Voglio sapere a riguardo di…

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 83 / Monday, May 3, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES

deceptive practices in 49 U.S.C. 41712.
The NPRM proposed to apply the requirements of the NPRM to both U.S.
and foreign air carriers to streamline the tarmac delay requirements and decrease confusion in the airport environment.
Comments: Commenters on this issue all agreed that adjustments to the tarmac delay rule should be applied to U.S. and foreign air carriers alike.
DOT Response: The requirements of this final rule apply to both U.S. and foreign air carriers, as proposed.
4. Diversions The NPRM: The NPRM proposed that diversions would be 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 would be treated as a departing flight and after that point, the departure delay exception could apply if carriers begin to return to a suitable disembarkation point to deplane passengers within the time frames specified in the exception.
Comments: Industry comments were not all supportive of the NPRMs proposed treatment of diversions. While Exhaustless, Inc. and Delta Air Lines agreed with the proposals, Air China, the Association of Asia Pacific Airlines AAPA, the National Air Carrier Association, and the Regional Airline Association RAA, expressed their view that the tarmac delay requirements should not apply to diversions. Many of them noted that carriers should not be held accountable for the lack of deplanement facilities at diversion airports, particularly during mass diversions, or in instances in which foreign carriers do not serve the diversion airport. AAPA also stated that passengers may not benefit from the rule in such situations if the flights are cancelled and passengers are stranded at an airport without carrier staff. Spirit Airlines proposed that diversions be treated as departing flights entirely, or to stop the tarmac delay clock when gates are not available and the airport or air traffic control caused the delay.
DOT Response: Section 42301
provides that a passenger shall have the option to deplane from an aircraft during an excessive tarmac delay, and that the option shall be offered to a passenger even if a flight in covered air transportation is diverted to a commercial airport other than the originally scheduled airport. 49 U.S.C.
42301b3B. The statute makes clear that the tarmac delay requirements apply to diversions, and the Department is implementing the tarmac delay rule consistent with the statute. The Department has decided to proceed with
VerDate Sep<11>2014

17:00 Apr 30, 2021

Jkt 253001

the NPRM proposal to permit carriers to take advantage of the departure delay exception during diversions only after an opportunity to deplane is provided to passengers. If no opportunity to deplane has been provided, then the diversion is still treated as an arriving flight and the carrier must provide an opportunity for passengers to deplane within 3 or 4
hours, depending on whether the flight is domestic or international. The departure delay exception, as written, is not easily applied to diverted flights before an opportunity to deplane is provided, particularly the exceptions primary elements such as returning to a suitable disembarkation point and doing so within 3 or 4 hours after the main aircraft door is closed.
In considering the concerns of foreign carriers who may have limited operations at a diversion airport, the Departments Office of Aviation Consumer Protection, the unit within the Office of the General Counsel that enforces aviation consumer protection requirements, already considers circumstances in which a carrier encounters unforeseeable conditions, and for which the carrier exerts no control, in determining whether to proceed with enforcement action and whether to mitigate any potential sanction. The Department also notes that carriers are required by the regulation to coordinate tarmac delay procedures in advance with the airport authorities and government agencies at the carriers regular diversion airports in the United States. If exigent circumstances require a flight to divert to an airport that is not a regular U.S.
diversion airport for the carrier, while the tarmac delay requirements would continue to apply, the Office of Aviation Consumer Protection would consider the totality of the circumstances in determining whether there is a violation in such a situation. In doing so, the Office of Aviation Consumer Protection recognizes that carriers diverting to a non-regular diversionary airport are not required to coordinate tarmac delay contingencies in advance with authorities at that airport and may not have a contingency plan with the airport, which may impact the airlines ability to provide the opportunity to deplane in a timely manner. The Office of Aviation Consumer Protection often affords the carrier additional leeway when the carrier finds itself in such circumstances; however, the tarmac delay requirements not related to the opportunity to deplane, such as providing timely food and water or notifications, would not be impacted when the delay occurs at a non-regular
PO 00000

Frm 00027

Fmt 4700

Sfmt 4700

23263

diversion airport. The Department expects the carrier to take reasonable efforts to prevent or mitigate tarmac delay violations given the resources available in each respective situation.
5. Data Reporting Requirements The NPRM: The Department proposed to revise the tarmac delay reporting requirements in 14 CFR part 244. Under existing reporting rules in 14 CFR parts 234 and 244, reporting carriers 3 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 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 234.7.4 The combination of 14 CFR
parts 234 and 244 reporting requirements has resulted in reporting carriers reporting tarmac delays twice at most U.S. airports. The NPRM proposed that reports for tarmac delays on scheduled domestic passenger flights no longer needed to be reported by reporting carriers under 14 CFR part 244, provided that such flights are reported under 14 CFR part 234.
The Department also proposed to eliminate the requirement that tarmac delay reports be filed under 14 CFR part 3 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 Departments Office of Airline Information, and as reported to the Department pursuant to part 241.
Reporting carriers will be identified periodically in accounting and reporting directives issued by the Office of Airline Information. 14 CFR 234.2.
4 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.

E:FRFM03MYR1.SGM

03MYR1