[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 1 (Thursday, January 2, 2020)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 27-37]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-27631]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Office of the Secretary

14 CFR Part 382

[Docket No. DOT-OST-2019-0180]
RIN 2105-AE88


Accessible Lavatories on Single-Aisle Aircraft: Part 1

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

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of Transportation (Department or DOT) is 
seeking comment in this Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) on 
proposed amendments to the Department's disability regulation. This 
NPRM proposes specific measures for improving accessibility of 
lavatories on single-aisle aircraft for passengers with disabilities. 
These improvements include changes to the interior of the lavatory, 
additional services that airlines would provide with respect to 
lavatory access, training requirements, and improvements to the 
aircraft's onboard wheelchair.

DATES: Comments should be filed by March 2, 2020. Late-filed comments 
will be considered to the extent practicable.

ADDRESSES: You may file comments identified by docket number DOT-OST-
2019-0180 by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to https://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-2019-0180 or the Regulatory Identification Number (RIN) for the 
rulemaking at the beginning of your comment. All comments received will 
be posted without change to https://www.regulations.gov, including any 
personal information provided.
    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.). 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 https://www.transportation.gov/privacy.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or 
comments received, go to https://www.regulations.gov, or to the street 
address listed above. Follow the online instructions for accessing the 
dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert Gorman, Senior Trial Attorney, 
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), robert.gorman@dot.gov (email). You may also 
contact Blane Workie, Assistant General Counsel, Office of Aviation 
Enforcement and Proceedings,

[[Page 28]]

U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Ave. SE, Washington, 
DC 20590, 202-366-9342, 202-366-7152 (fax), blane.workie@dot.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

A. Statutory Authority

    The Air Carrier Access Act (ACAA), 49 U.S.C. 41705, prohibits 
discrimination in airline service on the basis of disability by U.S. 
and foreign air carriers. However, it does not specify how U.S. and 
foreign air carriers must act to avoid such discrimination or how the 
Department should regulate with respect to these issues. The 
Department's authority to regulate nondiscrimination in airline service 
is found in the ACAA in conjunction with its rulemaking authority under 
49 U.S.C. 40113, which states that the Department may take action that 
it considers necessary to carry out this part, including prescribing 
regulations. The Department, through reasonable interpretation of its 
statutory authority, has issued regulations that require carriers to 
provide nondiscriminatory service to individuals with disabilities. In 
issuing regulations implementing the ACAA, the Department's general 
regulatory approach is to issue regulations that are reasonable, 
straightforward, clear, and designed to minimize burdens consistent 
with safety and access to air travel.

B. Need for a Rulemaking

    Single-aisle aircraft are increasingly being used by airlines for 
long-haul flights. At present, there is no requirement that airlines 
provide accessible lavatories on single-aisle aircraft. The inability 
to use the lavatory on long flights can present significant challenges 
to passengers with disabilities, and poses a deterrent for some 
passengers with disabilities to traveling by air.

C. History of Regulations Governing Accessible Lavatories on Aircraft

    The Air Carrier Access Act (ACAA), enacted in 1986, prohibits 
discrimination on the basis of disability in air travel.\1\ In 1988, 
the Department conducted a regulatory negotiation to develop ACAA 
regulations. The regulatory negotiation included representatives of the 
airline industry, the disability community, and other stakeholders.\2\ 
In March 1990, the Department issued final ACAA regulations, found at 
14 CFR part 382.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 49 U.S.C. 41705.
    \2\ 53 FR 23574, 23574 (June 22, 1988).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The 1990 ACAA rule required twin-aisle aircraft to have at least 
one accessible lavatory, if lavatories were installed on the aircraft. 
In the context of twin-aisle aircraft, an accessible lavatory is one 
that: (1) Permits a qualified individual with a disability to enter, 
maneuver as necessary to use all lavatory facilities, and leave, by 
means of the aircraft's onboard wheelchair (OBW); \3\ (2) affords 
privacy to persons using the OBW equivalent to that afforded ambulatory 
users; and (3) provides door locks, accessible call buttons, grab bars, 
faucets and other controls, and dispensers usable by qualified 
individuals with a disability, including wheelchair users and persons 
with manual impairments.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ An OBW is a wheelchair that is used to transport a passenger 
with a disability between the aircraft seat and the lavatory, and is 
stowed onboard the aircraft itself. An OBW should not be confused 
with an aisle chair, which is used for enplaning and deplaning. 
Aisle chairs transport passengers between the jetbridge and the 
passenger's seat on the aircraft. Aisle chairs are generally kept in 
the airport, rather than on the aircraft itself.
    \4\ 14 CFR 382.63(a). The rule does not expressly require the 
lavatory to be large enough to permit a passenger to enter the 
lavatory with a personal care attendant who can help the individual 
transfer from the onboard wheelchair to and from the toilet seat (a 
``dependent transfer''). It is our general understanding, however, 
that accessible lavatories on twin-aisle aircraft are generally 
large enough to permit a dependent transfer.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the preamble to the 1990 ACAA rule, the Department stated that 
by requiring accessible lavatories on aircraft with more than one 
aisle, the result would be ``new aircraft with the greatest passenger 
capacities, and which make the longest flights, having a lavatory that 
handicapped persons can readily use.'' \5\ At the time, the Department 
declined to require accessible lavatories on single-aisle aircraft. 
Accessible lavatories on single-aisle aircraft were optional, but not 
mandatory.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 55 FR 8008, 8021 (March 6, 1990).
    \6\ 14 CFR 382.63(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Department noted airlines' concerns that providing accessible 
lavatories on single-aisle aircraft may require airlines to remove 
seats in order to install a lavatory of sufficient size to meet the 
accessibility standards of the existing rule. The Department found that 
those ``cost and feasibility concerns'' were ``worth serious 
consideration,'' \7\ and ultimately decided at the time that it was 
unable to ``obtain sufficient information to make a sound decision'' on 
whether requiring accessible lavatories on single-aisle aircraft would 
impose an undue burden on airlines.\8\ The Department announced its 
intention to issue an advance notice of proposed rulemaking (ANPRM) to 
seek comment on the issue.\9\ In 1992, the Department convened an 
advisory committee to study this issue. The Committee issued a report 
that discussed various lavatory designs, along with potential 
associated costs.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 55 FR 8008, 8021.
    \8\ Id.
    \9\ Id.
    \10\ See attachment at https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=DOT-OST-2015-0246-0194.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The 1990 ACAA rule also set standards for the availability and 
design of OBWs. The rule generally requires airlines to provide OBWs in 
two circumstances: (1) If the aircraft has an accessible lavatory; or 
(2) on the request of a passenger with a disability, even if the 
aircraft does not have an accessible lavatory.\11\ The rule also sets 
basic standards for OBW design, including elements such as footrests, 
movable armrests, adequate restraint systems, handles, and wheel 
locks.\12\ The rule provides that the OBW must be designed to be 
compatible with the aisle width, maneuvering space, and seat height of 
the aircraft on which it is used, and must be easily pushed, pulled, 
and turned within the aircraft by airline personnel.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ The rule limits this requirement to aircraft with a design 
seat capacity of more than 60 passenger seats, with certain 
exceptions for specific types of smaller aircraft. 14 CFR 382.65(a). 
There are two limitations to the rule that airlines must provide 
OBWs on request when the lavatory itself is not accessible. First, 
the basis of the passenger's request must be that the passenger can 
use an inaccessible lavatory, but cannot reach it without the use of 
an OBW. Second, airlines may require passengers to provide up to 48 
hours' advance notice to provide this service. 14 CFR 382.65(b).
    \12\ 14 CFR 382.65(c).
    \13\ 14 CFR 382.65(c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As originally enacted, the ACAA covered only U.S. air carriers. 
However, on April 5, 2000, Congress enacted the Wendell H. Ford 
Aviation Investment and Reform Act for the 21st Century (``AIR-21''), 
which, among other things, amended the ACAA to include foreign 
carriers.\14\ In response to the AIR-21 requirements, the Department on 
May 18, 2000, issued a notice of its intent to investigate complaints 
against foreign carriers according to the amended provisions of the 
ACAA. The notice also announced the Department's plan to initiate a 
rulemaking modifying Part 382 to cover foreign carriers. On November 4, 
2004, the Department issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) 
announcing its intention to apply the ACAA rule to foreign 
carriers.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ Public Law 106-181, 707(c), 114 Stat. 61, 158 (2000).
    \15\ 69 FR 64364.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    During the process of amending Part 382 to apply to foreign 
carriers, the Department received many comments

