Extension Act amends 49 U.S.C. 42301 by changing the standard 
for when tarmac delay violations occur with respect to departing 
flights. The FAA Extension Act requires the Department to issue 
regulations and take other actions necessary to carry out section 2308. 
Under section 2308 of the FAA Extension Act, a tarmac delay occurs when 
passengers are on board an aircraft on the tarmac (A) awaiting takeoff 
after the main aircraft door is closed in preparation for departure, or 
(B) awaiting deplaning after the aircraft has landed. Under that Act, 
an excessive tarmac delay is a tarmac delay that is more than three 
hours long for domestic flights or more than four hours long for 
international flights. Previously, an excessive tarmac delay was 
defined in 49 U.S.C. 42301 as a tarmac delay that lasts for a length of 
time as determined by the Department.
    In its amended form, 49 U.S.C. 42301 provides that a tarmac delay 
ends for an arriving and departing flight when a passenger has the 
option to deplane an aircraft and return to the airport terminal; 
however, for a departing flight, under amended section 42301, it is not 
a violation of the assurance to permit an aircraft to remain on the 
tarmac for more than three hours for domestic flights and more than 
four hours for international flights if the air carrier begins to 
return the aircraft to a suitable disembarkation point to deplane 
passengers by those times. Unlike the amended statute, DOT's current 
regulation prohibits a carrier from allowing an aircraft to remain on 
the tarmac for more than three hours for domestic flights and four 
hours for international flights without providing passengers the 
opportunity to deplane and applies this standard to both departing and 
arriving flights without consideration of the time the carrier begins 
to return the aircraft to a suitable disembarkation point for departing 
flights.
    In the Enforcement Policy, the Department has stated that, if the 
aircraft is in an area of the airport property that is not under the 
carrier's control, the aircraft has begun the process of returning to a 
suitable disembarkation point when permission is granted by the Federal 
Aviation Administration (FAA) control tower, airport authority, or 
other relevant authority directing the aircraft's operations while it 
is on the tarmac. However, if the aircraft is in an area of the airport 
property that is under the carrier's control, an aircraft has begun to 
return to a suitable disembarkation point when the pilot begins 
maneuvering the aircraft to the disembarkation point.
    DOT is proposing to amend its tarmac delay regulation to reflect 
its Enforcement Policy, with slight modifications. To determine when 
the carrier begins to return to a suitable disembarkation point, we are 
proposing that if the aircraft is in an area that is not under the 
carrier's control, then the aircraft has begun to return to a suitable 
disembarkation point when a request is made to the Federal Aviation 
Administration control tower, airport authority, or other relevant 
authority directing the aircraft's operations, rather than when 
permission is granted as set forth in the Enforcement Policy. This 
revision would ensure that carriers are not held responsible for delays 
attributed to third parties and beyond the carriers' control. However, 
similar to the Enforcement Policy, under this proposed rule, if the 
aircraft is in an area of the airport property that is under the 
carrier's control, an aircraft would be considered to have begun to 
return to a suitable disembarkation point when the pilot begins 
maneuvering the aircraft to the disembarkation point. The Department 
seeks comment on this proposed standard and whether there are other 
appropriate standards the Department should consider.
    In addition, this rulemaking takes into account circumstances when 
a carrier has closed the main aircraft door for departure but the 
aircraft has not left the gate. Under the Enforcement Policy, the 
tarmac delay clock for departing flights begins when the main aircraft 
door has closed, even if the aircraft remains at the gate and the 
carrier asserts that an opportunity to deplane still exists. This 
rulemaking proposes that a tarmac delay on a departing flight begins 
when the main aircraft door is closed, which generally means that 
passengers on board the flight no longer have the opportunity to 
deplane. If a carrier can show that passengers on board the aircraft 
have the opportunity to deplane from an aircraft, even while the 
aircraft doors are closed, then, under the proposal, the tarmac delay 
clock has not started and will not start until passengers no longer 
have the opportunity to deplane. Absent a showing that passengers have 
the opportunity to deplane while the aircraft is at the gate with the 
doors closed, there would be a presumption that passengers do not have 
an opportunity to deplane. This approach allows carriers some 
flexibility in determining when a tarmac delay begins, while adhering 
to the standard prescribed by the statute. DOT seeks comment on this 
approach to determining when a tarmac delay begins during departing 
flights.
    DOT believes that adopting the departure delay exception as 
described in the Enforcement Policy--that a departing flight is not 
considered to be in violation of the assurance not to permit an 
aircraft to remain on the tarmac for more than 3 hours for domestic 
flights and more than 4 hours for international flights so long as the 
air carrier begins to return the aircraft to a suitable disembarkation 
point--would provide covered carriers some relief in situations when 
they may be unable to reduce the length of a tarmac delay for 
circumstances beyond their control. While in most cases a carrier would 
violate the current tarmac delay regulation if the carrier has not 
provided passengers the opportunity to deplane

