Family Seating in Air Transportation, 65272-65294 [2024-17323]

Agencies

• DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
• Office of the Secretary

[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 154 (Friday, August 9, 2024)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 65272-65294]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-17323]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Office of the Secretary

14 CFR Parts 259 and 261

[Docket No. DOT-OST-2024-0091]
RIN 2105-AF15


Family Seating in Air Transportation

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

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of Transportation (Department or DOT) is 
proposing to require U.S. and foreign air carriers to seat children 
aged 13 and under adjacent to at least one accompanying adult at no 
additional cost beyond the fare, subject to limited exceptions. The 
Department considers family seating to be a basic service, essential 
for the provision of adequate air transportation, that must be included 
in the advertised fare. Under this proposal, a carrier's failure to 
provide family seating would subject it to civil penalties on a per 
passenger (child) basis, and if the carrier charged families a fee 
beyond the fare to secure family seating, the carrier would be subject 
to civil penalties for each fee imposed.

DATES: Comments should be filed by October 8, 2024. Late-filed comments 
will be considered to the extent practicable.

ADDRESSES: You may file comments identified by the docket number DOT-
OST-2024-0091 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,

[[Page 65273]]

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-2024-0091 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 the 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.). For information on DOT's 
compliance with the Privacy Act, please visit https://www.transportation.gov/privacy.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents and 
comments received, go to https://www.regulations.gov or to the street 
address listed above. Follow the online instructions for accessing the 
docket.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Maegan Johnson, Senior Trial Attorney, 
Nicole Smith, Trial Attorney, or Blane A. Workie, Assistant General 
Counsel, Office of Aviation Consumer Protection, U.S. Department of 
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Ave. SE, Washington, DC 20590, 202-366-
9342, 202-366-7152 (fax), [email protected], [email protected], 
or [email protected] (email).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Executive Summary

A. Background

    The FAA Extension, Safety, and Security Act of 2016 (2016 FAA 
Extension Act) requires the Department to review U.S. air carrier 
family seating policies and, if appropriate, direct air carriers to 
establish policies that enable young children, age 13 and under, to sit 
adjacent to an accompanying family member, age 14 or over, to the 
maximum extent practicable and at no additional cost.\1\ In response to 
this directive, in 2017, the Department's Office of Aviation Consumer 
Protection (OACP) reviewed family seating complaints received between 
June 1, 2016 and June 1, 2017, to better understand the issues facing 
consumers. OACP also conducted a review of the nine largest U.S. 
airlines' \2\ family seating policies and had discussions with each of 
these airlines to learn about their family seating policies, practices, 
and procedures. Based on its review of airline family seating policies 
and consumer complaints, the Department determined that it was 
unnecessary to direct airlines to establish policies that enable a 
child to sit next to an adult family member at that time.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Public Law 114-190, codified at 49 U.S.C. 42301 note prec.
    \2\ The Department focused its review on the largest U.S. 
airlines, i.e., a certificated U.S. air carrier that accounted for 
at least one percent of domestic scheduled passenger revenues. OACP 
reviewed the following airlines: Alaska Airlines, American Airlines, 
Delta Air Lines, Frontier Airlines, Hawaiian Airlines, JetBlue 
Airways, Southwest Airlines, Spirit Airlines, and United Airlines. 
Together, these airlines and their operating partners accounted for 
approximately 95 percent of domestic passenger air traffic.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    OACP conducted a follow-up review in 2019 and learned that airlines 
had implemented enhanced approaches for providing family seating (e.g., 
more than one airline had developed an automated system to assign young 
children to seats next to an adult family member), but airlines did not 
guarantee family seating. Also, the total number of family seating 
complaints against U.S. airlines received by the Department trended 
slightly higher from July 2017 through June 2019.\3\ In the Joint 
Explanatory Statement accompanying the Consolidated Appropriations Act 
of 2019, the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations (Committees) 
requested that the Department provide a report to the Committees ``on 
its review of family seating policies and a justification for its 
decision to defer to current airline seating policies,'' noting that 
the Department has stated that it completed its review and deferred to 
current airline family seating policies.\4\ The Department submitted 
the requested report to the Committees on March 12, 2020. In that 
report, the Department concluded that ``[i]n lieu of directing airlines 
to establish specific seating policies, [it would] continue[ ] to 
update the family seating web page . . . [and] monitor and review the 
family seating complaints it receives on a regular basis to better 
understand what is and is not working.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ In calendar year 2017, 0.38% of complaints (44 complaints) 
filed with the Department by consumers against U.S. airlines 
concerned family seating. In calendar year 2018, 0.51% of air travel 
service complaints (46 complaints) against U.S. airlines concerned 
family seating. In calendar year 2019, 2.4% of air travel service 
complaints (230 family seating complaints) against U.S. airlines 
concerned family seating. This increase corresponded with a consumer 
advocacy group's effort to encourage air travelers to file 
complaints with the Department if they were dissatisfied with an 
experience related to family seating.
    \4\ See https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/CRPT-115srpt268/html/CRPT-115srpt268.htm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In July 2021, DOT Secretary Buttigieg and other officials from the 
Department met with consumer advocates who, as one of their top 
priorities, urged the Department to issue a rule requiring airlines to 
seat children next to at least one adult family member at no additional 
cost. The consumer advocates emphasized that, while the number of 
complaints about children being seated apart from an accompanying adult 
on a flight may not be large, the harm to the children who are 
separated is significant. After the meeting, the Department publicly 
stated that it would review this matter again to determine what other 
actions should be taken.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Travel Weekly, DOT takes another look at how families 
are split on airplanes, available at https://www.travelweekly.com/Travel-News/Airline-News/DOT-reexamining-family-seating-airplanes 
(Sept. 13, 2021).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In July 2022, the Department issued a notice encouraging airlines 
to review and improve, as needed, their policies and procedures to 
ensure young children are seated adjacent to at least one accompanying 
adult to the maximum extent practicable and at no additional cost.\6\ 
In the notice, the Department asked airlines to review and improve 
their policies and procedures and stated that, four months from the 
date of the notice, it would initiate a review of airlines' family 
seating policies to ensure that children aged 13 or younger would be 
seated adjacent to an accompanying adult without paying an additional 
fee. In November 2022, the Department reviewed the ten largest U.S. 
airlines' \7\ family seating policies and discovered that airlines 
generally promised to make efforts to seat families together, but many 
required families to pay an additional fee to be assured that a young 
child traveling in the party would be seated adjacent to an 
accompanying adult.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See https://www.transportation.gov/individuals/aviation-consumer-protection/family-seating/June-2022-notice.
    \7\ The Department focused its review on the largest U.S. 
airlines, i.e., a certificated U.S. air carrier that accounted for 
at least 1-percent of domestic scheduled passenger revenues. OACP 
reviewed the following airlines: Alaska Airlines, Allegiant Air, 
American Airlines, Delta Air Lines, Frontier Airlines, Hawaiian 
Airlines, JetBlue Airways, Southwest Airlines, Spirit Airlines, and 
United Airlines.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In February 2023, the President called upon Congress to ban airline 
family seating fees and announced that the Department would publish a 
family seating fee dashboard and initiate a rulemaking to ban the 
practice.\8\ The

[[Page 65274]]

Secretary of Transportation (Secretary) also announced the Department's 
plan to launch a dashboard that provides information to air travelers 
on the largest airlines' guarantees to seat young children adjacent to 
at least one accompanying adult without the traveler having to pay an 
additional fee.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2023/02/01/fact-sheet-president-biden-highlights-new-progress-on-his-competition-agenda/. Also, see https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/speeches-remarks/2023/02/07/remarks-of-president-joe-biden-state-of-the-union-address-as-prepared-for-delivery/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In anticipation of the dashboard's release, some airlines amended 
their family seating policies and added language to their customer 
service plans guaranteeing that they would provide adjacent seats for 
young children 13 or under traveling with an accompanying adult at no 
additional cost, subject to limited conditions. When the Department's 
family seating dashboard was published on OACP's website on March 6, 
2023, only three out of the ten largest U.S. carriers had committed to 
guaranteeing adjacent seating for families at no additional cost. Since 
then, one additional airline has made that commitment.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See https://www.transportation.gov/airconsumer/airline-family-seating-dashboard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Because most airlines would not guarantee that they would seat a 
parent and a child together at no extra cost, the Department initiated 
this rulemaking to ensure a young child is able to sit adjacent to an 
accompanying adult. On March 10, 2023, the Secretary also submitted a 
legislative proposal to Congress to amend chapter 417 of title 49, U.S. 
Code, to ensure that young children are seated adjacent to at least one 
accompanying adult at no additional cost, subject to certain 
conditions.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See https://www.transportation.gov/resources/individuals/aviation-consumer-protection/family-seating-legislative-proposal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