[[Page 29]]

expressing the view that the existing requirements concerning 
accessible lavatories were inadequate. Commenters at that time stated 
that accessible lavatories should be required in all aircraft, 
including single-aisle aircraft. The Department acknowledged that 
single-aisle aircraft sometimes make lengthy flights, and that 
providing accessible lavatories on single-aisle aircraft would be a 
significant improvement in airline service for passengers with 
disabilities. However, the Department ultimately declined to impose a 
requirement for accessible lavatories on single-aisle aircraft, given 
concerns that the ``revenue loss and other cost impacts'' could be too 
great.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ 73 FR 27614, 27625; available at https://www.transportation.gov/sites/dot.gov/files/docs/Part%20382-2008_1.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On May 13, 2008, the Department published a final rule amending 
Part 382 to cover foreign air carriers.\17\ The 2008 final rule 
requires foreign air carriers operating twin-aisle aircraft to provide 
accessible lavatories with respect to new aircraft that were ordered 
after May 13, 2009, or which were delivered after May 13, 2010.\18\ For 
U.S. carriers, the requirement applies to aircraft that were initially 
ordered after April 5, 1990, or which were delivered after April 1992.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ 73 FR 27614.
    \18\ 14 CFR 382.63(d). The rule also extended the OBW 
requirements to foreign air carriers. 14 CFR 382.65(d).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

D. DOT ACCESS Advisory Committee

1. Formation and History of Committee
    On December 7, 2015, the Department issued a Federal Register 
document indicating that it was exploring the feasibility of conducting 
a negotiated rulemaking with respect to six accessibility issues, 
including accessibility of lavatories on single-aisle aircraft.\19\ As 
part of this process, the Department hired a neutral facilitator to 
assist the Department in determining whether any or all of the six 
issues would be appropriate for a negotiated rulemaking. The 
facilitator found that the following three issues would be appropriate 
for a negotiated rulemaking: (1) Whether to require accessible in-
flight entertainment and strengthen accessibility requirements for 
other in-flight communications; (2) whether to require an accessible 
lavatory on new single-aisle aircraft over a certain size; and (3) 
whether to amend the definition of ``service animals'' that may 
accompany passengers with a disability on a flight.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ 80 FR 75953. The six issues were: (1) Accessibility of in-
flight entertainment; (2) supplemental medical oxygen; (3) service 
animals; (4) accessible lavatories on single-aisle aircraft; (5) 
seating accommodations; and (6) carrier reporting of disability 
service requests. Id.
    \20\ 81 FR 20265; see also https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=DOT-OST-2015-0246-0092.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Department established and appointed members to the Advisory 
Committee on Accessible Air Transportation (ACCESS Advisory Committee 
or Committee) to negotiate and develop proposed regulations addressing 
accessible in-flight entertainment, accessible lavatories, and service 
animals.\21\ The Committee comprised members representing various 
stakeholders including the Department, airlines, flight attendants, 
cross-disability advocacy groups, consumer groups, academic or non-
profit institutions having technical expertise in accessibility 
research and development, and aircraft manufacturers.\22\ The Committee 
formed separate subgroups of stakeholders to study and vote on the 
three topics, depending on the stakeholders' areas of interest and 
expertise. During the first meeting, the Department informed 
stakeholders that if they came to a consensus on the terms of a 
proposed rule, the Department would exercise good faith efforts to 
implement that consensus to the extent possible.\23\ The ACCESS 
Advisory Committee gathered data, conducted meetings and site visits, 
and engaged in negotiations from May 2016 through November 2016.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ 81 FR 26178.
    \22\ A full list of ACCESS Advisory Committee members and other 
information on the Committee may be found at https://www.transportation.gov/access-advisory-committee.
    \23\ Under the ground rules of the Committee, consensus was 
defined as ``no more than two negative votes in each issue area'', 
with abstentions not counting as negative votes. https://www.transportation.gov/office-general-counsel/negotiated-regulations/access-committee-ground-rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Information Gathering
    The ACCESS Advisory Committee gathered information concerning the 
benefits of improving the accessibility of lavatories on single-aisle 
aircraft. The Committee learned that single-aisle aircraft were being 
increasingly used for longer-haul flights, on which accessible 
lavatories were not available.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ https://www.transportation.gov/sites/dot.gov/files/docs/Minutes%20-%201st%20Plenary%20Meeting.pdf. More recent data shows 
similar trends. Figure 1 of the Preliminary Regulatory Impact 
Analysis indicates that in 1997, narrow-body aircraft accounted for 
slightly over 60% of departing flights of 2000-2499 miles; by 2018, 
that figure had risen to 90%. Narrow-body aircraft accounted for 
only 40% of departing flights of 2000-2499 miles in 1997; by 2018, 
that figure rose to approximately 75%.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Paralyzed Veterans of America (PVA) presented survey data showing 
that for a majority of respondents, the inability to use a lavatory 
would be reason enough to choose not to fly.\25\ PVA reported that some 
passengers with disabilities choose to fly shorter routes, go to the 
lavatory before entering the aircraft, or dehydrate themselves before 
flying to alleviate the need to use the lavatory on the aircraft.\26\ 
More than 500 of 725 respondents to PVA's survey indicated that the 
biggest hindrance was the size and space/design of the lavatory 
itself.\27\ A majority of survey respondents also indicated that an OBW 
would be necessary to reach the lavatory.\28\ Survey respondents noted 
a number of issues with current OBWs, including lack of access to an 
OBW, not knowing that OBWs are available, inability to transfer from 
the OBW to the toilet, and the narrowness of the aisle in relation to 
the OBW.\29\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ https://www.transportation.gov/sites/dot.gov/files/docs/3a.P4.Lav_.Advocate%20Survey%20Results.v2.pdf.
    \26\ Id. at 4.
    \27\ Id. at 3.
    \28\ Id.
    \29\ Id. at 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

3. Developments in Accessible Lavatory Design and OBW Design
    The ACCESS Advisory Committee proceedings provided an opportunity 
for manufacturers to demonstrate improvements to the accessibility of 
lavatories on single-aisle aircraft. For example, at the first meeting 
on May 17-18, 2016, Airbus presented information about its SpaceFlex 
lavatories. During normal operation, they function as two lavatories, 
separated by a dividing wall. On request, however, the dividing wall 
can be removed by a flight attendant, creating a single large space for 
the passenger and an assistant to enter and use the facilities.\30\ 
SpaceFlex lavatories are installed in the rear section of the aircraft 
against the back wall, in the area that is often used for galley space 
(where drinks, meals, snacks, and service carts are stowed). DOT has 
learned that some low-cost airlines that do not use significant galley 
space operate some aircraft with SpaceFlex lavatories. DOT has also 
learned that certain Airbus aircraft currently in operation have 
SpaceFlex lavatories installed as well.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \30\ https://www.transportation.gov/sites/dot.gov/files/docs/Airbus%20Presentation%20on%20Lav.pdf. This is the version of 
SpaceFlex known as ``V1.'' Airbus also produces a ``SpaceFlex V2,'' 
which does not increase the size of the lavatory, but provides a 
transfer seat to assist passengers in transitioning from the OBW to 
the aircraft toilet seat. To the Department's knowledge, no U.S. 
carrier uses the SpaceFlex V2.