[[Page 57372]]

by either the three or four-hour mark, the proposed inclusion of the 
departure delay exception offers carriers more flexibility and reduces 
the number of tarmac delays that are subject to enforcement. This would 
reduce the burden of the tarmac delay regulation on carriers in 
situations that they may be unable to control, while still maintaining 
important consumer protections.
    Also, the proposal specifies that the exception applies when 
carriers begin to return to a suitable disembarkation point in order to 
deplane passengers. If a flight begins to return to a suitable 
disembarkation point but does not provide passengers an opportunity to 
deplane, absent one of the safety, security, or air traffic control 
(ATC) exceptions provided in the regulation, the flight would not be 
considered to have begun to return to a suitable disembarkation point 
to provide passengers an opportunity to deplane, and the tarmac delay 
clock would continue to run. For example, an aircraft that begins the 
process to return to the gate or another suitable disembarkation point 
for a mechanical-related problem would have the tarmac delay time 
continue accruing for the flight if the purpose of the return was not 
to provide passengers an opportunity to deplane and passengers were not 
provided the option to deplane.
    We note that even though the requirements in 49 U.S.C. 42301, which 
were amended by the FAA Extension Act, only apply to U.S. carriers, DOT 
chose to apply its Enforcement Policy to both U.S. and foreign air 
carriers, under DOT's authority to prohibit unfair and deceptive 
practices in 49 U.S.C. 41712. We are also proposing to apply the 
requirements in the proposed rule to both U.S. and foreign air carriers 
to streamline the tarmac delay requirements and decrease confusion in 
the airport environment. DOT seeks comment on this approach.
    DOT is not proposing to change carrier obligations with respect to 
tarmac delays for arriving flights. Section 2308 of the FAA Extension 
Act states that the departure delay standard applies to departing 
flights, and, as such, DOT proposes to require carriers to modify their 
Contingency Plan for Lengthy Tarmac Delays to include specific 
assurances related to such flights.
    With regard to diverting flights, this proposal would provide that 
diversions are treated as arriving flights up to the point that an 
opportunity to deplane is provided to passengers. Once an opportunity 
to deplane is provided, the diversion is treated as a departing flight 
and after that point, the departure delay exception applies if carriers 
begin to return to a suitable disembarkation point in order to deplane 
passengers. DOT seeks comment on this treatment of diverting flights.

2. Reporting Requirements

    DOT proposes to revise the tarmac delay reporting requirements in 
14 CFR part 244. Currently, reporting carriers \6\ are required to file 
BTS Form 234 ``On-Time Flight Performance Report'' on a monthly basis 
for all scheduled passenger domestic flights that they market under 
their code to or from any U.S. large, medium, small, or non-hub 
airport. The report includes information on domestic scheduled 
passenger flights that experience tarmac delays at U.S. airports. 
Reporting carriers are also required to file BTS Form 244 ``Tarmac 
Delay Report'' on a monthly basis to report information on passenger 
flights that they operate that experience lengthy tarmac delays, 
including domestic scheduled passenger flights that experience lengthy 
tarmac delays at medium, small, or non-hub U.S. airports to the extent 
the carriers do not already report on-time performance data voluntarily 
for these airports under 14 CFR 234.7.\7\ This has resulted in 
duplicative reporting.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ ``Reporting carrier'' for air transportation taking place on 
or after January 1, 2018, means an air carrier certificated under 49 
U.S.C. 41102 that accounted for at least 0.5 percent of domestic 
scheduled-passenger revenues in the most recently reported 12-month 
period as defined by the Department's Office of Airline Information, 
and as reported to the Department pursuant to part 241 of this 
chapter. Reporting carriers will be identified periodically in 
accounting and reporting directives issued by the Office of Airline 
Information. 14 CFR 234.2.
    \7\ Reporting carriers are not required to file BTS Form 244 to 
report information on scheduled flights that experience lengthy 
tarmac delays at large hub U.S. airports because when DOT issued its 
rule for carriers to file BTS Form 244, that information was already 
required to be reported for domestic scheduled flights at large hub 
airports through BTS Form 234. Since then, the requirement for 
reporting carriers to provide on-time performance data using BTS 
Form 234 has been expanded to cover medium, small and non-hub 
airports. Also, the reporting of on-time performance data for 
scheduled domestic flights at medium, small, or non-hub U.S. 
airports on BTS Form 234 is mandatory and no longer voluntary for 
reporting carriers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Today, reporting carriers are required to submit tarmac delay 
information for scheduled domestic flights that they operate at medium, 
small, or non-hub U.S. airports both through Form 234 and Form 244. 
Also, tarmac delays on scheduled domestic flights marketed but not 
operated by a reporting carrier are being reported twice: The reporting 
carrier reports the flight using BTS Form 234, and the non-reporting 
carrier reports the same flight using BTS Form 244. This rulemaking 
would provide that tarmac delays on scheduled domestic passenger 
flights need no longer be reported by reporting carriers under 14 CFR 
part 244, provided that such flights are reported under 14 CFR part 
234. Also, the proposed rule changes reporting requirements to relieve 
non-reporting carriers of the obligation of filing BTS Form 244 for 
scheduled domestic flights if such flights are already reported by the 
reporting carrier to the Department using BTS Form 234. This change 
would reduce the burden on non-reporting carriers that operate flights 
held out by reporting carriers. U.S. air carriers covered under 14 CFR 
part 234 would still be required to file BTS Form 244 for tarmac delays 
occurring on international and public charter flights, and on flights 
not otherwise reported under 14 CFR part 234 (e.g., extra section 
flights). Non-reporting U.S. carriers that operate flights that are not 
held out by reporting carriers would still be required to file BTS Form 
244 for tarmac delays on domestic and international flights. The 
Department requests comment on the above reporting changes, including 
whether and how reporting requirements in 14 CFR parts 234 and 244 can 
be further consolidated.
    With respect to international flights, carriers are currently 
required to file a report under 14 CFR part 244 for tarmac delays of 
more than three hours. Under this proposed rule, the requirement to 
report would only be triggered if the tarmac delay rises to the level 
of an ``excessive tarmac delay,'' defined as a tarmac delay of more 
than three hours for a domestic flight and more than four hours for an 
international flight. This would reduce the number of instances in 
which a carrier is required to report to the Department a tarmac delay 
on an international flight. The Department solicits comment on this 
approach.