A. Need for a Rulemaking

    The Department views family seating as a basic service, essential 
for the provision of adequate air transportation, that should be 
provided to passengers at no additional cost. As described in the 
Regulatory Impact Analysis (RIA) developed in support of this 
rulemaking, the Department estimates the percentage of consumers, 
including families with young children, who may pay seating fees. 
According to complaints received by DOT, some parents mistakenly assume 
that they will be seated next to their young children when they 
purchase tickets for air transportation.\11\ These passengers assume 
that fee-free family seating is already required because a parent would 
need to supervise and tend to their child during a flight, not to 
mention the potential harm that may occur from a child being separated 
from a parent during a flight.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See Redacted Sample of Consumer Complaints Related to Seat 
Assignment Fees for Families Traveling with Children 13 and Under 
Received by the Department of Transportation's Office of Aviation 
Consumer Protection between 2019 and 2022: https://www.regulations.gov/document/DOT-OST-2022-0109-0023.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Based on the nature and severity of the complaints the Department 
has received, and the reluctance shown by the majority of the largest 
U.S. airlines to amend their family seating policies to guarantee 
family seating at no additional cost, demonstrates a need for action in 
this area. Additionally, the Department received several hundred 
comments on its Enhancing Transparency of Airline Ancillary Service 
Fees NPRM that urged the Department to ban family seating fees, rather 
than requiring that those fees be disclosed to consumers early in the 
purchasing process.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See, e.g., Comment from National Consumers League, 
available at https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOT-OST-2022-0109-0097 (``DOT should not assume that air carriers will stop charging 
seat reservation fees for family seating following the enactment of 
the proposed ancillary fee transparency regulations. To end this 
practice, the undersigned consumer and traveler rights organizations 
continue to urge the Department to utilize its existing authorities 
to require airlines to seat children 13 years old and younger with 
accompanying adults at no additional charge.''); Comment from PUBLIC 
INTEREST RESEARCH GROUP, available at, https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOT-OST-2022-0109-0383 (``. . . OACP receives complaints 
involving children as young as 11 months old not seated next to 
their adult travel partner. This is unacceptable. We support the 
OACP's position that airlines should not charge additional fees for 
a child 13 or younger to be seated next to an accompanying 
adult.''); Comment from AARP, available at, https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOT-OST-2022-0109-0093 (``. . . the high 
fees for changing or cancelling travel plans and fees for families 
to reserve seats together do not promote affordable access to travel 
by air. While disclosure is an essential first step, we would 
encourage the Department, and the airlines themselves, to reduce or 
eliminate such fees wherever possible.''); Comment from Travel Agent 
Org, available at, https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOT-OST-2022-0109-0492 (``Suggestion: Follow the way of other counites like 
Canada's APPR and require free adjacent seating for families with 
kids under 13.'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Specifically, the Department is concerned about the hardship 
experienced by families when they are unable to ensure family seating 
in advance of travel and about families paying extra fees just to 
ensure that they are seated with their children. Furthermore, a 
carrier's failure to provide family seating harms not only passengers 
traveling with young children, but also other passengers on the 
aircraft who may be asked or directed to give up their seats to 
accommodate families on the day of travel or who may be required to sit 
next to an unsupervised child.
    Consumers traveling with young children have reported feeling undue 
stress and anxiety when they are unable to receive assurances from 
carriers before the date of travel that they will be seated next to 
their young children. Although most airlines have indicated that their 
gate agents and flight crew will attempt to seat families together 
during the boarding process, these attempts are often taxing and, 
sometimes, unsuccessful. In one passenger complaint received by the 
Department, the passenger alleges that she purchased a ``basic'' 
ticket, and she was assigned a seat in a different row than her 4-year-
old son.\13\ She states that her son was assigned to a seat in between 
two men that she had never met before, and the flight attendant onboard 
the aircraft refused to assist her with asking passengers to shuffle 
seats because it was a full flight. Similarly, the Department received 
another consumer complaint alleging that a 10-year-old child suffered 
an anxiety attack when, at the start of boarding, the child was still 
assigned to a seat in a separate row from his parents.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See Redacted Sample of Consumer Complaints Related to Seat 
Assignment Fees for Families Traveling with Children 13 and Under 
Received by the Department of Transportation's Office of Aviation 
Consumer Protection between 2019 and 2022: https://www.regulations.gov/document/DOT-OST-2022-0109-0023.
    \14\ See Redacted Sample of Consumer Complaints Related to Seat 
Assignment Fees for Families Traveling with Children 13 and Under 
Received by the Department of Transportation's Office of Aviation 
Consumer Protection between 2019 and 2022: https://www.regulations.gov/document/DOT-OST-2022-0109-0023.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Department is also concerned that the carriers that do not 
guarantee family seating advise passengers to purchase advance seat 
assignments, purchase seats in a higher fare class, or pay a fee to 
receive early boarding on the aircraft, simply to ensure that families 
are seated together. Many U.S. airlines offer basic economy, or another 
equivalent low-cost economy ticket. These low-cost economy ticket 
options typically do not allow passengers to select a seat assignment 
for free. Thus, if a passenger wants to ensure that they will receive a 
seat assignment next to their child in advance of the flight, carriers 
that do not guarantee free family seating typically advise passengers 
to either pay the advance seat assignment selection fee, or purchase 
seats that cost more than the low-cost economy tickets to be assured of 
seats adjacent to their young child. Thus, families traveling with 
young children are being forced to purchase a more expensive fare to

[[Page 65275]]

ensure that they are seated with their young children.
    Most carriers have indicated to the Department that they would try 
to make accommodations at the airport to ensure that families are 
seated together, regardless of the fare purchased by the passenger. 
Nonetheless, passengers who purchase low-fare economy tickets for their 
family have reported having difficulty when attempting to obtain family 
seating at the gate, and have, in some instances, been shamed by 
airlines for failing to purchase a higher fare ticket to ensure that 
their family will be assigned adjacent seats.
    To illustrate, one passenger alleged that she purchased inexpensive 
seats on a large U.S. carrier and when she approached a gate agent on 
the day of travel, the agent initially refused to assign her a seat 
next to her two-year old and four-year old children and stated that she 
should have booked in a ``higher class.'' \15\ The passenger states 
that the agent eventually facilitated new seat assignments for her 
family, but she was upset by the lack of empathy shown by the agent and 
the unpleasantness of the encounter. In another complaint received by 
the Department, a passenger alleges that she was seated eight rows 
apart from her 3-year-old child and that the airline stated that it 
hoped she would be able to sit with her child on the day of travel or, 
in the alternative, that the passenger could pay for upgraded 
seats.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See Redacted Sample of Consumer Complaints Related to Seat 
Assignment Fees for Families Traveling with Children 13 and Under 
Received by the Department of Transportation's Office of Aviation 
Consumer Protection between 2019 and 2022: https://www.regulations.gov/document/DOT-OST-2022-0109-0023.
    \16\ See Redacted Sample of Consumer Complaints Related to Seat 
Assignment Fees for Families Traveling with Children 13 and Under 
Received by the Department of Transportation's Office of Aviation 
Consumer Protection between 2019 and 2022: https://www.regulations.gov/document/DOT-OST-2022-0109-0023.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Department also notes that even if a passenger reserves seats 
in advance, pays a fee to selects seats, or purchases seats in a higher 
class to ensure family seating, the passenger may be later assigned 
seats away from a young child in their travel party if the carrier 
changes the flight's aircraft. For example, the Department received a 
complaint from a passenger who alleges that he booked a flight for 
himself and his 8-year-old daughter. He states that when he booked his 
flight, he made sure that he reserved a seat directly next to his 
daughter, but when the airline changed the flight schedule, they also 
changed his seat assignment, and he was no longer seated next to his 
daughter.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ See Redacted Sample of Consumer Complaints Related to Seat 
Assignment Fees for Families Traveling with Children 13 and Under 
Received by the Department of Transportation's Office of Aviation 
Consumer Protection between 2019 and 2022: https://www.regulations.gov/document/DOT-OST-2022-0109-0023.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Families have also identified child safety concerns as a major 
cause of stress and anxiety when a carrier does not provide passengers 
with assurances that they will be seated next to their young child on a 
flight.\18\ In one passenger complaint received by DOT, a passenger 
alleges that her three children, all under the age of 13, were assigned 
seats away from the accompanying adults in their travel party. She 
states that she was concerned about the seating arrangement because 
there would be no responsible adult available to help her children with 
masks or life vests in the case of an emergency, no one to help her 
children load baggage into the overhead bin, and no assurances that her 
children were protected sitting next to strangers.\19\ No family should 
have to worry about the safety of a young child, including during a 
potential emergency, because their child is seated rows away and next 
to complete strangers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ Hundreds of commenters on the Department's Enhancing 
Transparency of Airline Ancillary Service Fees NPRM noted that 
family seating ``is a basic human safety right. No child should have 
to sit next to strangers on a plane, airlines need to proactively 
offer children seating next to an accompanying adult.'' See, e.g., 
https://www.regulations.gov/document/DOT-OST-2022-0109-0696.
    \19\ See Redacted Sample of Consumer Complaints Related to Seat 
Assignment Fees for Families Traveling with Children 13 and Under 
Received by the Department of Transportation's Office of Aviation 
Consumer Protection between 2019 and 2022: https://www.regulations.gov/document/DOT-OST-2022-0109-0023.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Additionally, carriers that do not guarantee family seating to 
passengers traveling with children cause harm to passengers traveling 
without children. When a carrier assigns a young child a seat away from 
their accompanying adult, other passengers must make the decision to 
sit next to an unsupervised child or to forfeit the seat they may have 
paid to obtain, to remedy a situation the carrier created. When a 
parent and child are seated apart, carriers rely heavily on the 
goodwill of other passengers on the aircraft to relinquish their seats 
to allow a child and a parent to be seated next to each other on the 
aircraft. However, due to carriers' seating policies, many passengers 
may have paid an additional fee for the seat they selected or have paid 
an additional fee to board the aircraft early. If the passenger elects 
not to relocate, the passenger would then sit next to, and potentially 
have to look after, an unsupervised child. Similarly, the Department 
views it as unreasonable for passengers who paid for early boarding to 
relinquish their seats to families traveling with young children to 
remedy the situation the carrier created. The seat switching process 
also creates a transaction cost on all parties involved, including 
delays in boarding and departure time, that could have been avoided if 
the family had already been assigned seats together prior to boarding, 
or in the case of open seating carriers, boarded in a manner that 
ensured family seating.
    As described above, the Department has received various complaints 
describing stress-inducing incidents where families with very young 
children were assigned seats apart from a parent, and complaints 
describing fees that had to be paid to ensure that a parent was seated 
adjacent to their child. These additional costs can be a significant 
expense and can be a barrier for families who cannot afford to pay 
additional fees to ensure that a child in the travel party is seated 
adjacent to at least one accompanying adult.
    In this rulemaking, the Department proposes to amend 14 CFR part 
259, Enhanced Protections for Airline Passengers, and create a new 14 
CFR part 261 Family Seating, to require U.S. and foreign air carriers 
to seat children aged 13 and under next to at least one accompanying 
adult at no additional cost, as defined in this rulemaking, subject to 
limited exceptions. Under this proposal, a carrier would be prohibited 
from imposing additional charges to provide adjacent seating. Failure 
to provide family seating at no additional cost beyond the fare, 
including by charging for seat selection or upgraded priority boarding, 
would subject the carrier to civil penalties on a per passenger (child) 
basis or a per fee basis. If an airline fails to provide adjacent 
seating as required by the proposed rule, it would be required to 
provide the passengers remedial choices.