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

[[Page 30]]

    Bombardier, Inc., a Canadian aircraft manufacturer, presented 
information about the accessibility features of its single-aisle C 
series aircraft. Bombardier explained that C-series lavatories were 
designed to allow passengers with reduced mobility the ability to 
transfer independently from the OBW to the toilet seat with the 
lavatory door closed.\31\ Bombardier explained that accessible 
lavatories were a design feature of the aircraft from its 
inception,\32\ and that ``clean sheet'' designs can take up to 20 years 
to produce. The Bombardier C series is now majority-owned by Airbus, 
and is known as the Airbus A220; seating capacity ranges from 100 to 
160.\33\ The accessibility lavatory feature of the Airbus 220 is 
optional.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \31\ https://www.transportation.gov/sites/dot.gov/files/docs/P3.Lav_.2.Block_.Bombardier%20Presentation.v2.2016.07.11.pdf.
    \32\ https://www.transportation.gov/sites/dot.gov/files/docs/resources/individuals/aviation-consumer-protection/285871/july-meeting-minutes.pdf.
    \33\ https://www.airbus.com/content/dam/corporate-topics/publications/backgrounders/Backgrounder-Airbus-Commercial-Aircraft-A220-Facts-and-Figures-EN.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The ACCESS Advisory Committee also learned about an innovative OBW 
design developed by researchers at the University of Hamburg in 
Germany. The cantilevered design of the ``Hamburg Chair'' allows it to 
enter the lavatory and be positioned over the toilet lid. The benefit 
of this design is that a passenger does not have to stand up out of the 
chair and make a transfer to the toilet. Instead, the passenger can 
enter the lavatory, use the facilities in privacy, and exit the 
lavatory without standing up.\34\ Representatives of the University of 
Hamburg explained that the design was a prototype and had not been put 
into mass production. Members of the ACCESS Advisory Committee 
generally noted that the Hamburg Chair design was promising to the 
extent that it would allow greater accessibility to the lavatory for 
passengers with reduced mobility. They noted that even if the passenger 
could not use the toilet itself, the passenger could use the Hamburg 
Chair to enter the lavatory and perform other personal hygiene 
functions with privacy. Some ACCESS Advisory Committee members did 
raise hygiene concerns about the dual function of the chair.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \34\ https://www.transportation.gov/sites/dot.gov/files/docs/3a.P4.Lav_.2016%20OBW%20v3.0.pdf. The Hamburg Chair has an optional 
removable seat panel. With this feature, a passenger could lift the 
toilet seat lid, position the chair over the toilet, then remove the 
seat panel on the chair so that the passenger can use the toilet 
without leaving the chair. Members of the ACCESS Advisory Committee 
also expressed hygiene concerns with this feature.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

4. Development of Tier System
    During the course of the ACCESS Advisory Committee's negotiations, 
stakeholders recognized that there were various ways to improve 
accessibility of lavatories, with varying costs and timelines for 
implementation. For example, the lavatory interior could be upgraded to 
include features such as accessible handles, faucets, and call buttons. 
These improvements, which would not require increasing the floor 
dimensions (``footprint'') of the lavatory itself, became known as 
``Tier 1'' improvements.
    The stakeholders also discussed various accessibility options that 
would increase the footprint of the lavatory, but not to the full size 
of a twin-aisle aircraft lavatory. Finally, the stakeholders discussed 
the highest tier of accessibility: Expansion of lavatories to have the 
footprint (and accessibility features) of lavatories on twin-aisle 
aircraft.
    Airlines took the position that lavatories with larger footprints 
would take up space that could otherwise be filled by a row of seats. 
Airlines and manufacturers argued that airlines would lose considerable 
revenue from increasing the footprint of the lavatory and losing this 
potential row of seats.\35\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \35\ Airlines and manufacturers calculated that costs in the 
form of lost revenue could be as high as $33.3 billion. https://www.transportation.gov/sites/dot.gov/files/docs/3a.OEM_.Airline%20Accessible%20Lav.Position.8.15.16..pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

5. Consensus and Production of Term Sheet
    On November 22, 2016, the ACCESS Advisory Committee reached 
consensus on proposed new regulations to improve the accessibility of 
lavatories on single-aisle aircraft and to improve the accessibility of 
in-flight entertainment.\36\ The Committee drafted an Agreed Term Sheet 
for each issue. The accessible lavatory Term Sheet states that the 
standards would apply to new single-aisle aircraft. The agreement does 
not call for retrofitting of existing aircraft, but it does call for 
airlines to comply with the new standards if they replace lavatories on 
older aircraft.\37\ The agreement included provisions for both short-
term and long-term accessibility improvements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \36\ https://www.transportation.gov/office-general-counsel/negotiated-regulations/final-resolution-access-committee. Of the 27 
total Committee members, 19 were voting members on the issue of 
accessible lavatories. Voting in favor of the agreement were United 
Airlines, the National Disability Rights Network, the National Air 
Carrier Association, JetBlue Airways, a subject matter expert from 
Oregon State University, the Association of Flight Attendants--CWA, 
the International Air Transport Association, WestJet, Delta Air 
Lines, Paralyzed Veterans of America, Frontier Airlines, Airbus, the 
American Council of the Blind, the Regional Airlines Association, 
and DOT. Boeing and Lufthansa voted to abstain, while the National 
Council on Independent Living voted against the agreement.
    \37\ As with the current rule, accessible lavatories would not 
be required if the airline chooses not to install any lavatories on 
the aircraft. In practice, however, airlines generally choose to 
install at least one lavatory onboard aircraft.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

a. Short-Term Improvements
    Under the ACCESS Advisory Committee's agreement, short-term 
improvements include Tier 1 improvements and improvements to the OBW 
design. Short-term improvements would be required on new single-aisle 
aircraft delivered 3 years after the effective date of the final 
rule.\38\ Airlines operating aircraft with 60 or more passenger seats 
\39\ would be required to: (1) Train flight attendants to proficiency 
with respect to transfers to and from the OBW, and with respect to 
accessibility features of the lavatory and the OBW; (2) publish 
lavatory accessibility information and provide it on request; and (3) 
remove the International Symbol of Accessibility from lavatories that 
are not capable of facilitating a seated independent transfer. Aircraft 
with 125 or more passenger seats would be required to have at least one 
lavatory with a number of accessibility features, including accessible 
door locks, flush handles, call buttons, faucets, and assist handles.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \38\ The proposed rule text refers to ``all new single-aisle 
aircraft'' above a specific seating capacity that are ``delivered'' 
on or after a certain date. This phrasing makes clear that the 
proposed rule is not limited to newly-certificated aircraft models. 
Instead, it also applies to newly-manufactured aircraft of existing 
models.
    \39\ All references to seat capacity in the Term Sheet are 
references to FAA-certified maximum seat capacities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Single-aisle aircraft with 125 or more passenger seats would also 
be required to include an OBW meeting the Department's new standards. 
The term sheet itself did not specify the standards for a new OBW, 
other than: (1) It permits passage in the aircraft aisle; (2) it fits 
within an available certificated OBW stowage space; and (3) it 
accomplishes its functions without requiring modification to the 
interior arrangement of the aircraft or the lavatory. The Term Sheet 
called on the Department to develop OBW standards in consultation with 
stakeholders, and to publish those standards in a proposed rule. The 
Term Sheet indicated that standards for an over-the-toilet design OBW 
should be established, if feasible.

[[Page 31]]

b. Long-Term Improvements
    Under the terms of the agreement, long-term improvements would be 
required on new single-aisle aircraft, with 125 or more passenger 
seats, that were initially ordered 18 years after the effective date of 
the final rule or delivered 20 years after the effective date of the 
final rule. Such aircraft would be required to include at least one 
lavatory of sufficient size to permit a qualified individual with a 
disability to perform a seated independent and dependent transfer from 
the OBW to and from the toilet within a closed space that affords to 
persons using the OBW privacy equivalent to that afforded ambulatory 
users. The lavatory would also include the interior accessibility 
improvements found in Tier 1.