3. Record Retention

    DOT proposes to eliminate the tarmac delay record retention 
requirement in 14 CFR 259.4(e) and replace it with a reporting 
requirement. The current rule requires that U.S. and foreign air 
carriers with a tarmac delay contingency plan retain for two years 
specific information related to a tarmac delay. The specific 
information includes, among other information, the length and cause of 
the delay and an explanation of the actions taken to minimize passenger 
hardship. Under 49 U.S.C. 42301(h), U.S. carriers are also required to 
submit a written description of each excessive tarmac delay, which may 
include the information required to be retained

[[Page 57373]]

under 14 CFR 259.4(e). Because the Department receives a written 
description of lengthy tarmac delays from U.S. carriers as mandated by 
statute, maintaining the record retention requirement for U.S. carriers 
is duplicative and of limited or no public benefit. As such, the 
Department proposes to change the record retention requirement in 14 
CFR 259.4(e) to a reporting requirement, thereby eliminating the 
requirement to retain certain information for two years.
    The new reporting requirement would include the same information 
currently required to be retained under the current Sec.  259.4(e), and 
would also satisfy U.S. carrier obligations under 49 U.S.C. 42301(h). 
To comply with the mandate in 49 U.S.C. 42301(h) for U.S. carriers to 
submit to the Department a written description of a flight that 
experiences an excessive tarmac delay and its resolution, U.S. carriers 
generally provide the Department with the same information that they 
are required to retain under Sec.  259.4(e): The name of the operating 
carrier, the flight number, the origin and destination airports, the 
location of the delay, the length of the tarmac delay, and an 
explanation of the incident, including the cause of the delay and 
actions taken to minimize passenger hardship. This NPRM proposes that 
the same information be provided to the Department by U.S. and foreign 
air carriers under 14 CFR 259.4. Although 49 U.S.C. 42301(h) applies 
only to U.S. carriers, the Department is proposing to apply the same 
requirement to foreign air carriers pursuant to the Department's 
authority under 49 U.S.C. 41712. Accordingly, under the proposal, U.S. 
and foreign air carriers would file one written description of each 
excessive tarmac delay incident to the Department. As explained 
earlier, the airlines would no longer be required to retain for two 
years the records listed in 14 CFR 259.4(e). For both U.S. and foreign 
air carriers, the new reports would be due within 30 days of the date 
an excessive tarmac delay occurs, which is consistent with the time 
frame reports are due for U.S. carriers under 49 U.S.C. 42301(h). The 
Department requests comment on the above reporting and record retention 
changes, including the type of information to be required for 
reporting.

4. Other Exceptions to Tarmac Delay Requirements

    Under the Department's existing tarmac delay rule, carriers must 
not allow an aircraft to remain on the tarmac for more than three hours 
for domestic flights and more than four hours for international flights 
before allowing passengers to deplane from an aircraft, except when the 
pilot-in-command determines that there is a safety-related or security-
related reason why the aircraft cannot leave its position on the tarmac 
to deplane passengers, or when air traffic control advises that 
returning to a suitable disembarkation point to deplane passengers 
would significantly disrupt airport operations. Under 49 U.S.C. 42301, 
a passenger must have the option to deplane an aircraft and return to 
the airport terminal when there is a lengthy tarmac delay except when 
the pilot in command determines that permitting a passenger to deplane 
would jeopardize passenger safety or security, or when air traffic 
control advises that returning to a suitable disembarkation point to 
deplane passengers would significantly disrupt airport operations. 
Title 49 U.S.C. 42301 also references a suitable disembarkation point 
when discussing deplaning passengers following a lengthy tarmac delay.
    This rulemaking proposes to amend the safety and security 
exceptions to the tarmac delay rule to codify the exceptions in 49 
U.S.C. 42301. Under this proposal, a safety or security exception 
occurs when the pilot-in-command determines that deplaning passengers 
at a suitable disembarkation point would jeopardize passenger safety or 
security, or when there is a safety-related or security-related reason 
why the aircraft cannot leave its position on the tarmac to deplane 
passengers. A suitable disembarkation point is defined as a location at 
an airport where passengers have the ability to deplane from an 
aircraft. The Department's Enforcement Office already considers the 
exceptions provided in 49 U.S.C. 42301 and the Department's tarmac 
delay rule to determine whether a violation has occurred. As such, the 
Department does not anticipate that this change in language would 
impact carriers or consumers. Consistent with the statute and prior 
practice, under this proposal, a safety or security exception would 
apply when passengers are at a suitable disembarkation point to deplane 
but are unable to do so for an unavoidable safety-related reason such 
as lightning. If, however, the passengers are at a suitable 
disembarkation point such as a remote hardstand to deplane but are 
unable to do so because of lack of buses or stairs, the safety or 
security exception would not apply.
    As this rulemaking would not have an effect on the safety or 
security exceptions articulated in the rule and the statute, this NPRM 
would not negatively impact safety.