[[Page 65276]]

B. Statutory Authority

1. Authority To Regulate Under the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2024
    Section 516 of the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2024 (2024 FAA 
Reauthorization Act, Reauthorization Act, or Act) \20\ provides that 
the Secretary of Transportation ``shall issue a notice of proposed 
rulemaking to establish a policy'' that directs assigned seating air 
carriers to seat young children, under 14 years of age, adjacent to an 
accompanying adult to the greatest extent practicable, if the adjacent 
seats are available any time after the ticket has been issued, but 
before the first passenger boards the flight.\21\ Additionally, the 
Reauthorization Act also prohibits air carriers from charging a fee or 
imposing an additional cost beyond the ticket price to provide this 
service. Further, the Act states that section 516 should not be 
construed in such a way as to ``allow the Secretary to impose a change 
in the overall seating or boarding policy of an air carrier that has an 
open or flexible seating policy in place that generally allows adjacent 
family seating as described in'' that section. Pursuant to Section 516 
of the Reauthorization Act, DOT proposes in this NPRM to require 
assigned seating carriers to provide family seating to young children 
and an accompanying adult on aircraft at no additional cost. The 
Department also proposes to require carriers with an open or flexible 
seating policy to board passengers in a manner that allows a young 
child and an accompanying adult to secure adjacent seatings on the 
flight at no additional charge. This proposal, made pursuant to 
existing statutory authority at 49 U.S.C. 41702 and 41712 as explained 
in the following paragraphs, is consistent with paragraph (c) of 
section 516, which prohibits DOT from imposing a change in the overall 
seating or boarding policies of open or flexible seating carriers. The 
Department's proposals provide open and flexible seating carriers with 
the flexibility to work within the framework of their existing seating 
policies to determine how to board passengers in a way that would allow 
a young child to secure a seat adjacent to an accompanying adult at no 
additional charge. For example, a carrier, operating under its existing 
open or flexible seating policies could ensure family seating by 
blocking off seats in a specific section of the aircraft dedicated to 
passengers traveling with families, or by requiring families to be at 
the gate at a certain time before boarding to obtain family seating.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ FAA Reauthorization Act of 2024, Public Law 118-63, Sec.  
516, 138 Stat. 1025, 1197-1198 (2024).
    \21\ In addition to the mandate to issue an NPRM in the 2024 FAA 
Reauthorization Act, in 2016 Congress also required DOT to 
``establish a policy directing all air carriers . . . to establish 
policies that enable young children to sit adjacent to an 
accompanying family member over age 13 to the maximum extent 
practicable and at no additional cost.'' See section 2309(a) of the 
2016 FAA Extension Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Authority To Regulate Under 49 U.S.C. 41702
    With respect to the proposed requirements in this NPRM applicable 
to air carriers,\22\ the Department issues this NPRM pursuant to 
additional authority under 49 U.S.C. 41702, which states that ``an air 
carrier shall provide safe and adequate interstate air 
transportation.'' \23\ The Civil Aeronautics Board (CAB), the 
predecessor to the U.S. Department of Transportation, had the authority 
to ensure that air carriers provide ``safe and adequate service, 
equipment and facilities'' under section 404(a) of the Federal Aviation 
Act of 1958, which was later codified in 49 U.S.C. 41702.\24\ The CAB 
relied on section 404(a) to adopt a regulation that restricted smoking 
on flights by dividing aircraft cabins into smoking and nonsmoking 
sections. The CAB reasoned that its authority to require air carriers 
to provide ``adequate service'' under Sec.  41702 includes ensuring 
that the service does not cause passenger discomfort and annoyance.\25\ 
The CAB's regulation and interpretation of ``adequate service'' was 
later challenged by a passenger, but the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 
Fifth Circuit found that ``adequate service'' referred both to the 
number of flights provided by an air carrier and the quality of service 
provided to passengers.\26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 70102, an ``air carrier'' means a 
citizen of the United States undertaking by any means, directly or 
indirectly, to provide air transportation.
    \23\ Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 40102(a)(25) ``interstate air 
transportation'' means the transportation of passengers or property 
by aircraft as a common carrier for compensation, or the 
transportation of mail by aircraft--(A) between a place in--(i) a 
State, territory, or possession of the United States and a place in 
the District of Columbia or another State, territory, or possession 
of the United States; (ii) Hawaii and another place in Hawaii 
through the airspace over a place outside Hawaii; (iii) the District 
of Columbia and another place in the District of Columbia; or (iv) a 
territory or possession of the United States and another place in 
the same territory or possession; and (B) when any part of the 
transportation is by aircraft.
    \24\ Codification was effectuated in Public Law 103-272 (enacted 
July 5, 1994).
    \25\ ``[T]he extent and depth of passenger discomfort and 
annoyance from unsegregated and unregulated smoking on aircraft 
compels the conclusion that service which does not provide for the 
effective separation of smokers constitutes neither adequate service 
nor reasonable practice and cannot be permitted under the act.'' 38 
FR 12209 (May 10, 1973).
    \26\ See Diefenthal v. Civil Aeronautics Bd., 681 F.2d 1039 (5th 
Cir. 1982) (adequate service can refer both to the number of flights 
scheduled as well as the quality of service provided).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    More recently, the Department relied on its authority to provide 
safe and adequate interstate transportation in Sec.  41702 in its 2016 
final rule prohibiting the use of e-cigarettes on-board aircraft.\27\ 
In that final rule, the Department reasoned that it had the authority 
to rely on the ``adequate'' prong in Sec.  41702 to ban the use of e-
cigarettes. The Department argued that discomfort from e-cigarettes was 
like the discomfort described by the CAB when it chose to restrict 
smoking on aircraft in 1973.\28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ 81 FR 11415 (March 4, 2016).
    \28\ 81 FR 11415, 11421 (March 4, 2016).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Department's proposal in this NPRM promotes ``adequate'' air 
transportation because requiring airlines to ensure that young children 
are seated adjacent to an accompanying adult at no additional cost 
would decrease the significant hardship, stress, and anxiety 
experienced by families when a young child is not seated next to an 
accompanying adult on an aircraft. Passenger complaints received by DOT 
allege that both parents and their children have experienced anxiety 
and significant stress when faced with the risk of being separated 
during their flights.\29\ Failing to provide family seating also causes 
discomfort and harm to passengers who are not traveling with young 
children since these passengers may be asked to voluntarily give up 
their seats on the day of travel to accommodate a young child and 
accompanying adult. Forcing passengers, especially those passengers who 
paid for a specific seat assignment, to choose either to sit next to an 
unsupervised child or to relinquish their seat and move to a 
potentially undesirable location on the aircraft causes discomfort and 
annoyance.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ See Redacted Sample of Consumer Complaints Related to Seat 
Assignment Fees for Families Traveling with Children 13 and Under 
Received by the Department of Transportation's Office of Aviation 
Consumer Protection between 2019 and 2022: https://www.regulations.gov/document/DOT-OST-2022-0109-0023.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, the rule promotes ``adequate'' service because 
ensuring that young children are seated adjacent to an accompanying 
adult is an essential component of basic air transportation service 
that passengers reasonably believe should be included in their air 
transportation fare. Adequate service includes the quality of the 
service