E. Congressional Directive

    In July 2016, while the ACCESS Advisory Committee was working on 
the regulatory negotiation, Congress enacted the FAA Extension, Safety, 
and Security Act of 2016 (FAA Act of 2016).\40\ This statute directed 
the Department to issue a supplemental NPRM by July 15, 2017, on the 
issue of accessible lavatories on single-aisle aircraft.\41\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \40\ Public Law 114-190, 130 Stat. 615, Sec.  2108.
    \41\ The FAA Act of 2016 directed the Department to issue the 
supplemental NPRM ``referenced in the Secretary's Report on 
Significant Rulemakings, dated June 15, 2015, and assigned 
Regulation Identification Number [RIN] 2105-AE12.'' Public Law 114-
190, 130 Stat. 615, Sec.  2108. At the time that the FAA Act of 2016 
was enacted, one of the topics within RIN 2105-AE12 was ``whether 
carriers should be required to provide accessible lavatories on 
certain new single-aisle aircraft.'' See https://cms.dot.gov/regulations/2015-significant-rulemaking-archive (entry for June 
2015). In other words, the direction was for the Department to issue 
a supplemental NPRM on whether carriers should be required to 
provide accessible lavatories on certain new single-aisle aircraft.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

F. Conducting Lavatory Rulemakings in Two Phases

    In June 2019, the Department announced that it had determined that 
the most appropriate course of action was to conduct two separate 
accessible lavatory rulemakings: (1) This NPRM, covering short-term 
accessibility improvements; and (2) an ANPRM titled ``Accessible 
Lavatories on Single-Aisle Aircraft: Part 2,'' covering long-term 
accessibility improvements.\42\ The Department reasoned that it was 
necessary to gather additional data on the costs and benefits of long-
term improvements. The Department also determined that an NPRM on 
accessible lavatories would be expedited if the complex and more costly 
long-term improvements were not included at this time. Information on 
the ANPRM can be found at Docket DOT-OST-2019-0181, RIN 2105-AE89.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \42\ The Department's NPRM on accessible lavatories was 
originally located at RIN 2105-AE32, which also addressed accessible 
in-flight entertainment. The Department eventually determined that 
the in-flight entertainment NPRM would proceed separately at RIN 
2105-AE32, while the accessible lavatory rulemaking proceeded at 
RINs 2105-AE88 (this NPRM) and 2105-AE89 (the ANPRM).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

G. OBW Design Process

    As noted above, the ACCESS Committee's Term Sheet called for the 
Department to consult with stakeholders on OBW design improvements. The 
Department determined that the most appropriate method for developing 
initial OBW design standards was to seek the assistance of the 
Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board (Access 
Board).\43\ The Access Board is a Federal agency that specializes in 
producing accessibility guidelines and standards for the built 
environment, transportation systems, and technology. On August 20, 
2019, the Access Board published ``Proposed Advisory Guidelines for 
Aircraft Onboard Wheelchairs,'' and sought public comment.\44\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \43\ https://www.access-board.gov/.
    \44\ https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2019/08/20/2019-17873/advisory-guidelines-for-aircraft-onboard-wheelchairs. The 
Access Board's Docket for OBW standards is found at https://www.regulations.gov/docket?D=ATBCB-2019-0002. The Access Board held 
a public hearing on these advisory guidelines on September 12, 2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As the Access Board explains, its Advisory Guidelines are not 
mandatory. Instead, they are intended to ``serve as technical 
assistance for covered air carriers, providing one example of how 
covered air carriers might satisfy the performance standard for onboard 
wheelchairs established by DOT in its forthcoming rulemaking.'' \45\ 
The Department has considered the Access Board's proposed technical 
standards, along with the public comments in the Access Board's docket, 
when developing the OBW performance standards found in this NPRM. The 
Department's performance standards set the essential required features 
of the OBW, while allowing flexibility in how manufacturers meet those 
standards. Airlines may, if they wish, use the Access Board's more 
specific technical standards as a guide for complying with the 
Department's more generalized performance standards. However, airlines 
would not be required to use the Access Board's technical 
specifications in order to comply with the performance standards; 
airlines may choose to adopt alternative specifications for the OBW 
provided that those specifications achieve a level of accessibility 
consistent with the performance standards found in the Department's 
regulations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \45\ 84 FR 43100, 43101 (August 20, 2019).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Proposed Rule

    The proposed accessibility improvements in this NPRM generally 
track the Tier 1 provisions in the ACCESS Advisory Committee's Term 
Sheet (relating to accessible interior features, training and 
information requirements, and OBW improvements). This NPRM does not 
propose expanding the size of the lavatory to provide a level of 
accessibility equivalent to that found on twin-aisle aircraft. That 
issue will be addressed in the related ANPRM.

A. Improvements to Lavatory Interiors

    The first set of proposed improvements in this NPRM relate to the 
accessibility features of the lavatory itself. These improvements, 
found in proposed Sec.  382.63(f), would apply to lavatories on new 
aircraft with an FAA-certificated maximum capacity of 125 seats or 
more. The Department is tentatively of the view that because aircraft 
with fewer than 125 seats tend to be shorter-haul aircraft, with 
shorter flight times, it may not be cost-beneficial to require interior 
improvements to lavatories on those aircraft. The Department seeks 
comment on this issue.
    First, the proposed rule would require grab bars to be installed 
and positioned as required to meet the needs of individuals with 
disabilities. We note that the ACCESS Advisory Committee's Term Sheet 
provided that the pull handles must meet the needs of individuals with 
disabilities and must support a minimum of 250 pounds.\46\ The proposed 
rule does not include a weight-support minimum threshold. We are 
tentatively of the view that setting a specific weight threshold would 
be unduly prescriptive,\47\ and that grab bars must necessarily support 
significant weight in order to adequately meet the needs of individuals 
with disabilities. The Department seeks comment on whether this general 
performance standard provides sufficient guidance to airlines and 
lavatory manufacturers. The Department seeks comment on whether a 
weight-support minimum threshold is

[[Page 32]]