5. Other Carrier Obligations

    This rulemaking would clarify carrier obligations with respect to 
the provision of food and water. Currently, carriers must provide 
adequate food and potable water no later than two hours after the 
aircraft leaves the gate (in the case of a departure) or touches down 
(in the case of an arrival) if the aircraft remains on the tarmac, 
unless the pilot-in-command determines that safety or security 
considerations preclude such service. Because the obligation to provide 
food and water is triggered two hours after the aircraft leaves the 
gate, there are two separate start times for carriers' tarmac delay 
responsibilities. More specifically, for the purposes of calculating 
the length of a tarmac delay, a tarmac delay starts after the main 
aircraft door has closed in preparation for departure, which generally 
means that passengers on board the aircraft no longer have the 
opportunity to deplane. On the other hand, carriers' obligation to 
provide food and water occurs within two hours of the aircraft leaving 
the gate. The two start times are not always in alignment. For example, 
if an aircraft remains at the gate for one hour and passengers do not 
have the opportunity to deplane, and then the aircraft leaves the gate, 
the flight crew must maintain two separate timers, one to monitor the 
time of the tarmac delay, and the other to monitor the time since the 
aircraft left the gate to determine when food and water must be 
provided. This proposed rule would standardize carrier obligations such 
that the food and water timer would begin at the same time a tarmac 
delay begins. The proposed rule would also clarify that the food and 
water obligation only applies to situations in which the aircraft 
remains on the ground, both during departure and after touch-down.
    The proposed rule would also change carrier obligations with 
respect to notifying passengers when they have an opportunity to 
deplane. Currently, carriers must provide notification to passengers 
that they have the opportunity to deplane from an aircraft if the 
opportunity to deplane exists. The first notification must be made 
beginning 30 minutes after the scheduled departure time and every 30 
minutes thereafter while the opportunity to deplane exists. This 
proposed rule would eliminate the carrier's obligation to provide 
additional notifications every 30 minutes, thereby reducing the burden 
on carrier staff, while maintaining passengers' access to information. 
Carriers would be obligated to make a notification when an opportunity 
to deplane exists (and each time such an opportunity recurs, if, for

[[Page 57374]]

example, an aircraft returns to the gate after taxiing).
    This rulemaking also proposes to eliminate the requirement that 
carriers provide notifications regarding the status and cause of the 
delay every 30 minutes to passengers on board an aircraft. The 
Department believes that the current rule, specifically the required 
frequency of notifications, provides no or limited value to passengers. 
It may even be harmful to passengers for carriers to provide frequent 
updates when the flight crew have no new updates to share with 
passengers and/or when passengers may be attempting to sleep during 
late night delays. The Department seeks comment on the elimination of 
this requirement.

Regulatory Notices

A. Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review) and DOT 
Regulatory Policies and Procedures

    This action has been determined to be nonsignificant under 
Executive Order 12866 (``Regulatory Planning and Review'') as 
supplemented by Executive Order 13563 (``Improving Regulation and 
Regulatory Review''). Accordingly, the Office of Management and Budget 
(OMB) has not reviewed it under that Order. It is also not significant 
under the Department of Transportation's Regulatory Policies and 
Procedures.
    Nearly all the provisions in this proposed rule are deregulatory in 
nature, which would generate cost savings, or clarifications, which 
would result in no economic impact. Minimal costs may be associated 
with three provisions consisting of a requirement for carriers to: (1) 
Report the length of the excessive tarmac delay if the length is not 
otherwise represented by the data listed under 14 CFR 244.3(a); (2) 
collect a new data point for the start time of a tarmac delay for 
enforcement purposes for departing flights, which would be the time the 
main aircraft door closes; and (3) collect a new data point for the 
time carriers begin to return the aircraft to a suitable disembarkation 
point to deplane passengers on departing flights. The primary purpose 
of this proposed rule is to implement changes to the FAA Extension Act 
regarding carrier obligations during an excessive tarmac delay. In 
general, we expect the rule to generate cost savings and benefits to 
carriers and consumers due primarily to the new standard for departure 
delays. This rulemaking also includes provisions to make conforming 
changes to carrier tarmac delay reporting and record keeping 
requirements. The changes to record retention and reporting 
requirements would reduce the burden on carriers. However, these cost 
savings and benefits are minimal and difficult to quantify as annual 
tarmac delays are becoming relatively rare since the implementation of 
the 2009 Tarmac Delay rule. In particular, domestic tarmac delays have 
already been reduced to 193 in 2017 from 1,642 in 2007, or 2.2 delays 
dropping to 0.3 delays per 10,000 flights. Details are provided in the 
preliminary regulatory evaluation which is available in the docket.

B. 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 propose any regulation 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.

C. Executive Order 13084

    This NPRM has been analyzed in accordance with the principles and 
criteria contained in Executive Order 13084 (``Consultation and 
Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments''). Because none of the 
options on which we are seeking comment would 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 13084 do not apply.

D. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) requires an 
agency to review regulations to assess their impact 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. 
A direct air carrier or foreign 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. 
Nearly all the provisions in this proposed rule are deregulatory in 
nature (which would generate cost savings) or clarifications (which 
would result in no economic impact). This NPRM's proposals are expected 
to result in cost savings or benefits that are minimal and difficult to 
quantify. A small number of tarmac delays occur on flights operated by 
small entities, and the impact on the small entities is expected to be 
minimal. Accordingly, the Department does not believe that the NPRM 
would have a significant impact on a substantial number of small 
entities. However, we invite comment on the potential impact of this 
rulemaking on small entities.