[[Page 65277]]

provided to passengers.\30\ Current carrier practices of encouraging 
families to pay fees for a basic service that should be included with 
the air transportation purchased degrades the quality of the service 
provided to passengers by the carrier and can ultimately be harmful to 
any passengers on the aircraft. As such, the Department's authority to 
ensure adequate service under Sec.  41702 supports the proposed 
requirements in this NPRM.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \30\ See Diefenthal, 681 F.2d at 1044 (adequate service can 
refer both to the number of flights scheduled as well as to the 
quality of service provided).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Also, in light of passenger complaints received by DOT, the 
Department's proposal in this NPRM promotes ``adequate'' air 
transportation under Sec.  41702 by establishing further protections 
for young children traveling in air transportation. According to 
passenger complaints, young children who are separated from an 
accompanying adult may be more vulnerable to harm when traveling on an 
aircraft. Unlike children traveling as unaccompanied minors, who 
benefit from a service provided by airlines that typically involves the 
airline charging a fee to monitor and supervise the transport of a 
young child, young children who travel unsupervised because the airline 
failed to provide family seating may undergo unnecessary emotional 
trauma,\31\ may be harmed by another passenger during air 
transportation,\32\ or may not receive the requisite assistance to 
protect themselves during an emergency on the aircraft. Passenger 
concerns about protecting children traveling alone on aircraft 
therefore justify the Department's use of its authority to ensure 
adequate transportation under Sec.  41702.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \31\ See Redacted Sample of Consumer Complaints Related to Seat 
Assignment Fees for Families Traveling with Children 13 and Under 
Received by the Department of Transportation's Office of Aviation 
Consumer Protection between 2019 and 2022: https://www.regulations.gov/document/DOT-OST-2022-0109-0023.
    \32\ Press Release, U.S. Fed. Bureau of Investigation, Sexual 
Assault Aboard Aircraft: Raising Awareness About a Serious Federal 
Crime, (April 26, 2018), https://www.fbi.gov/news/stories/raising-awareness-about-sexual-assault-aboard-aircraft-042618.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

3. Authority To Regulate Under 49 U.S.C. 41712
    The Department is also issuing this NPRM pursuant to its authority 
in 49 U.S.C. 41712 to prohibit unfair or deceptive practices by air 
carriers, foreign air carriers, or ticket agents in air transportation 
or the sale of air transportation.
    On December 7, 2020, the Department issued a final rule that, among 
other things, requires the Department to provide its reasoning for 
concluding that a certain practice is unfair or deceptive to consumers 
when issuing aviation consumer protection rulemakings that are not 
specifically required by statute and are based on the Department's 
general authority to prohibit unfair or deceptive practices under 
section 41712.\33\ That final rule adopted definitions for the terms 
``unfair'' and ``deceptive.'' A practice is ``unfair'' to consumers if 
it causes or is likely to cause substantial injury, which is not 
reasonably avoidable, and the harm is not outweighed by benefits to 
consumers or competition.\34\ A practice is ``deceptive'' to consumers 
if it is likely to mislead a consumer, acting reasonably under the 
circumstances, with respect to a material matter. A matter is material 
if it is likely to have affected the consumer's conduct or decision 
with respect to a product or service.\35\ Proof of intent is not 
necessary to establish unfairness or deception.\36\ The Department 
elaborated further on the elements of ``unfair'' and ``deceptive'' in a 
2022 guidance document.\37\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \33\ See Final Rule, Defining Unfair or Deceptive Practices, 85 
FR 78707, Dec. 7, 2020. See also https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2022-08-29/pdf/2022-18170.pdf.
    \34\ 14 CFR 399.79(b)(1).
    \35\ 14 CFR 399.79(b)(2).
    \36\ 14 CFR 399.79(c).
    \37\ 87 FR 52677 (August 28, 2022).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

a. Unfair Practice
    Pursuant to its authority to prohibit unfair practices under 
section 41712, the Department proposes to ensure that carriers allow 
young children to be seated adjacent to an accompanying adult on a 
flight at no additional cost. In support of its proposal, the 
Department reasons that a carrier's practice of not allowing a young 
child or young children to be seated adjacent to an accompanying adult 
unless they pay a fee to ensure adjacent seating is unfair because it 
causes substantial harm to consumers, the harm is not reasonably 
avoidable, and the harm is not outweighed by the benefits to consumers 
and competition. Although the number of family seating complaints that 
the Department has received is low, a substantial harm may be 
demonstrated by a large amount of harm to a small number of people \38\ 
or unwarranted health and safety risk.\39\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \38\ A parent attempting to travel on a major U.S. airline in 
2021 complained to the Department that the airline seated her 11-
month-old and 4-year-old children by themselves. The airline did not 
dispute this occurred and stated that DOT had yet to put any 
directives in place for U.S. airlines about family seating. In 
another example, a complaint against another major airline alleged 
that in 2020 the airline seated a six-year-old apart from a parent 
and that the traveler next to the child proceeded to watch R-rated 
content. The airline did not dispute this occurred. Further, one 
complaint alleges that a child with autism was initially separated 
from his parents, which caused the child's mother to suffer a panic 
attack. While another complaint alleges that a 10-year-old child 
suffered an anxiety attack when initially separated from their 
parents. Another family alleged being asked to pay $200 per ticket 
after being separated from a 5-year-old. Redacted Sample of Consumer 
Complaints Related to Seat Assignment Fees for Families Traveling 
with Children 13 and Under Received by the Department of 
Transportation's Office of Aviation Consumer Protection between 2019 
and 2022: https://www.regulations.gov/document/DOT-OST-2022-0109-0023.
    \39\ FTC has found actions to be unfair if they pose a risk of 
physical harm to children or enticed children to engage in risky or 
dangerous activities. FTC Policy Statement on Unfairness, available 
at, https://www.ftc.gov/legal-library/browse/ftc-policy-statement-unfairness (Dec. 17, 1980) (citing to Philip Morris, Inc., 82 F.T.C. 
16 (1973) (approving consent decree to cease distributing 
unsolicited razor blades directly to homes: ``[T]he distribution of 
the razor blades, constitutes a hazard to the health and safety of 
persons . . . particularly young children.'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Department believes there is substantial harm whenever a young 
child is separated from an accompanying adult on a flight due to 
unwarranted health and safety risks to the child. Consumers report 
experiencing significant stress and anxiety when they are assigned 
seats apart from their young children, who, in some circumstances, are 
too young to feed themselves, fasten their own seatbelt, go to the 
bathroom, and, in some cases, communicate. Furthermore, as discussed 
above, young children who travel unsupervised because the airline 
failed to provide family seating may undergo unnecessary emotional 
trauma,\40\ may be harmed by another passenger during air 
transportation,\41\ or may not receive the requisite assistance

[[Page 65278]]