necessary, and if so, what that threshold would be. We specifically 
seek comment on whether or not the grab bar weight-support standards in 
other lavatory environments (e.g., airports, trains, and restaurants) 
are transferable to the environment of an aircraft lavatory, and if so, 
how. We also seek comment on the costs and benefits of setting any 
specific threshold.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \46\ Term Sheet 2b.
    \47\ In 2018, the Department issued guidance regarding its own 
rulemaking procedures. The guidance provides, in relevant part, that 
regulations should be technologically neutral and should set 
performance objectives. https://www.transportation.gov/sites/dot.gov/files/docs/regulations/328561/dot-order-21006-rulemaking-process-signed-122018.pdf, section 6(e).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Next, the proposed rule would require that lavatory faucets have 
controls with tactile information concerning temperature. 
Alternatively, airlines may comply with this requirement by ensuring 
that lavatory water temperature is adjusted to eliminate the risk of 
scalding for all passengers. The rule would also require that automatic 
or hand-operated faucets shall dispense water for a minimum of five 
seconds for each application or while the hand is below the faucet.\48\ 
The Department seeks comment on whether this last requirement is 
necessary, and the costs and benefits of including such a provision.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \48\ See Term Sheet 2c.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Next, the proposed rule would require attendant call buttons and 
door locks to be accessible to an individual seated in the 
lavatory.\49\ We seek comment on whether to further define 
``accessible'' with respect to call buttons and door locks. For 
example, we seek comment on whether they should be discernible through 
the sense of touch and/or through specific means of communication such 
as braille, or whether airlines should be permitted to develop their 
own methods of providing accessibility.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \49\ The Term Sheet had separate provisions for call buttons and 
for door locks. Specifically, the Term Sheet provided that ``call 
buttons shall be provided in the lavatory and accessible to an 
individual seated on the toilet,'' while ``the door lock must be 
accessible by a 5th percentile female seated on the OBW, if any, 
within the lavatory compartment.'' Term Sheet, sections 2e, 2i. The 
proposed rule simplifies and consolidates those two provisions. 
While we believe that both of these provisions are adequately 
reflected in the rule as currently phrased, we seek comment on 
whether the proposed rule should more explicitly track the 
provisions of the Term Sheet.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Next, the proposed rule would require that lavatory controls and 
dispensers must be discernible through the sense of touch. This 
rulemaking would also require operable parts of the lavatory to be 
operable with one hand and not require tight pinching, grasping, or 
twisting of the wrist.
    We are of the view that the term ``operable parts'' includes, but 
is not limited to, call buttons, door locks, faucets, lavatory 
controls, and dispensers. We also seek comment on whether the 
Department should specify the maximum force required to activate 
operable parts; for example, whether the force should not exceed 5 
pounds (2.2N), an accessibility standard applied under the Americans 
with Disabilities Act (ADA) or whether the proposed performance 
standard is sufficient to ensure accessibility.
    Such requirements would apply if those accessible operable parts 
are reasonably available and certificated for the applicable aircraft 
type.\50\ We seek comment on the availability of accessible controls 
and other lavatory parts that are operable by passengers with 
disabilities, along with the costs and benefits of requiring such 
accessible controls.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \50\ This paragraph represents a consolidation of Term Sheet 
provisions 2f and 2l. We believe that the proposed rule as currently 
phrased adequately reflects these two provisions. We also note that 
section 2f of the Term Sheet would separately require ``information 
regarding location and use of all other lavatory controls and 
dispensers to be made available through informational cards on 
request, verbally through flight attendants, online, or by phone and 
TTY where those services are ordinarily provided.'' In our view, 
this provision is adequately reflected in proposed Sec.  382.63(h), 
relating to training and information. We seek comment on whether the 
rule should more explicitly track the provisions of the Term Sheet 
in these respects.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Department proposes to require the lavatory door sill to 
provide minimum obstruction for the passage of an OBW, consistent with 
applicable safety regulations.\51\ The Department recognizes that door 
sills must prevent the spillage of water into the aircraft cabin. On 
the other hand, during site visits to inspect aircraft lavatories at 
various airports, members of the ACCESS Advisory Committee's Lavatory 
Working Group found that a steep door sill can be a significant barrier 
for the entry of an OBW. This provision is intended to promote 
accessibility without compromising safety. We seek comment on whether 
the term ``minimum obstruction'' should be further defined and if so, 
what that definition should be.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \51\ See Term Sheet 2g.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Next, recognizing that adequate toe clearance is necessary to 
permit the OBW to maneuver into and out of the lavatory, the proposed 
rule would require airlines not to reduce toe clearance below the 
current specifications of the lavatory. The Department understands 
``toe clearance'' to mean the space between the lavatory floor and the 
lower edge of the sink or other fixtures of the lavatory. The 
Department seeks comment on this proposed provision and on whether the 
term ``toe clearance'' should be specifically defined. If so, should 
the adequate toe clearance of a lavatory be defined in relation to the 
foot supports of the OBW that is installed on the specific aircraft 
containing that lavatory?
    Finally, the proposed rule would require airlines to provide a 
visual barrier, on request, for passengers with disabilities who may 
require the use of the lavatory but who cannot do so with the door 
closed. The purpose of the visual barrier is to afford passengers with 
disabilities a level of privacy equivalent to that afforded to 
ambulatory users.\52\ We seek comment on the means by which this 
proposed visual barrier may be installed and operated in an efficient 
and cost-effective manner, consistent with the privacy interests of 
passengers entering and using the lavatory.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \52\ See Term Sheet 2k.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Department seeks comment on the costs and benefits of these 
features. The Department seeks comment on any additional features that 
may improve the accessibility of lavatories on single-aisle aircraft 
without expanding the footprint of the lavatory itself.\53\ The 
Department also seeks comment and data on the extent to which the 
footprint of aircraft lavatories on single-aisle aircraft has been 
reduced in recent years, and the effect that any such reduction has on 
accessibility for passengers with disabilities. While the Department is 
not proposing to require in this NPRM that lavatory footprints be 
expanded to any particular size, the Department is considering whether 
to prohibit the footprint of lavatories from being further reduced from 
current measurements, on the ground that further reduction would 
adversely impact accessibility.\54\ The Department seeks comment on the 
costs and benefits of any such proposal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \53\ Section 2a of the Term Sheet included a provision that the 
lavatory's toilet seat height must be between 17 and 19 inches. The 
Department has declined to include this provision on the ground that 
it is unduly prescriptive. We are also tentatively of the view that 
the seat height requirement was included to ensure that the height 
of the toilet seat, aircraft seat, and OBW seat were all reasonably 
consistent. In our view, the more effective and flexible approach to 
this issue is to require the OBW to be compatible with the both the 
height of the toilet seat and the height of the aircraft passenger 
seat. That issue is addressed in the OBW section below.
    \54\ The Department notes that under 14 CFR 382.71, airlines are 
already required to ensure that any replacement or refurbishing of 
an aircraft cabin or its elements does not reduce the accessibility 
of that element to a level below that specified for new aircraft in 
Part 382. This existing requirement arguably does not apply to the 
footprint of lavatories on single-aisle aircraft, because Part 382 
does not currently specify any minimum footprint for lavatories on 
single-aisle aircraft.

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

[[Page 33]]

B. Retrofitting

    Retrofitting of lavatories is addressed in proposed Sec.  
382.63(g). The proposed rule reflects the provisions of the ACCESS 
Advisory Committee's Term Sheet. Retrofitting of lavatories on aircraft 
currently in service would not be required under the proposed rule; 
however, if an airline replaces a lavatory 3 years or more after the 
effective date of the rule, the proposed rule would require the airline 
to install a lavatory that meets the new requirements. Under this 
paragraph, a lavatory is not considered replaced if it is removed for 
specified maintenance, safety checks, or any other action that results 
in returning the same lavatory into service. For retrofitted 
lavatories, there would be no requirement to install a visual barrier 
if doing so would obstruct the visibility of exit signs.