E. Paperwork Reduction Act

    Under the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) (PRA), 
no person is required to respond to a collection of information unless 
it displays a valid OMB control number. This NPRM proposes a revision 
to the existing information collection burdens under OMB control number 
2105-0561. Under the PRA, before an agency seeks OMB approval for a 
proposed collection of information, it must first publish a document in 
the Federal Register providing 60-day notice to the public to allow for 
comment. The Department invites interested parties to comment on the 
information collection requirements contained in this document. As 
prescribed by the PRA, the requirement will not go into effect until 
OMB has approved them after a 30-day notice is issued and the 
Department has published a notice announcing the effective date of the 
revised information collection requirements.
    This NPRM proposes to modify existing information collection 
requirements under OMB control number 2105-0561. This NPRM proposes 
changes to two parts of the Department's regulations: 14 CFR part 244 
(reporting tarmac delay data) and part 259, specifically Sec.  259.4(e) 
(retention of records related to tarmac delays). It would eliminate 
reports for tarmac delays between 3 and 4 hours on international 
flights, eliminate duplicative reporting of domestic tarmac delays that 
are already reported under 14 CFR part 234, and change a record 
retention requirement in 14 CFR 259.4(e) into a descriptive tarmac 
delay reporting requirement.
    For each of the information collections proposed for 14 CFR part 
244 and 14 CFR 259.4, the title, a description of the respondents, and 
an estimate of the burdens are set forth below:
    1. Requirement that carriers report certain tarmac delay data to 
BTS for tarmac delays exceeding 3 hours (for domestic flights) and 
exceeding 4 hours (for international flights) on a monthly basis.
    Title: Reporting Tarmac Delay Data to BTS for Tarmac Delays 
Exceeding 3

[[Page 57375]]

Hours (for Domestic Flights) and 4 Hours (for International Flights).
    Respondents: U.S. carriers that operate scheduled passenger service 
or public charter service using any aircraft with 30 or more seats, and 
foreign air carriers that operate scheduled passenger or public charter 
service to and from the United States using any aircraft with 30 or 
more seats.
    Number of Respondents: 61 U.S. and 70 foreign carriers (estimated). 
Due to the changes proposed by this NPRM, it is expected that in nearly 
all cases, tarmac delays that would be reportable under 14 CFR part 244 
would be on international flights, as nearly all tarmac delays on 
domestic flights would be reported under 14 CFR part 234.\8\ Based on 
data submitted by airlines to BTS from 2014 to 2018, we expect the 
NPRM's proposals to result in an average of 37 tarmac delays on 
international flights to be reported through BTS Form 244 in a given 
year.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ The NPRM would not affect the reporting of tarmac delays on 
domestic flights if those flights are not already reported under 14 
CFR part 234 (i.e. those flights that are neither held out or 
operated by carriers that file reports under 14 CFR part 234); 
however, such tarmac delays are generally uncommon.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Estimated Annual Burden on Respondents: Based on 2014-2018 data, 
the NPRM's proposals would result in 0 to 18 reports being filed under 
14 CFR part 244 by U.S. air carriers each year, and 0 to 7 reports 
being filed under 14 CFR part 244 by foreign air carriers each year. 
This range reflects the lowest and highest number of reportable tarmac 
delays on international flights experienced by U.S. and foreign air 
carriers during the 2014-2018 period. At 30 minutes of burden per 
report filed, this proposal would result in a burden of between 0.0 
hours and 9.0 hours for each U.S. carrier, and between 0.0 and 3.5 
hours for foreign air carriers.
    Estimated Total Annual Burden: As the proposals in this NPRM would 
result in an estimated 37 reports filed under 14 CFR part 244 each 
year, the total annual burden would be 1110 minutes (18.5 hours). This 
reflects a reduction in existing burdens that would result from the 
NPRM's proposals, including (1) elimination of reports for tarmac 
delays between 3 and 4 hours on international flights, and (2) 
elimination of duplicative reporting for domestic tarmac delays that 
are already reported under 14 CFR part 234. The NPRM's proposal to 
require an additional data point for certain tarmac delay reports (when 
the length of the tarmac delay is not reflected in the required data 
points reported on BTS Form 244) would not result in any measurable 
effect on burden.
    2. Eliminating Tarmac Delay Record Retention Requirement and Adding 
a New Descriptive Reporting Requirement for Foreign Air Carriers.
    Title: Changing Tarmac Delay Record Retention Requirement into a 
Descriptive Reporting Requirement That Complies with 49 U.S.C. 
42301(h).
    Respondents: U.S. carriers that operate scheduled passenger service 
or public charter service using any aircraft with 30 or more seats, and 
foreign air carriers that operate scheduled passenger or public charter 
service to and from the United States using any aircraft with 30 or 
more seats.
    Number of Respondents: 61 U.S. air carriers and 70 foreign air 
carriers (estimated). Based on reports submitted by carriers to BTS 
between 2014 and 2018, we expect an average of 148 reportable tarmac 
delays to occur in a given year, with 128 operated by U.S. air carriers 
and 20 by foreign air carriers. Based on the NPRM's proposals, carriers 
would no longer need to retain for two years the records related to 
these tarmac delays. Instead, carriers would be required to file a 
report with a written description of the tarmac delay incident to the 
Department's Aviation Consumer Protection Division. Because U.S. 
carriers already file such reports pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 42301(h), U.S. 
carriers would not encounter any additional reporting burdens under the 
NPRM's proposed changes to 14 CFR 259.4, and would experience a net 
burden decrease as a result of the proposed elimination of the record 
retention requirement. Only the 20 tarmac delays operated by foreign 
air carriers would result in new reports being filed under 14 CFR 
259.4.
    Estimated Annual Burden on Respondents: We expect the burden on 
carriers to file descriptive tarmac delay reports is 2 hours per report 
for U.S. carriers and 4 hours per report for foreign carriers. As the 
NPRM only results in a new reporting burden for foreign air carriers, 
the expected burden per respondent is between 0 and 7 reports per year 
(based on the highest annual number of tarmac delays experienced by a 
single foreign carrier between 2014 and 2018), or 0.0 to 28.0 hours of 
burden per respondent. There will be no new burdens on U.S. air 
carriers under this information collection, due to U.S. air carriers' 
existing reporting requirement under 49 U.S.C. 42301(h).
    Estimated Total Annual Burden: This information collection would 
result in an estimated annual burden of 20 reports, or 80 hours. This 
reflects a reduction in burden for U.S. carriers based on the 
elimination of the record retention burden required by 14 CFR 259.4(e).
    The Department invites interested persons to submit comments on any 
aspect of each of these information collections, including the 
following: (1) The necessity and utility of the information collection, 
(2) the accuracy of the estimate of the burden, (3) ways to enhance the 
quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected, and 
(4) ways to minimize the burden of collection without reducing the 
quality of the collected information. Comments submitted in response to 
this NPRM will be summarized or included, or both, in the request for 
OMB approval of these information collections.

F. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    The Department has determined that the requirements of Title II of 
the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 do not apply to this NPRM.

G. National Environmental Policy Act

    The Department has analyzed the environmental impacts of this 
proposed action pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act of 
1969 (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). See 40 CFR 
1508.4. 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 4(c)(6)(i) of DOT Order 5610.1C provides that ``actions 
relating to consumer protection, including regulations'' are 
categorically excluded. The purpose of this rulemaking is primarily to 
amend the definition of excessive tarmac delay. The Department does not 
anticipate any environmental impacts, and there are no extraordinary 
circumstances present in connection with this rulemaking.

List of Subjects

14 CFR Part 244

    Administrative practice and procedure, Airports, Consumer 
protection.

[[Page 57376]]

14 CFR Part 259

    Air carriers, Consumer protection, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements.

    For the reasons stated in the preamble, DOT proposes to amend 14 
CFR chapter II, subchapter A, as follows:

PART 244--REPORTING TARMAC DELAY DATA

0
1. Revise the authority citation for part 244 to read as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 40101(a)(4), 40101(a)(9), 40113(a), 41702, 
41712, and 42301.

0
2. Amend Sec.  244.1 by removing the definition of ``Arrival time'', 
adding definitions for ``Excessive tarmac delay'' and ``Gate arrival 
time'' in alphabetical order, and revising the definition for ``Tarmac 
delay'' to read as follows:


Sec.  244.1  Definitions.

* * * * *
    Excessive tarmac delay means a tarmac delay of more than three 
hours for a domestic flight and more than four hours for an 
international flight.
* * * * *
    Gate arrival time is the instant when the pilot sets the aircraft 
parking brake after arriving at the airport gate or passenger unloading 
area. If the parking brake is not set, record the time for the opening 
of the passenger door. Also, for purposes of Sec.  244.3 carriers using 
a Docking Guidance System (DGS) may record the official ``gate-arrival 
time'' when the aircraft is stopped at the appropriate parking mark.
* * * * *
    Tarmac delay means the period of time when an aircraft is on the 
ground with passengers and the passengers have no opportunity to 
deplane.
0
3. Revise Sec.  244.2 to read as follows:


Sec.  244.2  Applicability.

    (a) Covered operations. Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this 
section, this part applies to U.S. certificated air carriers, U.S. 
commuter air carriers and foreign air carriers that operate passenger 
service to or from a U.S. airport with at least one aircraft that has 
an original manufacturer's design capacity of 30 or more seats. Covered 
carriers must report all passenger operations that experience an 
excessive tarmac delay at a U.S. airport.
    (b) Exceptions. (1) For foreign air carriers that operate charter 
flights from foreign airports to U.S. airports, and return to foreign 
airports, and do not pick up any new passengers in the U.S., the 
charter flights are not flights subject to the reporting requirements 
of this part.
    (2) For U.S. air carriers that submit Airline Service Quality 
Performance Reports under 14 CFR part 234, their scheduled domestic 
flights are not flights subject to the reporting requirements of this 
part to the extent part 234 reports are submitted for those flights.
0
4. Revise Sec.  244.3 to read as follows:


Sec.  244.3  Reporting of tarmac delay data.