to protect themselves during an emergency on the aircraft.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \40\ See Redacted Sample of Consumer Complaints Related to Seat 
Assignment Fees for Families Traveling with Children 13 and Under 
Received by the Department of Transportation's Office of Aviation 
Consumer Protection between 2019 and 2022: https://www.regulations.gov/document/DOT-OST-2022-0109-0023https://www.regulations.gov/document/DOT-OST-2022-0109-0023.
    \41\ Press Release, U.S. Fed. Bureau of Investigation, Sexual 
Assault Aboard Aircraft: Raising Awareness About a Serious Federal 
Crime, (April 26, 2018), https://www.fbi.gov/news/stories/raising-awareness-about-sexual-assaultaboard-aircraft-042618. See also 
https://www.fbi.gov/news/stories/raising-awareness-about-sexual-assault-aboard-aircraft-042618.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Department also considers the monetary harm to parents, who are 
required to purchase adjacent seats to ensure the safety of their 
children, to be substantial and to satisfy the first prong of the 
unfairness test. Other travelers may choose to purchase adjacent seats 
for convenience or companionship, but they would not face the same 
concerns that parents with young children would if they are not seated 
together because young children are not able to defend and protect 
themselves from harm in the same way as an adult. A parent traveling 
with young children may feel compelled to pay for adjacent seating, 
even though the cost is high, to ease their minds about the health and 
safety of their children. For similar reasons, parents traveling with 
young children are currently not able to take advantage of basic 
economy fares that do not include the ability to select seats or to be 
seated together, thereby creating higher travel costs for those with 
young children.
    Furthermore, the practice of not guaranteeing that young children 
will be seated adjacent to at least one accompanying adult at no 
additional cost harms other passengers on the aircraft. Most carriers 
have moved to a seating model where people may pay to select their seat 
in advance or pay for early boarding. Airlines charge different fees 
for different seats based on perceived benefits. Despite passengers 
paying these fees, airlines may ask these passengers to ``voluntarily'' 
forfeit their seats for families traveling with young children and move 
to a less desirable seat, with the alternative of being seated next to 
an unsupervised child and causing stress and anxiety for that child's 
parent.
    For families traveling with young children, the monetary harm 
suffered by consumers who are coerced into paying more to sit adjacent 
to their children is not reasonably avoidable because the only way for 
families to ensure that they are seated together on carriers that do 
not guarantee family seating is to pay a seat-selection fee, book a 
seat in a higher fare class, or pay an early boarding fee. For many 
parents, sitting apart from their child is not an option, and those 
parents feel compelled to pay the fee or may even be unable to travel 
altogether because of the additional cost. Furthermore, as discussed 
above, even those paying fees for adjacent seats may be separated from 
their children in the event of an aircraft change and would also be 
unable to avoid the harm of being seated apart from their young 
children. In addition, the harm to passengers not traveling with young 
children is not reasonably avoidable because these passengers do not 
know, prior to travel, if they will be asked to relinquish their seat 
to accommodate a family traveling with a young child or if they will be 
seated next to an unsupervised child.
    The Department believes that the tangible and significant harm to 
consumers is not outweighed by countervailing benefits to consumers or 
competition. As noted above, consumers face substantial harm when a 
carrier refuses to seat families traveling with young children together 
at no additional cost, or when the carrier relies on other passengers 
to choose between sitting next to an unsupervised child or giving up 
their preferred seat. Further, the countervailing benefits to consumers 
and competition of permitting family seating fees do not outweigh this 
substantial harm to consumers. The Department does not believe the harm 
outweighs any benefit to consumers, such as any potential slight 
increase in fare cost for consumers traveling without children or 
families that do not currently pay advance seat fees.
    In fact, the Department believes that its proposal will promote 
competition. Today, airlines are required to state the full price of a 
ticket, inclusive of all mandatory fees, in their published fares. 
However, airlines are not required to include fees for adjacent seats 
in the advertised fare, as they are considered optional services.\42\ 
Many families with young children consider fees for adjacent seats as 
not truly optional and effectively part of the price. Fees for adjacent 
seats can quickly add up and transform what seemed like a cheap airline 
ticket into a pricey one. The addition of a seating fee to the 
advertised fare effectively raises the final cost of air transportation 
for families traveling with young children. Banning fees for seating 
young children adjacent to an accompanying adult will enhance 
competition, as families will be able to use the published fare to 
accurately comparison shop between airline offers. Effective 
competition is enabled when consumers have the information necessary to 
make informed choices.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \42\ Optional Services is a service the airline provides, for a 
fee, beyond passenger air transportation. See defined in 14 CFR 
399.85(d).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Department also proposes to prohibit unfair practices by 
requiring a carrier to disclose that it provides family seating at no 
additional cost and to disclose any carrier-imposed requirements that 
attach to its family seating policy and are permitted under the 
proposed rule that may impact the consumer's ability to secure adjacent 
seats, including carrier requirements for check-in or boarding. These 
disclosures would be required on a carrier's online platforms and when 
a consumer calls the carrier's reservation center to inquire about a 
fare or seating or to book a ticket.
    A carrier's failure to disclose that it provides family seating at 
no additional cost would result in substantial monetary harm to 
families because uninformed consumers would be likely to needlessly 
purchase seats assignments, or seats in a higher fair class to, secure 
family seating, which would result in higher costs to families 
traveling in air transportation. Additionally, failing to disclose the 
exceptions to the carrier's family seating policy would cause 
significant harm to consumers because uninformed families run the risk 
of unwittingly forfeiting their ability to secure adjacent seats e.g., 
a family may be refused family seating, resulting in a young child or 
young children sitting apart from a parent or other responsible adult, 
if the family was unaware of the need to check-in at the boarding gate 
at a specific time.
    The harm is not reasonably avoidable because consumers would have 
no way of learning the parameters of a carrier's family seating policy 
if a carrier failed to make the disclosures proposed in this NPRM. The 
only way that a consumer would learn that a carrier provides family 
seating for free, or that certain exceptions to the carrier's family 
seating policy exist, would be if the consumer made a direct inquiry to 
the carrier. The Department believes that such an inquiry is unlikely 
to occur because an ordinary consumer would reasonably assume that a 
carrier has provided pertinent information about its seating policies, 
including for family seating to enable young children to sit next to a 
parent or other responsible adult, on its online platform.
    Finally, the harm to consumers is not outweighed by the benefit 
because, as discussed above, the additional cost of purchasing assigned 
seats or seats in a higher fare class would raise the cost of air 
transportation for families traveling with young children. 
Additionally, uninformed consumers run the risk of failing to secure 
family seating.
b. Deceptive Practice
    Pursuant to its authority to prohibit deceptive practices under 
section 41712, the Department is proposing to require carriers to 
disclose that they will seat a young child adjacent to an accompanying 
adult at no additional cost with limited exceptions and disclose the 
exceptions that may impact

[[Page 65279]]

the consumer's ability to secure adjacent seats, if the proposal to ban 
family seating fees is adopted in final. The Department is proposing to 
require this disclosure on carrier's online platforms and when a 
customer calls the carrier's reservation center to inquire about a fare 
or seating or to book a ticket. Without this disclosure, it is likely 
that a consumer, acting reasonably under the circumstances, would be 
misled and unnecessarily pay for adjacent seats or inadvertently not 
take the required steps to secure adjacent seats. The carrier's 
disclosure that it will provide family seating at no additional cost, 
and disclosure of the applicable exceptions to its policy, is a 
material matter for consumers, as the disclosure prevents unnecessary 
payment of fees and ensures families know what they need to do to 
ensure they are seated together.\43\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \43\ See Fed. Trade Comm'n, FTC Policy Statement on Deception, 
103 F.T.C. 174, 182 (1984) (``Information has been found material 
where it concerns the purpose, safety, efficacy, or cost, of the 
product or service. Information is also likely to be material if it 
concerns durability, performance, warranties, or quality'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. Hearing Procedures

    For the reasons discussed in the Statutory Authority section of 
this NPRM, the Department proposes that failing to provide family 
seating at no additional cost is an unfair practice. The Department 
also proposes that, if family seating fees are banned, it would be a 
deceptive practice for carriers not to disclose to families that they 
will seat a young child adjacent to an accompanying adult at no 
additional cost with limited exceptions.
    Pursuant to 14 CFR 399.75(b)(1), any interested party may file a 
petition to hold a hearing on the proposed rule prior to the close of 
the comment period. As stated in the DATES section, petitions must 
therefore be received by October 8, 2024.
    14 CFR 399.75(b)(2) provides that the Department will grant a 
petition if the petitioner makes a clear and convincing showing that 
granting the petition is in the public interest. Factors considered in 
determining whether a petition is in the public interest include: (1) 
Whether the proposed rule depends on conclusions concerning one or more 
specific scientific, technical, economic, or other factual issues that 
are genuinely in dispute or that may not satisfy the requirements of 
the Information Quality Act; (2) whether the ordinary public comment 
process is unlikely to provide an adequate examination of the issues to 
permit a fully informed judgment; (3) whether the resolution of the 
disputed factual issues would likely have a material effect on the 
costs and benefits of the proposed rule; (4) whether the requested 
hearing would advance the consideration of the proposed rule and the 
General Counsel's ability to make the rulemaking determinations 
required by Sec.  399.75; and (5) whether the hearing would 
unreasonably delay completion of the rulemaking. DOT must also provide 
an explanation of the basis for the decision on a petition. (14 CFR 
399.75(b)(3)).

D. Summary of Proposed Regulatory Provisions

    The Department is proposing to enhance its aviation consumer 
protection requirements by adopting a new part under Subchapter A of 
Title 14 of the Code of Federal regulations, 14 CFR part 261, which 
would require U.S. and foreign air carriers to allow young children to 
be seated adjacent to an accompanying adult on a flight at no 
additional cost. In addition, the Department seeks to enhance its 
aviation consumer protection requirements by amending 14 CFR part 259 
to require carriers to notify passengers of their family seating 
policies in their customer service plans. The Department's proposed 
protections are described in the summary table below.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Subject                              Proposal
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applicability................  Would apply to U.S. and foreign air
                                carriers that operate or market
                                scheduled passenger flights to, within,
                                or from the U.S. on at least one
                                aircraft that has a designed capacity of
                                30 or more passenger seats.
Family Seating Requirement...  Would require adjacent seats for a young
                                child (age 13 and under) and an
                                accompanying adult (age 14 and over)
                                within the same class of service at no
                                additional cost beyond the fare, with
                                limited exceptions. This Part clarifies
                                that family seating is a basic service,
                                essential for the provision of adequate
                                air transportation, that must be
                                included in the advertised fare.
Exceptions to Family Seating   Would provide four exceptions to the
 Requirements.                  family seating requirement when: (1) the
                                young child is not traveling with an
                                accompanying adult; (2) the booking
                                party or accompanying adult declines to
                                accept the adjacent seats or chooses to
                                sit apart from the young child; (3) the
                                number of young children traveling makes
                                it impossible to provide adjacent seats
                                due to the layout of the aircraft; or
                                (4) the young child and/or accompanying
                                adult do not comply with the carrier's
                                check-in or boarding requirements.
                               In situations where it is impossible to
                                seat multiple young children adjacent to
                                an accompanying adult, carriers must
                                seat the young children across the aisle
                                from, or directly in front of or
                                directly behind the accompanying adult
                                at no additional cost beyond the fare.
Available Family Seating at    If adjacent seats are available at
 Booking.                       booking, would require a carrier that
                                assigns seats in advance of the date of
                                departure of a flight (Assigned Seating
                                Carrier) to make every reasonable effort
                                to provide adjacent seat assignments to
                                a young child and accompanying adult at
                                the time of booking, but no later than
                                48 hours after the tickets are
                                purchased, for each flight segment,
                                unless an exception applies.
No Available Family Seating    If adjacent seats are not available at
 at Booking--Options,           booking, an Assigned Seating Carrier
 Notification by Airline, and   must provide the booking party the
 Decision by Passenger.         choice between: (1) a full refund or,
                                (2) the option to wait for family
                                seating to become available for the
                                booked flight closer to the scheduled
                                departure.
                               For flights purchased more than two weeks
                                prior to departure, would require an
                                Assigned Seating Carrier to contact the
                                booking party within 48 hours after the
                                ticket for air transportation has been
                                purchased and provide the booking party
                                a minimum of seven days to choose
                                between: (1) a full refund or, (2) the
                                option to wait for family seating to
                                become available for the booked flight
                                closer to the scheduled departure.