C. Training and Information

    New proposed training and information requirements are found in 
Sec.  382.63(h). These requirements largely reflect the provisions of 
the Committee's Term Sheet. They apply to airlines operating aircraft 
with an FAA-certificated maximum capacity of greater than 60 seats 
(i.e., airlines that do not qualify as small businesses under 14 CFR 
399.73). The training and information requirements would apply to the 
airlines' operations generally, not to the operation of any specific 
aircraft. Consistent with the Term Sheet, these provisions would apply 
three years after the effective date of the final rule.
    First, the proposed rule would require airlines to train flight 
attendants to proficiency on proper procedures for providing assistance 
to qualified individuals with disabilities to and from the lavatory 
from the aircraft seat.\55\ Such training would include hands-on 
training on the retrieval, assembly, stowage, and use of the aircraft's 
OBW, and training regarding the accessibility features of the 
lavatory.\56\ Consistent with the Term Sheet, the proposed rule would 
require such training on an annual basis. The Department expects that 
both initial and annual hands-on training will be required for airline 
and contractor employees to gain proficiency in providing this 
assistance, in light of factors such as the various OBW designs that 
may be supplied to various aircraft, and the frequency of OBW use. The 
Department seeks comment on whether annual training is necessary, or 
whether a different frequency of training would be more appropriate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \55\ Airlines are already required to train their personnel to 
proficiency on the airline's procedures concerning the provision of 
air travel to passengers with a disability, including the proper and 
safe operation of any equipment used to accommodate passengers with 
a disability. 14 CFR 382.141(a)(1)(ii).
    \56\ The Term Sheet states: ``You must train flight attendants 
to proficiency on an annual basis to provide assistance in 
transporting qualified individuals with disabilities to and from the 
lavatory from the aircraft seat, including hands-on training on the 
use of any new DOT-required on-board wheelchair, and with respect to 
any assembly or modifications to the accessibility features of the 
lavatory or on-board wheelchair.'' The proposed rule is broader than 
the Term Sheet to the extent that it clarifies training must be 
provided on the retrieval and stowage of the OBW, along with its 
assembly and use. The proposed rule does not implement the Term 
Sheet to the extent that it suggests that flight attendants must be 
trained with respect to any ``assembly or modifications'' of the 
lavatory's accessibility features. Such a provision would be, in our 
view, both unclear and unnecessary. In our view, it is appropriate 
to generally mandate that flight attendants are trained on the 
accessibility features of the lavatory. We solicit comment on 
whether the training requirements should track the Term Sheet more 
closely or should be otherwise modified.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Second, the Department proposes to require airlines to provide 
information on their websites and upon request regarding the 
accessibility features of the lavatory.\57\ The purpose of this 
proposed requirement is to provide passengers with accurate information 
about the types of accessibility features that will be available on the 
aircraft, so that passengers may plan their flights appropriately.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \57\ Term Sheet 1(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Third, the Department proposes to require airlines to remove the 
International Symbol of Accessibility from new and in-service aircraft 
that are equipped with lavatories that are not capable of facilitating 
a seated independent transfer (i.e., a transfer from an OBW to the 
toilet seat without requiring the use of an assistant).\58\ During the 
ACCESS Advisory Committee's deliberations, advocates noted that the 
symbol appeared on certain lavatories where it was unclear what 
features, if any, made the lavatory accessible. This proposed rule 
would provide greater consistency regarding the use of the symbol.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \58\ Removal of the international symbol is the only proposed 
rule that would apply to existing in-service lavatories, and to 
lavatories on aircraft with and FAA-certificated maximum capacity of 
fewer than 125 seats. The Term Sheet uses the term ``seated 
independent transfer'' without further defining the term. We believe 
that the definition provided in the rule text accurately reflects 
the meaning of ``seated independent transfer,'' but we seek comment 
on that issue.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, the Department proposes to require airlines to develop 
and, on request, inform passengers about their procedures for disposing 
of sharps and bio-waste. It is reasonable to expect that as lavatories 
on single aisle aircraft become more accessible, they may be used 
increasingly as a location where passengers with disabilities may 
perform personal functions which require the disposal of sharps and 
bio-waste. The proposed rule does not require any specific type of 
disposal procedures, however (e.g., a sharps disposal box installed 
within the lavatory).\59\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \59\ This provision is based on paragraph 2h of the Term Sheet. 
The Term Sheet placed the sharps/biowaste provision within the 
section of the agreement relating to the lavatory interior. In our 
view it is most appropriately seen as a provision relating to 
information and training.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

D. OBW Standards

    The Department's proposed performance standards for new OBWs are 
found in Sec.  382.65(h). The standards found in the NPRM describe the 
expected performance of the OBW, while allowing manufacturers to find 
efficient and innovative means for meeting those performance 
expectations. At the same time, the proposed rule states that airlines 
may use the Access Board's advisory guidelines for technical assistance 
in furnishing an OBW that meets the Department's performance standards. 
In this way, the Department intends to encourage innovation while also 
providing a specific example of how to comply with the proposed rule.
    Under the proposed rule, OBWs meeting the new standards must be 
installed on new single-aisle aircraft with an FAA-certificated maximum 
capacity of 125 seats or more that enter service 3 years after the 
effective date of the final rule.\60\ The Department seeks comment on 
whether aircraft with fewer than 125 seats tend to be used for shorter-
haul flights, and whether or not such aircraft should be excluded from 
the new OBW requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \60\ See Term Sheet 4A.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed rule would require the OBW design to enable the OBW to 
completely enter the lavatory in a backward orientation. Specifically, 
the rule would require the OBW to fit over the closed toilet lid in a 
manner that permits the lavatory door to close completely. It is 
anticipated that the attendant would push the OBW backward into the 
lavatory by means of handles on the front of the OBW. After the OBW is 
situated over the closed toilet lid, the door would be closed and the 
passenger would be able to perform non-toileting lavatory functions in 
privacy. It is the tentative view of the Department that these OBW 
features would substantially improve accessibility for passengers who, 
at present, cannot enter the lavatory from existing OBWs.

[[Page 34]]

    The proposed rule would also require that the OBW design enable it 
at a minimum to partially enter the lavatory in a forward orientation. 
The purpose of this provision is to facilitate a stand-and-pivot 
maneuver from the OBW to the toilet seat, for passengers who are able 
to do so. With a stand-and-pivot maneuver, the passenger would 
partially enter the lavatory by means of the OBW, stand up, and pivot 
180 degrees to reach the toilet seat. Grab bars and/or visual barriers 
may be necessary to complete a stand-and-pivot. We seek comment on the 
ways that an OBW can be best designed to facilitate forward entry and a 
stand-and-pivot maneuver.
    The next set of proposed rules relates to safety. In drafting these 
proposed performance standards, the Department considered the features 
that the Access Board has identified as necessary to ensure passenger 
safety. The proposed rule would require that the height of the OBW seat 
must align with the height of the aircraft seat to the maximum extent 
practicable, in order to permit a safe transfer between the OBW and the 
aircraft seat.\61\ The rule would require the wheels of the OBW to lock 
in the direction of travel, in order to avoid contact with aircraft 
seats and other obstructions as it moves down the aisle. Any other 
moving parts of the onboard wheelchair would need to be capable of 
being secured such that they do not move while the occupied onboard 
wheelchair is being maneuvered. The wheels would also be required to 
lock in place so as to provide stability during transfers. When 
occupied for use, the onboard wheelchair would be required to not tip 
or fall in any direction under normal operating conditions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \61\ Depending on the nature and extent of the passenger's 
disability, it may be necessary for the passenger's seat to have a 
movable aisle armrest. The Department believes that its existing 
rules relating to movable aisle armrests (14 CFR 382.61 and 382.81-
87) are sufficient to ensure that passengers who require a movable 
aisle armrest are accommodated; however, the Department seeks 
comment on this issue.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The OBW would be required to have a padded seat and backrest, in 
order to preserve skin integrity, and to prevent spasticity and injury. 
We specifically seek comment on whether the proposed rule text 
adequately conveys the degree of back support and seat support 
necessary to properly accommodate passengers with disabilities, and if 
not, whether additional standards should be specified. For example, 
should the text further indicate that the seat and backrest must be 
``firm'' or ``solid?''
    The rule would also require the OBW to be free of sharp or abrasive 
components. The OBW would also be required to have arm supports that 
are sufficient to facilitate transfers; arm supports that are 
repositionable to permit unobstructed transfers between the OBW and the 
aircraft seat; torso and leg restraints to ensure stability and prevent 
injury; as well as a unitary foot support that would provide adequate 
clearance over the lavatory threshold and also allow for an 
unobstructed transfer between the OBW and the lavatory. Under the 
proposed rule, restraints must be operable by the passenger in order to 
permit the passenger the option to adjust the restraints unassisted. 
Finally, the rule would require the OBW to have instructions 
prominently displayed for proper use.
    The Department seeks comment on these features, including their 
costs, benefits, and necessity. We also seek comment on whether 
additional features are necessary (for example, whether specific 
performance standards should be required with respect to minimum load 
weight), along with their costs and benefits.
    Under paragraph (f) of this proposed rule, airlines would not be 
required to modify aircraft interiors, including lavatories and 
existing OBW stowage spaces, in order to comply with these OBW 
provisions. During negotiations, airlines and aircraft manufacturers 
expressed concern about the costs of altering the interior spaces of 
the aircraft to accommodate a newly designed OBW. These provisions 
reflect those concerns. Like the other improvements to the lavatory 
interior, the OBW design would not require alteration of the interior 
space of the lavatory or the aircraft generally.
    The Department seeks comment on all aspects of this critical issue 
of OBW stowage space. Specifically, the Department seeks further data 
regarding: (1) The folded dimensions of OBWs currently in use on 
single-aisle aircraft; (2) the locations and dimensions of current OBW 
stowage spaces; and (3) the feasibility of designing and constructing 
an OBW that meets the listed performance standards, particularly 
including the ability to enter the lavatory in a backward orientation, 
while fitting into the existing OBW stowage space for that aircraft. 
The Department also seeks comment on an alternative proposal: Whether 
to require OBWs to meet the new performance standards set forth in this 
NPRM even if stowage space must be expanded to accommodate the OBW. The 
Department seeks comment on the costs of expanding OBW stowage spaces 
to meet these performance standards.
    Under paragraph (g) of this proposed rule, and in keeping with the 
ACCESS Advisory Committee's Term Sheet, an airline would not be 
responsible for the failure of third parties to furnish an OBW that 
complies with these proposed standards, so long as the airline notifies 
and substantiates to the Department the efforts it expended to obtain 
compliant OBWs. The Department recognizes that, at present, no 
commercially available OBW exists that permits backward passage into an 
aircraft lavatory, and that while airlines may seek to procure an OBW 
that meets the Department's performance standards, airlines do not 
design or produce OBWs themselves. The Department seeks comment on 
whether there should be a deadline for an airline to notify the 
Department that the airline has expended its efforts to obtain 
compliant OBWs. If so, how many days after an airline becomes aware of 
such commercial unavailability (e.g., 30 days) would be appropriate for 
airlines to notify the Department? The Department also recognizes the 
uncertainties surrounding the issue of whether OBWs meeting the 
Department's new standards can fit within existing OBW stowage spaces. 
The intent of proposed paragraph (g) is to encourage innovation in 
meeting the proposed standards by affirmatively requiring airlines to 
engage in reasonable efforts to obtain compliant OBWs from third 
parties. The Department seeks comment on whether the ``reasonable 
efforts'' clause is the most appropriate means of reaching the 
overarching goal of ensuring that OBWs with the new accessibility 
features are acquired.
    Finally, the proposed rule provides that if an airline replaces an 
OBW on an aircraft with an FAA-certificated maximum capacity of 125 
seats or more three years after the effective date of the rule, then 
the replacement OBW must comply with DOT's new OBW standards. That 
provision is reflected in Sec.  382.65(h).

