People's Comments

Join the discussion by clicking on the comment bubble next to a section of the Agency proposal or by replying to someone else’s. You must be logged in.
This discussion is now closed.
show all (9)
There are no comments. Click the text to your left to make a new comment.
6/11/2010 19:04

This seems like another bureaucratic paperwork mess that will be outdated as soon as it is published, of little use and another cost of doing business that will raise ticket prices. I do NOT support this.

    6/11/2010 20:49

    Do you see a more effective way of getting this information to passengers? Or do you think that it is not really information that passengers need in the first place?

6/15/2010 19:25

I’m not sure about this, but I assume that all or most of this data collection is totally automated for the large carriers. In other words, this data isn’t being collected by some human accountant type with a green visor and a pad and pencil. It’s simply being pulled out of databases that already contain the information. If so, why would it be so hard for the smaller or foreign carriers to implement the same solution. Just digitally collect the information and transmit it to the authorities for analysis. It would involve some up front programming, but what else?

    6/16/2010 02:43

    Thanks for your comment and your suggestion. Does anyone know the details about how the large carriers collect this information?

7/25/2010 19:35

The information and technology is available so I don’t find it burdensome for an airline , or for the DOT themselves to accumulate and present the info in a useable fashion for interested travelers.

7/30/2010 23:26

Why does everyone look at this is paperwork? Technology should be able to be implemented to make data available. Fighter jets already have the capacity to plug into a laptop to get readings of systems. Formula one does this as well. I see this implemented via a standard technology that uploads to computers where reports could be generated. For airlines that do not upload data and or fails audits, they are fined and could loose routes.

8/29/2010 10:02

Long time members of frequent flier programs should not be treated the same as newer members or non members. Information on passengers to be shared with others should be clearly specified and passengers should be so advised. Transparency should be the rule of the day in all matters of safety and security.

8/29/2010 13:33

It is important to carriers to publish on-time performance. This is an important statistic used by some travelers to make choices about the carriers they wish to fly with.
Also, the requirement to publish these statistics makes the carriers pay more attention to their achievements both individually and as compared to other carriers.

Airline Passenger Rights "Data reporting requirements"

Agency Proposal
By the Regulation Room team based on the NPRM
Agency Documents
1 6


Solving a problem is tough if you aren’t sure when, where, and why it’s happening. DOT Department of Transportation wants more data about tarmac delay and other customer service problems — and it’s thinking about requiring US and foreign airlines to provide it. This may seem like a no-brainer to frustrated passengers. But, having to submit reports to the government costs time and money (think about filing your federal and state tax returns). So, DOT Department of Transportation is taking a hard look at whether the ultimate benefits, to air travelers, of having better data on these issues are likely to outweigh the costs, to airlines, of more required reports and record-keeping.

This post will tell you more about what the problems have been, and what solutions DOT Department of Transportation is considering – and alert you to questions DOT particularly wants people to comment on.

2 0 The Problems

The major US airlines (who serve about 90% of all passengers) already have to file On-Time Flight Performance Reports that allow DOT Department of Transportation and air travelers to see the on-time record of the airline as a whole, and particular flights. These Reports now have to include tarmac delay data — but only for domestic flights. So, DOT Department of Transportation doesn’t have a good picture of tarmac delay on flights of smaller carriers or on international flights by US or foreign carriers.

Foreign airlines have not been required to have customer service plans that identify what the carrier will do in the event of several kinds of problems travelers might encounter. See Customer Service Plans. Therefore, they also haven’t had to audit their performance in these areas and make the results available to DOT, like US carriers now do.

3 0 The Proposed Solutions

DOT is thinking about requiring that all U.S. and foreign airlines that operate at least one aircraft with 30 or more passenger seats submit monthly reports about any tarmac delay of 3 hours or more. Seventeen pieces of information would be required for any flight that must be reported on. A summary of these reports will be available to travelers in DOT’s monthly Air Travel Consumer Report.

DOT is now proposing to require foreign airlines that operate at least one aircraft with 30 or more passenger seats to create customer service plans. These carriers would also have to audit their compliance with the terms of the plan every year, keep that information for two years, and make it available to DOT. Failure to adopt a plan, stick to it, and audit compliance for DOT’s inspection would be considered an “unfair and deceptive practice.”

4 2 What DOT Department of Transportation wants to know from you

Is the benefit of monthly tarmac reports from smaller carriers likely to be worth the cost, given the limited resources of those carriers? Should the reporting threshold be set at 60-seat aircraft rather than 30-seat?

Same question as to foreign carriers, who have relatively fewer flights to and from the US?

Are there alternative ways to get more complete information on tarmac delay and customer service without overburdening small and foreign carriers?

See what DOT Department of Transportation said on this issue: NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking: the official document announcing and explaining the proposed rule Section 3, Section 4

See the proposed rule text on this issue: Section 244.3, Section 259.5

Want data?