    (a) Each covered carrier shall file BTS Form 244 ``Tarmac Delay 
Report'' with the Office of Airline Information of the Department's 
Bureau of Transportation Statistics setting forth the information for 
each of its covered flights that experienced an excessive tarmac delay 
at a U.S. airport, including diverted flights and cancelled flights on 
which the passengers were boarded and then deplaned before the 
cancellation. The reports are due within 15 days after the end of any 
month during which the carrier experienced the excessive tarmac delay. 
The reports shall be made in the form and manner set forth in 
accounting and reporting directives issued by the Director, Office of 
Airline Information, and shall contain the following information:
    (1) Carrier code.
    (2) Flight number.
    (3) Departure airport (three letter code).
    (4) Arrival airport (three letter code).
    (5) Date of flight operation (year/month/day).
    (6) Gate departure time (actual) in local time.
    (7) Wheels-off time (actual) in local time.
    (8) Wheels-on time (actual) in local time.
    (9) Gate arrival time (actual) in local time.
    (10) Aircraft tail number.
    (11) Total ground time away from gate for all gate return/fly 
return at origin airports including cancelled flights.
    (12) Longest time away from gate for gate return or canceled 
flight.
    (13) Three letter code of airport where flight diverted.
    (14) Wheels-on time at diverted airport.
    (15) Total time away from gate at diverted airport.
    (16) Longest time away from gate at diverted airport.
    (17) Wheels-off time at diverted airport.
    (b) Covered carriers that experience an excessive tarmac delay at a 
U.S. airport and are filing a form under this section must also report 
the length of the excessive tarmac delay to the Office of Airline 
Information of the Department's Bureau of Transportation Statistics, if 
the length of the excessive tarmac delay experienced is not otherwise 
represented by the data points listed in paragraph (a) of this section 
(e.g., the pilot sets the aircraft parking brake after arriving at the 
passenger unloading area, but passengers are not provided an 
opportunity to deplane at that time).
    (c) The same information required by paragraphs (a)(13) through 
(17) of this section must be provided for each subsequent diverted 
airport landing.

PART 259--ENHANCED PROTECTIONS FOR AIRLINE PASSENGERS

0
5. 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, 
41712, and 42301.

0
6. Revise Sec.  259.2 to read as follows:


Sec.  259.2  Applicability.

    This part applies to all the flights of a certificated or commuter 
air carrier if the carrier operates scheduled passenger service or 
public charter service using any aircraft originally designed to have a 
passenger capacity of 30 or more seats, and to all flights to and from 
the U.S. of a foreign air carrier if the carrier operates scheduled 
passenger service or public charter service to and from the U.S. using 
any aircraft originally designed to have a passenger capacity of 30 or 
more seats, except as otherwise provided in this part. This part does 
not apply to foreign air carrier charters that operate to and from the 
United States if no new passengers are picked up in the United States. 
Section 259.4 does not apply to a flight that diverts to the United 
States when the flight is operated by a foreign air carrier and 
scheduled to operate between two foreign points.
0
7. Amend Sec.  259.3 by adding definitions for ``Main aircraft door'' 
and ``Suitable disembarkation point'' in alphabetical order and 
revising the definition of ``Tarmac delay'' to read as follows:


Sec.  259.3  Definitions.

* * * * *
    Main aircraft door means the door used for boarding. In situations 
in which there are multiple doors that can be used for boarding, the 
last door closed is considered the main aircraft door.
* * * * *
    Suitable disembarkation point means a location at an airport where

[[Page 57377]]

passengers have the ability to deplane from an aircraft.
    Tarmac delay means the period of time when an aircraft is on the 
ground with passengers and the passengers have no opportunity to 
deplane.
0
8. Revise Sec.  259.4 to read as follows:


Sec.  259.4  Contingency Plan for Lengthy Tarmac Delays.