Regulatory Analyses and Notices

A. Executive Order 13771 (Reducing Regulation and Controlling 
Regulatory Costs), Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory Planning and 
Review), Executive Order 13563 (Improving Regulation and Regulatory 
Review), and DOT Order 2100.6 (Policies and Procedures for Rulemakings)

    This proposed rule is a significant regulatory action under section 
3(f) of E.O. 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), ``Regulatory 
Planning and Review,'' as supplemented by E.O. 13563 (76 FR 3821, 
January 21, 2011),

[[Page 35]]

``Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review.'' The Department made 
this determination by finding that, although the economic effects of 
this proposed regulatory action would not exceed the $100 million 
annual threshold defined by E.O. 12866, the proposed rule is 
significant because of the rule's substantial public interest in 
accessible transportation for individuals with disabilities. 
Accordingly, this proposed rule has been reviewed by the Office of 
Management and Budget (OMB). This proposed rule is issued consistent 
with the policies and procedures governing the development and issuance 
of regulations by the Department found in DOT Order 2100.6, ``Policies 
and Procedures for Rulemakings'' (December 20, 2018). This proposed 
rule is expected to be a regulatory action under Executive Order 13771. 
Details on the estimated costs of this proposed rule can be found in 
the rule's economic analysis.
    The Department has conducted a preliminary regulatory impact 
analysis (PRIA) in support of the NPRM. With respect to accessible 
lavatories, the total estimated costs and benefits of the proposed rule 
are as follows:

                                         Table 1--Cost Summary of the Lavatory Accessibility and OBW Provisions
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                      Discounted at   Discounted at  Annualized 25-
                 14 CFR                       Regulatory topic          7 percent       3 percent       year cost                  Benefits
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec.   382.63..........................  Lavatory Accessibility....     $21,353,264     $36,522,224      $1,832,334  Not Quantified.
Sec.   382.65..........................  OBW.......................       2,523,364       2,621,359         216,531  Not Quantified.
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total..............................  Total.....................      22,876,628      39,143,583       2,048,866  Not Quantified.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Benefits are expected to include ensuring the comfort, privacy, 
dignity, and civil rights of passengers with disabilities by improving 
their ability to access the lavatory and its facilities on long flights 
so as to perform personal functions in privacy. Passengers who are 
expected to benefit from the proposed rule include passengers currently 
unable to use lavatories on single-aisle aircraft because of a 
disability. Passengers with visual impairments will benefit from the 
requirement that controls be discernible through the sense of touch. 
Non-ambulatory passengers are expected to benefit from the safety 
improvements to the OBW. In general, passengers with disabilities will 
benefit from the provision requiring airlines to provide accurate 
information about the accessibility of the aircraft lavatory.
    The PRIA provided a cost estimate for proposed Sec.  382.63 
(lavatory interiors, retrofitting, and information/training.) The 
improvements to lavatory interiors are estimated to cost approximately 
$1,000 per lavatory (collectively, $1.7 million discounted at 7% and 
$2.9 million discounted at 3%.) By far the largest estimated cost 
component for Sec.  382.63 is the cost of training flight attendants to 
proficiency with respect to the operation of the OBW. These costs are 
estimated at $19.6 million discounted at 7%, and $33.6 million 
discounted at 3%. In general, other costs related to proposed Sec.  
382.63 are estimated to be minimal.\62\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \62\ The PRIA refers to the information and training measures as 
appearing within Sec.  382.63(f); they now appear in Sec.  
382.63(h). Similarly, the PRIA refers to lavatory interior 
improvements as appearing within Sec.  382.63(h); they now appear in 
Sec.  382.63(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The PRIA also estimated costs for improvements to the OBW. It is 
important to note that the PRIA estimated the costs of compliance with 
the Access Board's technical standards, not the costs of compliance 
with the more generalized performance standards in this NPRM. The PRIA 
noted certain key uncertainties of its OBW analysis, including but not 
limited to: (1) The difficulties in comparing the potential benefits of 
the new OBW design to an existing baseline; (2) whether OBW 
manufacturers are willing and able to manufacture an OBW with an over-
the-toilet design; (3) the ability of any OBW with over-the-toilet 
positioning to fit within existing FAA stowage spaces; and (4) 
uncertainties regarding the reasonable weight load for an OBW, given 
constraints such as the width of the aircraft aisle. Bearing these 
uncertainties in mind, the PRIA estimates the costs of developing 
compliant OBWs to be $2.7 million undiscounted ($2.5 million discounted 
at 7% and $2.6 million discounted at 3%). These costs are largely 
related to design, and not to manufacturing. The Department's complete 
PRIA with more details on the economic analysis may be found in the 
rulemaking docket. The Department seeks comment on all elements of this 
PRIA.

B. 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).\63\ This rule 
applies only to carriers that operate aircraft with FAA-certificated 
maximum capacity of more than 60 seats. The Department hereby certifies 
that this rule would not have a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \63\ See 14 CFR 399.73.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 NPRM has been analyzed in accordance with the principles and 
criteria contained in Executive Order 13175 (``Consultation and 
Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments''). Because this NPRM 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.

[[Page 36]]

E. Paperwork Reduction Act

    The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) 
requires that DOT consider the impact of paperwork and other 
information collection burdens imposed on the public and, under the 
provisions of PRA section 3507(d), obtain approval from OMB for each 
collection of information it conducts, sponsors, or requires through 
regulations. This rule adopts new information collection requirements 
subject to the PRA. The Department will publish a separate notice in 
the Federal Register inviting OMB, the general public, and other 
Federal agencies to comment on the new and revised information 
collection requirements contained in this document. As prescribed by 
the PRA, the requirements will not go into effect until OMB has 
approved them and the Department has published a notice announcing the 
effective date of the information collection requirements.

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 
rulemaking.