[[Page 65280]]

 
                               Requires an Assigned Seating Carrier, for
                                flights purchased less than two weeks
                                prior to departure, to contact the
                                booking party as soon as practical after
                                the ticket for air transportation has
                                been purchased and provide the booking
                                party a reasonable amount of time to
                                choose between: (1) a full refund or,
                                (2) the option to wait for family
                                seating to become available for the
                                booked flight closer to the scheduled
                                departure.
Waiting for Available Family   Would specify that when a booking party
 Seating--Adjacent Seats        chooses to wait for available family
 Become Available.              seating, and adjacent seats become
                                available before the first passenger
                                boards the aircraft, an Assigned Seating
                                Carrier must notify the booking party
                                and assign the adjacent seats to a young
                                child and accompanying adult as soon as
                                the seats become available.
Waiting for Available Family   Would specify that when a passenger
 Seating--Adjacent Seats Do     chooses to wait for available family
 Not Become Available.          seating, and adjacent seats do not
                                become available before the first
                                passenger boards the aircraft, an
                                Assigned Seating Carrier must offer the
                                booking party and/or the accompanying
                                adult the choice between free rebooking
                                on the next flight with available family
                                seating at no additional cost or
                                continuing travel in seats that are not
                                adjacent.
Disclosure of Family Seating   Would require carriers to clearly and
 Policy.                        conspicuously disclose their family
                                seating policies on their public-facing
                                online platforms and when a customer
                                calls the carrier's reservation center
                                to inquire about a fare or seating or to
                                book a ticket that the carrier will
                                allow a young child to be seated
                                adjacent to an accompanying adult at no
                                additional cost beyond the fare. The
                                disclosure is also required to include
                                any exceptions to the family seating
                                requirement, including any carrier
                                requirements for check-in and boarding
                                that may impact the ability to secure
                                adjacent seats.
Mitigating Passenger Harm--    Requires a carrier to mitigate passenger
 Options Available.             harm if the carrier fails to provide
                                family seating as proposed by offering a
                                choice between: (1) rebooking at no
                                additional cost on the next flight with
                                available family seating, (2)
                                transporting the young child or young
                                children and an accompanying adult on
                                the flight without adjacent seats, or
                                (3) a refund.
Mitigating Passenger Harm--    States that the amount of refund that the
 Refund Calculation.            booking party is entitled to receive
                                would be the entire cost of the ticket
                                if family seating as required by this
                                rule is not provided on any segment of
                                the outbound flight and the young child
                                and passengers on that reservation
                                decide not to travel to destination.
                                States that the amount of refund in all
                                other cases would be the cost of the
                                unused portion of the ticket.
Mitigating Passenger Harm--    Would specify that, if a carrier fails to
 Right of Passengers Stuck at   provide family seating as specified in
 Connecting Airport on          this rule and that failure results in
 Outbound Trip.                 the young child and accompanying adult
                                being stuck at a connecting airport on
                                the outbound trip and they choose to no
                                longer travel, the carrier must provide
                                return transportation to the origination
                                airport at no cost.
Customer Service Plan........  Would require that carriers update their
                                Customer Service Plans to include a
                                commitment to notify passengers that the
                                carrier will provide adjacent seats to a
                                young child and accompanying adult at no
                                additional cost.
Civil Penalty................  States that carriers that violate the
                                family seating requirements would be
                                subject to civil penalties. Specifies
                                that if young children and an
                                accompanying adult are not provided
                                adjacent seats as required by the
                                proposed rule and none of the exceptions
                                apply, then a separate violation would
                                occur for each child that is not seated
                                next to an accompanying adult.
                               Also, specifies that when a fee beyond
                                the fare is imposed to secure family
                                seating, a separate violation occurs for
                                each fee imposed.
Removal of Passengers for      Clarifies that this rule would not
 Safety or Operational          prohibit carriers from removing or
 Reasons.                       reseating a young child and an
                                accompanying adult, because of safety or
                                operational reasons. Proposes that the
                                selection of passengers for removal must
                                be non-discriminatory.
Inclusion of Fees for Basic    Seeks comments on whether fees for other
 Services in Advertised Fare.   basic airline services should be
                                required to be included in the
                                advertised fare.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

E. Summary of Regulatory Impact Analysis

                                       Summary of Economic Impacts, Annual
                                            [2022 Dollars, millions]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Benefits (+):                                                                   Benefits (+).
    Reduced disutility to passengers      Unquantified........................
     from separation of families
     traveling by air.
Costs (-):                                                                      Costs (-):
    Implementation costs................  $5-21...............................     Implementation costs.
Net societal benefits (costs)...........  Not applicable......................  Net societal benefits (costs).
Transfers (0):                                                                  Transfers (0):
    Increase in consumer surplus from     $910................................     Increase in consumer surplus
     elimination of seating fees for                                                from elimination of seating
     families (airlines to families).                                               fees for families (airlines
                                                                                    to families).
    Decrease in consumer surplus for      $760................................
     solo air passengers (solo
     passengers to airlines).
    Decrease in consumer surplus for      $51.................................     Decrease in consumer surplus
     families who do not pay for seat                                               for families who do not pay
     reservations in the baseline                                                   for seat reservations in the
     (families to airlines).                                                        baseline (families to
                                                                                    airlines).
    Airline revenue loss (airlines to     $85.................................     Airline revenue loss
     consumers).                                                                    (airlines to consumers)
Benefits (+):                                                                   Benefits (+):

[[Page 65281]]

 
    Reduced disutility to passengers      Unquantified........................     Reduced disutility to
     from separation of families                                                    passengers from separation
     traveling by air.                                                              of families traveling by
                                                                                    air.
Costs (-):                                                                      Costs (-):
    Implementation costs................  $5-21...............................     Implementation costs.
Net societal benefits (costs)...........  Not applicable......................  Net societal benefits (costs).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Benefits, which we did not quantify, are due to the reduction in 
disutility to passengers from separation of families traveling by air. 
Costs are the upfront costs that carriers will incur to adjust their 
ticketing systems to allow them to distinguish passengers traveling as 
a family from other passengers. Aside from these implementation costs, 
the other quantified effects of the proposed rule are transfers. 
Families who currently pay for seat assignments will experience an 
increase in consumer surplus when their seating fees are eliminated. 
The elimination of seating fees encourages families to increase air 
travel, which puts upward pressure on airfares. Passengers that do not 
travel as a family and families who do not currently purchase seat 
reservations experience a loss in consumer surplus due to an airfare 
increase. Airlines initially will incur a loss in revenue primarily 
from the loss in seating fee revenue from families, as well as a 
smaller amount from the reduced travel on the part of solo passengers 
and families who do not pay seating fees in the baselines.

II. Discussion of Proposals

A. Overview of Proposal

    In this rulemaking, the Department proposes to require U.S. and 
foreign air carriers to ensure that young children aged 13 and under 
are seated adjacent to at least one accompanying adult aged 14 or over 
at no additional cost, subject to limited exceptions.\44\ Under this 
rulemaking, the specific requirements that U.S. and foreign air 
carriers would be required to follow to ensure a young child is seated 
adjacent to an accompanying adult at no additional cost differ 
depending on the carrier's seating method. There are different 
requirements for an open seating carrier and an assigned seating 
carrier. However, in both cases, carriers would be prohibited from 
imposing additional charges for adjacent family seating. Further, under 
this proposed rule, carriers would be required to take certain steps to 
mitigate passenger harm if they fail to provide family seating as 
required by the proposed rule. Additionally, the Department would 
consider it a violation each time a young child is not provided the 
opportunity to secure a seat adjacent to an accompanying adult as 
required by the proposed rule, including each time an additional charge 
is incurred to secure an adjacent seat. Each violation could subject an 
airline to civil penalties. The Department believes that the proposed 
requirements along with the proposed exceptions will ensure that 
carriers have policies that enable young children to sit adjacent to an 
accompanying adult to the maximum extent practicable and at no 
additional cost.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \44\ Although the provisions in the proposed regulation on 
family seating do not reference adjacent seating for individuals 
with disabilities, the Department has separate regulations in 14 CFR 
part 382, pursuant to the Air Carrier Access Act, that specify when 
a carrier is permitted to require a passenger with a disability to 
travel with a safety assistant, and when a carrier is required to 
provide an adjoining seat at no additional cost to a person 
assisting a passenger with a disability, such as a personal care 
attendant, a safety assistant, or an interpreter. See 14 CFR 382.29 
and 14 CFR 382.81(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Department seeks comment on its proposal to require carriers to 
provide family seating at no additional cost beyond the fare, and 
whether its proposal protects families adequately. Should families 
traveling with young children continue to be forced to purchase 
adjacent seating in order to ensure that they will sit together, or 
should carriers provide this service to passengers traveling with young 
children at no additional cost beyond the fare, as is being proposed? 
Additionally, the Department seeks comment on whether its family 
seating requirements provide needed protections for children on 
aircraft. The Department is also examining whether fees for other basic 
airline services such as booking a ticket should be required to be 
included in the advertised fare and solicits comment in this area, as 
described in Section K.