    (a) Adoption of plan. Each covered carrier, as defined by Sec.  
259.3, shall adopt a Contingency Plan for Lengthy Tarmac Delays for its 
scheduled and public charter flights at each U.S. large hub airport, 
medium hub airport, small hub airport, and non-hub airport at which it 
operates or markets such air service and shall adhere to its plan's 
terms.
    (b) Contents of plan. Each Contingency Plan for Lengthy Tarmac 
Delays shall include, at a minimum, assurances that the covered carrier 
shall comply with the requirements set forth in paragraph (c) of this 
section.
    (c) Requirements. Covered carriers must comply with the following 
requirements:
    (1) For all domestic flights, each covered U.S. air carrier shall 
provide a passenger on a flight experiencing a tarmac delay at a U.S. 
airport the opportunity to deplane before the tarmac delay exceeds 
three hours in duration, subject to the exceptions in paragraph (c)(3) 
of this section;
    (2) For all international flights, each covered carrier shall 
provide a passenger on a flight experiencing a tarmac delay at a U.S. 
airport the opportunity to deplane before the tarmac delay exceeds four 
hours in duration, subject to the exceptions in paragraph (c)(3) of 
this section;
    (3) A covered U.S. carrier that experiences a tarmac delay at a 
U.S. airport must comply with paragraphs (c)(1) and (2) of this 
section, and a covered foreign air carrier must comply with paragraph 
(c)(2) of this section, unless:
    (i) For departing flights, the flight begins to return to a 
suitable disembarkation point no later than three hours (for domestic 
flights) or four hours (for international flights) after the main 
aircraft door is closed in order to deplane passengers. If the aircraft 
is in an area that is not under the carrier's control, the aircraft has 
begun to return to a suitable disembarkation point when a request is 
made to the Federal Aviation Administration control tower, airport 
authority, or other relevant authority directing the aircraft's 
operations. If the aircraft is in an area that is under the carrier's 
control, the aircraft has begun to return to a suitable disembarkation 
point when the pilot begins maneuvering the aircraft to a suitable 
disembarkation point;
    (ii) The pilot-in-command determines that deplaning passengers at a 
suitable disembarkation point would jeopardize passenger safety or 
security, or there is a safety-related or security-related reason why 
the aircraft cannot leave its position on the tarmac to deplane 
passengers; or
    (iii) Air traffic control advises the pilot-in-command that 
returning to a suitable disembarkation point to deplane passengers 
would significantly disrupt airport operations;
    (4) For all flights if the aircraft remains on the tarmac, each 
covered carrier must provide adequate food and potable water no later 
than two hours after the main aircraft door is closed (in the case of a 
departure) or touches down (in the case of an arrival), unless the 
pilot-in-command determines that safety or security considerations 
preclude such service;
    (5) For all flights, each covered carrier must ensure operable 
lavatory facilities, as well as adequate medical attention if needed, 
during a tarmac delay;
    (6) For all flights, when the opportunity to deplane exists at a 
suitable disembarkation point, each covered carrier must notify the 
passengers on board the aircraft that they have the opportunity to 
deplane;
    (7) Each covered carrier must ensure that it has sufficient 
resources to implement its Contingency Plan for Lengthy Tarmac Delays, 
as set forth in paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section; and
    (8) Each covered carrier must ensure that its Contingency Plan for 
Lengthy Tarmac Delays, as set forth in paragraphs (a) and (b) of this 
section, has been coordinated with the following entities:
    (i) Airport authorities (including terminal facility operators 
where applicable) at each U.S. large hub airport, medium hub airport, 
small hub airport, and non-hub airport that the carrier serves, as well 
as its regular U.S. diversion airports;
    (ii) U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) at each large U.S. 
hub airport, medium hub airport, small hub airport, and non-hub airport 
that is regularly used for that carrier's international flights, 
including regular U.S. diversion airports; and
    (iii) The Transportation Security Administration (TSA) at each U.S. 
large hub airport, medium hub airport, small hub airport, and non-hub 
airport that the carrier serves, including regular U.S. diversion 
airports.
    (d) Diversions. For purposes of this section, a diverted flight is 
treated as an arriving flight up to the point that an opportunity to 
deplane is provided to passengers. Once an opportunity to deplane is 
provided, the diversion is treated as a departing flight, and after 
that point, the departure delay exception in paragraph (c)(3)(i) of 
this section applies if the carrier begins to return to a suitable 
disembarkation point in order to deplane passengers.
    (e) Code-share responsibility. The tarmac delay contingency plan of 
the carrier under whose code the service is marketed governs, if 
different from the operating carrier, unless the marketing carrier 
specifies in its contract of carriage that the operating carrier's plan 
governs.
    (f) Amendment of plan. At any time, a carrier may amend its 
Contingency Plan for Lengthy Tarmac Delays to decrease the time for 
aircraft to remain on the tarmac for domestic flights covered in 
paragraph (c)(1) of this section, for aircraft to remain on the tarmac 
for international flights covered in paragraph (c)(2) of this section, 
for aircraft to begin to return to a suitable disembarkation point 
covered in paragraph (c)(3)(i) of this section, and for providing food 
and water covered in paragraph (c)(4) of this section. A carrier may 
also amend its plan to increase these intervals (up to the limits in 
this part), in which case the amended plan shall apply only to 
departures that are first offered for sale after the plan's amendment.
    (g) Written reports. (1) Each covered operating carrier subject to 
this part shall submit to the Aviation Consumer Protection Division of 
the U.S. Department of Transportation a written description of each of 
the flights it operates that experiences a tarmac delay of more than 
three hours (on domestic flights) and more than four hours (on 
international flights) at a U.S. airport no later than 30 days after 
the tarmac delay occurs.
    (2) The written description referenced in paragraph (g)(1) of this 
section shall include, at a minimum, the following information:
    (i) The name of the operating carrier, the name of the marketing 
carrier if the operating carrier is not the marketing carrier, and the 
flight number;
    (ii) The originally scheduled origin and destination airports of 
the flight;
    (iii) The airport at which the tarmac delay occurred and the date 
it occurred;
    (iv) The length of the tarmac delay that occurred; and
    (v) An explanation of the incident, including the precise cause of 
the tarmac delay, the actions taken to

[[Page 57378]]

minimize hardships for passengers (including the provision of food and 
water, the maintenance and servicing of lavatories, and medical 
assistance), and the resolution of the incident.
    (3) The written description referenced in paragraph (g)(1) of this 
section shall be accompanied by a signed certification statement that 
reads as follows:
    I, (Name) and (Title), of (Air Carrier Name), certify that the 
enclosed report is, to the best of my knowledge and belief, true and 
correct.
    Date:
    Signature:
    Name (Please Print or Type):
    (4) A U.S. air carrier that submits a report in accordance with 
paragraph (g) of this section is in compliance with the reporting 
mandate for U.S. air carriers in 49 U.S.C. 42301(h) with respect to the 
excessive tarmac delay reported.
    (h) Unfair and deceptive practice. A carrier's failure to comply 
with the assurances required by this part and contained in its 
Contingency Plan for Lengthy Tarmac Delays will be considered to be an 
unfair and deceptive practice within the meaning of 49 U.S.C. 41712 
that is subject to enforcement action by the Department.

    Issued this 15th day of October, 2019, in Washington, DC.
Elaine L. Chao,
Secretary of Transportation.
[FR Doc. 2019-22973 Filed 10-24-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-9X-P


