Quiero saber acerca de...

jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES

23262

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 83 / Monday, May 3, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
to analyzing the location of the aircraft and using a different standard for whether the aircraft is in a carriercontrolled or non-carrier-controlled area sufficiently balances the needs of effective enforcement of the tarmac delay rule and the circumstances and interests of carriers and passengers, while appreciating the complexity of airport environments. A standard that requires carriers physically to maneuver aircraft back to the gate regardless of the aircrafts location, as sought by consumer advocates, may be difficult for carriers to meet if their aircraft are in a position on the airfield where FAA, for example, is directing the aircrafts movements and FAA does not provide the clearance for an aircraft to physically move. Conversely, industry commenters suggestion that the process of returning to the gate has begun when a decision is made to return, lacks a measurable standard that can be easily corroborated. It could also result in situations in which a carrier makes a decision to return to a suitable disembarkation point, but the aircraft does not actually begin the process to return to a suitable disembarkation point for some time due to reasons within the carriers control.
The Department believes that the exception articulated in the NPRM
provides the best middle ground that balances the above interests. For aircraft in an area of the airport that is not controlled by the carrier, there are typically verifiable and objective indicia of when an aircraft has begun the process of returning to a suitable disembarkation point, and the Department has determined that an appropriate trigger for this process is when the carrier makes a request for permission from the third party directing the aircrafts movements e.g., FAA, airport authority, or terminal to return to a suitable disembarkation point. For aircraft that are in a carriercontrolled area, the physical maneuvering of the aircraft will signal the start of the process of returning to a suitable disembarkation point, consistent with the standard that has been in effect since the Department issued its 2016 Enforcement Policy.
As stated in the NPRM, the Department notes that the departure delay exception only 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, DOT would not consider the
VerDate Sep<11>2014

17:00 Apr 30, 2021

Jkt 253001

flight to have begun to return to a suitable disembarkation point to provide passengers an opportunity to deplane, and the departure delay exception would not apply. For example, an aircraft that begins the process of returning to the gate or another suitable disembarkation point for a mechanical-related problem would not benefit from the departure delay exception if the purpose of the return did not include providing passengers an opportunity to deplane and passengers were not provided the option to deplane.
2. Start of the Tarmac Delay The NPRM: The Department proposed that for departing flights, a tarmac delay starts when the main aircraft door is closed, in line with the language in the FAA Extension Act. The Department further proposed to provide flexibility to carriers by taking into account circumstances when a carrier has closed the main aircraft door for departure but the aircraft has not left the gate. The Department proposed that, if a carrier can show that passengers on board the aircraft have the opportunity to deplane an aircraft, even while the aircraft doors are closed, then the tarmac delay clock would 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, the Department would presume passengers do not have an opportunity to deplane.
Comments: Industry comments were generally supportive of the proposal regarding the start of a tarmac delay for departing flights and for the flexibility that the Department proposed for carriers. Some carriers, as well as IATA
and A4A, also preferred to use the gate departure time as the start of the tarmac delay, in line with the data that is submitted to the Bureau of Transportation Statistics under Form BTS 244. Some carriers noted that many aircraft do not capture the door closing time. Exhaustless, Inc. opposed any standard that does not start the tarmac delay when the aircraft doors close, as provided in the statute. FlyersRights noted that the flexibility offered in the NPRM, in which carriers can rebut the presumption that the opportunity to deplane ends when the aircraft doors close, negates the benefits of the Departments proposal regarding the provision of food and water.
FlyersRights argues that, if the timer for the food and water requirement starts when the aircraft doors close, then the timer for a tarmac delay would not be
PO 00000

Frm 00026

Fmt 4700

Sfmt 4700

in alignment if it starts at any time other than the time the aircraft doors close.
DOT Response: As amended by the FAA Extension Act, 49 U.S.C.
42301b3 provides that a passenger shall have the option to deplane an aircraft and return to the airport terminal when there is an excessive tarmac delay, and that in providing the option described in subparagraph A, the air carrier shall begin to return the aircraft to a suitable disembarkation point no later than three or four hours depending on whether the flight is domestic or international after the main aircraft door is closed in preparation for departure. Based on this statutory language, the Department interprets the tarmac delay to start when the main aircraft door is closed for departing flights, rather than the gate departure time i.e., the time the aircraft pushes back from the gate, as proposed by some carriers. The Department expects that in most situations, the time the aircraft door is closed is equivalent to the time passengers no longer have the opportunity to deplane, thereby starting the tarmac delay. However, the Department acknowledges that there may be a few instances in which the opportunity to deplane may still exist after the aircraft doors are closed, for example, circumstances in which the jet bridge is still attached to the aircraft and the crew is available and willing to open the aircraft door immediately to allow a passenger to deplane. For this reason, this rule allows carriers to present evidence that the opportunity to deplane exists even with the doors closed. In such situations, evidence that the carrier made announcements that the opportunity to deplane was available and that the aircraft doors could be opened as soon as a passenger requested to deplane would be sufficient to show that an opportunity existed.
The Department agrees with FlyersRights regarding its comment that flexibility in the start of the tarmac delay could create a misalignment between the start of the tarmac delay and the start of the food and water clock. For this reason, the Department has modified the food and water provision in the rule, as discussed in a later section.
3. Applicability to U.S. and Foreign Carriers The NPRM: Although 49 U.S.C.
42301, which was amended by the FAA
Extension Act, only applies to U.S.
carriers, the NPRM proposed to apply the departure delay exception to both U.S. and foreign air carriers under DOTs authority to prohibit unfair and
E:FRFM03MYR1.SGM

03MYR1