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 (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). 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 3.c.6.i of DOT Order 5610.1C categorically excludes 
``[a]ctions relating to consumer protection, including regulations.'' 
This rulemaking concerns civil rights protection for individuals with 
disabilities. The Department does not anticipate any environmental 
impacts, and there are no extraordinary circumstances present in 
connection with this rulemaking.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 382

    Lavatories; Single-aisle aircraft; Onboard wheelchairs.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Department proposes 
to amend 14 CFR part 382 as follows:

PART 382--NONDISCRIMINATION ON THE BASIS OF DISABILITY IN AIR 
TRAVEL

0
1. The authority citation for part 382 is revised to read as follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 40113(a); 41702, 41705, 41712, and 41310; 
FAA Extension, Safety, and Security Act of 2016, section 2108.

Subpart E--Accessibility of Aircraft

0
2. In Sec.  382.63, add the phrase ``not covered in paragraph (f) of 
this section'' after the word ``aircraft'' in paragraph (b), and add 
paragraphs (f), (g), and (h) to read as follows:


Sec.  382.63   What are the requirements for accessible lavatories?

* * * * *
    (f) As a carrier, you must ensure that all new single-aisle 
aircraft that you operate with an FAA-certificated maximum seating 
capacity of 125 or more that are delivered on or after [DATE THREE 
YEARS AFTER THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE FINAL RULE] and on which 
lavatories are provided shall include at least one lavatory that meets 
the following specifications:
    (1) Grab bars must be provided and positioned as required to meet 
the needs of individuals with disabilities.
    (2) Lavatory faucets must have controls with tactile information 
concerning temperature. Alternatively, carriers may comply with this 
requirement by ensuring that lavatory water temperature is adjusted to 
eliminate the risk of scalding for all passengers. Automatic or hand-
operated faucets shall dispense water for a minimum of five seconds for 
each application or while the hand is below the faucet.
    (3) Attendant call buttons and door locks must be accessible to an 
individual seated within the lavatory.
    (4) Lavatory controls and dispensers must be discernible through 
the sense of touch. Operable parts within the lavatory must be operable 
with one hand and must not require tight grasping, pinching, or 
twisting of the wrist.
    (5) The lavatory door sill must provide minimum obstruction to the 
passage of the onboard wheelchair across the sill while preventing the 
leakage of fluids from the lavatory floor and trip hazards during an 
emergency evacuation.
    (6) Toe clearance must not be reduced from current measurements.
    (7) The aircraft must include a visual barrier that must be 
provided upon request of a passenger with a disability. The barrier 
must provide passengers with disabilities using the lavatory (with the 
lavatory door open) a level of privacy substantially equivalent to that 
provided to ambulatory users.
    (g) You are not required to retrofit cabin interiors of existing 
single-aisle aircraft to comply with the requirements of paragraph (f) 
of this section. However, if you replace a lavatory on a single-aisle 
aircraft after [DATE THREE YEARS AFTER THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE FINAL 
RULE], you must replace it with a lavatory complying with the 
requirements of paragraph (f) of this section. Under this paragraph 
(g), a lavatory is not considered replaced if it is removed for 
specified maintenance, safety checks, or any other action that results 
in returning the same lavatory into service. For retrofit lavatories, 
there shall be no requirement to install a visual barrier if doing so 
will obstruct the visibility of exit signs.
    (h) As a carrier operating at least one aircraft with an FAA-
certificated maximum seating capacity of 60 or more, you must comply 
with the following requirements:
    (1) You must train flight attendants to proficiency on an annual 
basis to provide assistance in transporting qualified individuals with 
disabilities to and from the lavatory from the aircraft seat. Such 
training shall include hands-on training on the retrieval, assembly, 
stowage, and use of the aircraft's onboard wheelchair, and regarding 
the accessibility features of the lavatory.
    (2) You must provide information, on request, to qualified 
individuals with a disability or persons making inquiries on their 
behalf concerning the accessibility of aircraft lavatories. This 
information must also be available on the carrier's website, and in 
printed or electronic form on the aircraft, including picture diagrams 
of accessibility features in the lavatory and the location and usage of 
all controls and dispensers.
    (3) You must remove or conceal the International Symbol of 
Accessibility from new and in-service aircraft equipped with lavatories 
that are not capable of facilitating a seated independent transfer 
(i.e., a transfer from an onboard wheelchair to the toilet seat without 
requiring the use of an assistant).

[[Page 37]]

    (4) You must develop and, upon request, inform passengers of trash 
disposal procedures and processes for sharps and bio-waste.
    (5) You must comply with the provisions of this paragraph (h) by 
[DATE THREE YEARS AFTER THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE FINAL RULE].
0
3. In Sec.  382.65, add paragraphs (e), (f), (g), and (h) as follows:


Sec.  382.65   What are the requirements concerning on-board 
wheelchairs?

* * * * *
    (e) As a carrier, you must ensure that all new single-aisle 
aircraft that you operate with an FAA-certificated maximum seating 
capacity of 125 or more that are delivered on or after [DATE THREE 
YEARS AFTER THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE FINAL RULE] and on which 
lavatories are provided include an onboard wheelchair meeting the 
requirements of this section. The Access Board published nonbinding 
technical assistance titled, ``Advisory Guidelines for Aircraft Onboard 
Wheelchairs,'' for compliance with these requirements.
    (1) The onboard wheelchair must be maneuverable both forward and 
backward through the aircraft aisle by an attendant.
    (2) The onboard wheelchair must be maneuverable in a forward 
orientation partially into at least one aircraft lavatory to permit 
transfer from the onboard wheelchair to the toilet.
    (3) The onboard wheelchair must be maneuverable into the aircraft 
lavatory in a backward orientation to permit positioning over the 
toilet lid without protruding into the clear space needed to completely 
close the lavatory door.
    (4) The height of the onboard wheelchair seat must align with the 
height of the aircraft seat so as to facilitate a safe transfer between 
the onboard wheelchair seat and the aircraft seat.
    (5) The onboard wheelchair must have wheels that lock in the 
direction of travel, and that lock in place so as to permit safe 
transfers. Any other moving parts of the onboard wheelchair must be 
capable of being secured such that they do not move while the occupied 
onboard wheelchair is being maneuvered.
    (6) When occupied for use, the onboard wheelchair shall not tip or 
fall in any direction under normal operating conditions.
    (7) The onboard wheelchair must have a padded seat and backrest, 
and must be free of sharp or abrasive components.
    (8) The onboard wheelchair must have arm supports that are 
sufficiently structurally sound to permit transfers and repositionable 
so as to allow for unobstructed transfers; adequate back support; torso 
and leg restraints that are adequate to prevent injury during 
transport; and a unitary foot support that provides sufficient 
clearance to traverse the threshold of the lavatory and is 
repositionable so as to allow for unobstructed transfer. All restraints 
must be operable by the passenger.
    (9) The onboard wheelchair must prominently display instructions 
for proper use.
    (f) You are not required to expand the existing FAA-certificated 
onboard wheelchair stowage space of the aircraft, or modify the 
interior arrangement of the lavatory or the aircraft, in order to 
comply with this section.
    (g) You are not responsible for the failure of third parties to 
develop and deliver an onboard wheelchair that complies with a 
requirement set forth in paragraph (e) of this section so long as you 
notify and demonstrate to the Department at the address cited in Sec.  
382.159 that an onboard wheelchair meeting that requirement is 
unavailable despite your reasonable efforts.
    (h) If you replace an onboard wheelchair on aircraft with an FAA-
certificated maximum seating capacity of 125 or more after [DATE THREE 
YEARS AFTER THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE FINAL RULE], then you must 
replace it with an onboard wheelchair that meets the standards set 
forth in paragraph (e) of this section.

    Issued this 16th day of December, 2019, in Washington, DC, under 
authority delegated in 49 CFR 1.27(n).
Steven G. Bradbury,
General Counsel.
[FR Doc. 2019-27631 Filed 12-31-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-9X-P