A. Applicability

    In this NPRM, the Department proposes to adopt family seating 
requirements in 14 CFR part 261 that would apply to U.S. and foreign 
air carriers that operate and market scheduled passenger flights to, 
from, or within the U.S. using at least one aircraft that has a 
designed capacity of 30 or more passenger seats. The Department is of 
the view that the rulemaking should apply to both marketing and 
operating carriers because they both interact with consumers regarding 
seating, including families traveling with young children. Marketing 
carriers interact with consumers in advance of travel since they 
typically hold out services to the public, ticket passengers, offer 
reservation services, and assign seats. Operating carriers interact 
with consumers on the date of the travel by assisting families who are 
not seated adjacent to their young children. The Department seeks 
comment on its decision to apply this rulemaking to both marketing and 
operating carriers.
    As proposed, this rulemaking would apply to carriers that operate 
aircraft with a designed seating capacity of 30 or more seats. This is 
consistent with the Department's past practice, as many of the 
Department's consumer protection requirements do not apply to small 
U.S. carriers that operate passenger service exclusively with aircraft 
that have fewer than 30 seats.\45\ Very few passengers travel on 
aircraft with fewer than 30 seats.\46\ Although aircraft designed to 
have a maximum passenger capacity of 60 seats or fewer are considered 
small aircraft,\47\ DOT has not proposed to exclude them because a 
substantial number of passengers are transported on flights operated by 
aircraft with between 30 and 60 seats. According to data from the 
Department's Bureau of Transportation Statistics (BTS), a total of 
760,159,634 domestic passengers were transported in 2022, 734,090,772 
(or 96.6%) of which

[[Page 65282]]

were on flights using aircraft of more than 60 seats, 23,717,481 (or 
3.1%) of which were on flights using aircraft with 30 through 60 seats, 
and 2,351,381 (or 0.3%) were on flights using aircraft with fewer than 
30 seats.\48\ We solicit comment on whether the Department should cover 
carriers as proposed or limit or expand the carriers covered by this 
rulemaking. We ask proponents and opponents of any alternative to 
provide arguments and evidence in support of their positions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \45\ The requirements relating to tarmac contingency plans and 
reporting tarmac delays, specific customer service plan provisions, 
and denied boarding compensation also do not apply to these 
carriers. See 14 CFR 259.2, 14 CFR 250.2.
    \46\ According to data from the Department's Bureau of 
Transportation Statistics (BTS), a total of 760,159,634 domestic 
passengers were transported in 2022 and 2,351,381 or 0.3% were on 
flights using aircraft with less than 30 seats. See Bureau of 
Transportation Statistics ``T-100 Domestic Segment Data (World Area 
Code)'', https://www.bts.gov/browse-statistical-products-and-data/bts-publications/data-bank-28ds-t-100-domestic-segment-data.
    \47\ An air carrier is a small business if it provides air 
transportation only with small aircraft (i.e., aircraft with up to 
60 seats/18,000 pound payload capacity). See 14 CFR 399.73.
    \48\ See Bureau of Transportation Statistics ``T-100 Domestic 
Segment Data (World Area Code)'', https://www.bts.gov/browse-statistical-products-and-data/bts-publications/data-bank-28ds-t-100-domestic-segment-data.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Family Seating Requirements (Definitions)

    The Department proposes to require carriers to ensure adjacent 
seating for a young child and an accompanying adult within the same 
class of service at no additional cost with limited exceptions when 
there is available family seating. The Department proposes definitions 
for each key term.
1. Adjacent Seating
    In this NPRM, the Department proposes to define ``adjacent 
seating'' as two or more seats positioned next to each other in the 
same row of the aircraft and not separated by an aisle. The 
Department's family seating dashboard published on its aviation 
consumer protection website identifies those carriers that guarantee 
adjacent seats for a child 13 or under and an accompanying adult at no 
additional cost for all fare types, subject to limited conditions. 
However, the Department does not define adjacent seating on the 
Dashboard, and some carriers have interpreted adjacent seating to 
include a seat across the aisle from another seat. By proposing a 
definition of adjacent seats, the Department is ensuring that there is 
consistency in the service that families with young children receive 
across airlines. Further, the Department believes that its proposed 
definition of adjacent seats is necessary to ensure that an 
accompanying adult is seated close enough to care adequately for a 
young child and to ease anxiety about the seat that a child may be 
assigned on the aircraft. The Department seeks comment on its proposed 
definition of adjacent. Specifically, should adjacent be defined as two 
seats next to each other in the same row and not separated by an aisle 
as proposed? Or, conversely, should airlines be permitted to seat a 
child across the aisle from or near an accompanying adult, and if the 
latter, what should ``near'' mean?
2. Young Child or Young Children
    The Department is proposing to define ``young child or young 
children'' in this NPRM to mean an individual(s) age 13 or under on the 
date of scheduled departure of the purchased flight. This definition is 
consistent with section 516 of the 2024 FAA Reauthorization which 
defines ``young child'' to mean ``an individual who has not attained 14 
years of age.''
    The Department considered modeling its definition of young child 
after language in FAA Advisory Circular 120-27F \49\ addressing air 
carrier weight and balance control programs, which defines a child to 
be less than 13 years of age. The Department chose ``13 or under'', as 
prescribed in the Act, instead of the ``under 13'' age designation, as 
prescribed in FAA Advisory Circular 120-27F, because the definition in 
the FAA Advisory Circular was singularly focused on the weight and 
balance safety aspects of the aircraft and did not consider the mental 
fitness of a child and whether a child is old enough to be safely 
seated alone. The Department also considered the age that airlines 
permit children to travel unaccompanied as standard passengers. Many 
U.S. airlines do not accept children traveling alone as standard 
passengers unless they are 15 or older, although some U.S. airlines do 
allow children 12 or older to travel alone.\50\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \49\ AC 120--27F--Aircraft Weight and Balance Control, available 
at https://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/advisory_circulars/index.cfm/go/document.information/documentID/1035868 (May 6, 2019).
    \50\ Allegiant, American, Delta, Frontier, Spirit, and United do 
not allow children under 15 to travel alone for safety reasons. See 
https://www.allegiantair.com/traveling-with-children, https://www.delta.com/us/en/children-infant-travel/unaccompanied-minor-program, https://www.united.com/en/us/fly/travel/accessibility-and-assistance/unaccompanied-minors.html, https://www.aa.com/i18n/travel-info/special-assistance/unaccompanied-minors.jsp, https://customersupport.spirit.com/en-us/category/article/KA-01160, and 
https://faq.flyfrontier.com/help/traveling-with-children-or-pets. 
Hawaiian and Southwest allow children ages 12 and up to travel 
alone. See https://www.southwest.com/help/flying-with-children/unaccompanied-minors-flying-alone, and https://www.hawaiianairlines.com/legal/domestic-contract-of-carriage/rule-12.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Department believes that children should not be separated from 
their families on a flight because, if they are separated, they are not 
supervised or monitored by their families or by airline staff. In this 
NPRM, the Department proposes to apply family seating policies to 
children aged 13 or under. We solicit comment on whether 13 or under is 
the appropriate definition for a young child. We encourage commenters 
to provide data or other evidence as support for why a particular age 
group is appropriate.
    The Department also recognizes that there may be situations where 
there are multiple young children traveling on the same reservation 
record as an accompanying adult. This rule seeks to ensure, to the 
extent feasible given the layout of an aircraft, that young children 
are seated adjacent to an accompanying adult. We request comment on 
whether the Department should specify that airlines must seat the 
children across the aisle from, or directly in front of or directly 
behind the accompanying adult, when multiple young children are 
traveling with an accompanying adult.
3. Accompanying Adult and Booking Party
    The Department is proposing to define ``accompanying adult'' as an 
individual age 14 or over on the date of the scheduled departure who is 
traveling with a young child or young children on the same reservation 
record. The Department uses ``individual,'' rather than family member, 
when defining an accompanying adult because the adult may not be 
related to the young child. For example, the accompanying adult may be 
a family friend or caretaker.
    When considering the appropriate age to use in the definition of an 
accompanying adult, the Department took into account airline policies 
on the minimum age for children to travel unaccompanied as young 
adults. A review of the policies of the 10 largest U.S. airlines 
revealed that airlines' policies vary and that there is no universally 
agreed upon age when a child is considered a young adult. Airlines use 
12, 13, 14, and 15 as the cutoff for children to travel alone as young 
adults.\51\ The Department also considered the cognitive ability of 
children and the ages that children are given greater responsibility. 
The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) allows individuals who are 15 
years of age or older to be seated in an exit seat. This means that the 
FAA has determined that a 15-year-old has the capacity to understand 
and follow the crew's instruction and perform safety functions without 
the assistance of an adult companion or parent. The Department also 
considered the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), which sets 14 years old 
as the minimum age of

[[Page 65283]]

employment. A 14-year-old is deemed to have the capacity to take on 
certain paid responsibilities outside of the home.\52\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \51\ Children who are 12 years old or older can fly alone on 
Hawaiian and Southwest, children who are 13 years old or older can 
fly alone on Alaska, children who are 14 years old or older can fly 
alone on JetBlue, and children who are 15 years old or older can fly 
alone on Allegiant, American, Delta, Frontier, Spirit, and United.
    \52\ The FLSA allows for the employment of minors between 14 and 
16 years of age subject to limitations and if it does not interfere 
with their schooling or with their health and well-being. 29 CFR 
570.31. Minors 14 and 15 years of age are restricted from employment 
in occupations that involve certain tasks, including, but not 
limited to, manufacturing, mining, operating a motor vehicle, 
working in a boiler room, etc. 29 CFR 570.33. Minors 14 and 15 years 
of age may be employed in occupations involving office and clerical 
work, cashiering, bagging and carrying out customers' orders, etc. 
29 CFR 570.34.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In evaluating whether to propose an accompanying adult to be a 14- 
or 15-year-old, the Department factored in the benefit of avoiding an 
age gap between the age of a young child and accompanying adult. 
Avoiding such a gap would ensure that the family seating protections 
would also apply to a young child traveling with an older teenager, 
like a sibling. For these reasons, the Department is proposing to 
define an accompanying adult to be an individual age 14 or over on the 
scheduled departure date.
    The Department requests comment on its definition of an 
accompanying adult. Specifically, is a 14-year-old too young to act as 
an accompanying adult to a young child? And if so, what should be the 
appropriate minimum age of an accompanying adult? Comments that are 
most useful provide information regarding the reasons why a particular 
age is appropriate. We also seek comment on the proposed use of the 
term ``accompanying adult.''
    The Department is proposing to define the term ``booking party'' as 
the person who booked the reservation for air travel. Since the booking 
party may or may not be an accompanying adult, we believe that it is 
important to define ``booking party'' to draw a distinction between the 
roles, rights, and responsibilities of the booking party versus the 
accompanying adult. For example, a parent may book tickets for her two 
children aged 11 and 16 without the intent for the parent to travel. 
The Department seeks comment on its definition of booking party and 
defining the booking party separate from an accompanying adult.
4. No Additional Cost
    The Department is proposing to define ``no additional cost'' to 
mean no added charge beyond the fare. Additionally, the Department is 
proposing to define ``fare'', a term used in the Department's 
definition of no additional cost, to mean the price paid for air 
transportation, including all basic services and all mandatory 
government taxes and carrier-imposed fees. The proposed definition of 
``fare'' does not include ancillary service fees for optional services 
that have been determined by the Department not to be basic services. 
Furthermore, the Department is proposing to define the term ``ancillary 
service fee'' as a fee charged for any optional service that a carrier 
provides beyond passenger air transportation. Such fees may include, 
but are not limited to, charges for checked or carry-on baggage, 
canceling or changing a reservation, advance seat selection, in-flight 
beverages, snacks and meals, lounge access, bedding or other amenities, 
or seat upgrades so long as the fees are not for basic services.
    The Department's proposed definition of ``no additional cost'' is 
consistent with the 2024 FAA Reauthorization Act, which ``prohibits an 
air carrier from charging a fee, or imposing an additional cost beyond 
the ticket price of the additional seat, to seat each young child 
adjacent to an accompanying adult within the same class of service.'' 
Under this proposal, airlines would be prohibited from charging parents 
traveling with young children any additional fees to sit with their 
children beyond what they would pay for the tickets. While this 
proposed rule would require airlines to provide adjacent seats for a 
young child and an accompanying adult at no additional cost beyond the 
fare, airlines would have the flexibility to select which adjacent 
seats to provide. To the extent that a family with a young child wanted 
specific seats or wanted to be seated in a specific area of the 
aircraft, nothing in the proposal would prohibit an airline from 
charging for those seats.
    The Department's proposed definition of ``fare'' in this rulemaking 
is consistent with the meaning of that term in other aviation consumer 
protection regulations.\53\ This definition does not consider ancillary 
service fees for optional services paid by passengers, such as baggage 
fees, to be part of the fare. However, this definition clarifies that 
the term fare includes all basic services. ``Basic service'' is a 
defined term under this proposal and is discussed below. In addition, 
the proposed definition of ``ancillary service fee'' is consistent with 
the Department's existing definition of ``optional services'' in 14 CFR 
399.85(d),\54\ although the proposed definition of ancillary service 
fee clarifies that the term does not include fees for basic services.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \53\ 14 CFR 250.1; 76 FR 23161 (April 25, 2011); See also 14 CFR 
399.84.
    \54\ ``Optional services'' is defined as any service the airline 
provides, for a fee, beyond passenger air transportation. Such fees 
include, but are not limited to, charges for checked or carry-on 
baggage, advance seat selection, in-flight beverages, snacks and 
meals, pillows and blankets and seat upgrades. 14 CFR 399.85(d).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Department seeks comment on its proposed definitions of ``no 
additional cost'', ``fare'', and ``ancillary service fee.'' The 
Department also requests comment on continuing to permit airlines to 
charge fees to families who wish to secure specific seats. Comments 
that are most helpful will provide information and explain why a 
particular definition or action is best.
5. Class of Service
    The Department is proposing to define class of service as seating 
in the same cabin class such as First, Business, Premium Economy, or 
Economy class, based on seat location in the aircraft and seat 
characteristics such as pitch size, features, or amount of legroom. 
Under this proposal, Premium Economy would be considered a different 
class of service from standard Economy, while Basic Economy would not. 
Consumers who purchase Premium Economy seats are often physically 
separated from other seats by a partition or bulkhead, they are 
provided seats with extra legroom than standard Economy, and their 
seats are often wider and recline further than standard Economy seats. 
They may also receive perks like free checked bags, special meals, or 
priority boarding. However, Basic Economy seats do not differ in pitch 
size or legroom from standard Economy. Typically, consumers who 
purchase a Basic Economy ticket face restrictions that those who 
purchase standard Economy do not, such as not being allowed to change 
or cancel tickets, select seats, or check-in bags. The Department seeks 
comment on whether Premium Economy or Basic Economy should be 
considered as a separate class of service from standard Economy under 
the proposed rule. The 2024 FAA Reauthorization Act prohibits fees ``to 
seat each young child adjacent to an accompanying adult within the same 
class of service'' but does not define class of service. Under this 
proposal, carriers would be obligated to provide family seating within 
the same class of service, at no additional cost. Carriers would not be 
required to upgrade the family to a higher class of service, like 
First, Business, or Premium Economy, to ensure family seating.
    Furthermore, the Department is proposing a requirement that family 
seating must be provided in every class of service. This would mean 
that

[[Page 65284]]

carriers cannot define classes of service in a way that would limit the 
availability of family seating, such as by defining a class of service 
as consisting of only middle seats, only aisle seats, or only window 
seats. The Department wants to ensure that carriers do not 
intentionally limit the ability for passengers to achieve family 
seating in all classes of service. At the same time, the Department is 
concerned that a proposal that adjacent seats be available in all 
classes of service may not always be feasible. For example, a carrier's 
first-class cabin may consist of single seats that are separated by an 
aisle, which would make providing adjacent seats as defined in this 
rulemaking impossible. For this reason, the Department has included as 
an exception for circumstances when an aircraft seating configuration 
would make it impossible to provide adjacent seating to a young child 
and an accompanying adult. The Department solicits comment on whether 
there are instances when family seating may not be physically possible 
in all classes of service and what remedial efforts could be made to 
address these constraints.
6. Available Family Seating
    The Department is proposing to define ``available family seating'' 
as two or more adjacent seats located in the purchased class of service 
that have not been assigned to other passengers, and to which a young 
child or children and an accompanying adult may be assigned. Under this 
definition, an airline would not be required to seat a young child with 
both child's parents to accomplish the family seating requirements in 
the proposed rule. So long as the airline seats the young child with at 
least one accompanying adult, the airline would fulfill its 
responsibility to provide family seating. The Department seeks comment 
on its decision to define family seating as seating each child with one 
accompanying passenger, which may result in a child sitting with only 
one parent, as opposed to the entire party.
    Also, the Department is proposing to define available family 
seating, rather than just using the term ``available'', to create a 
distinction between seats that are available for families (capable of 
assignment to a young child and an accompanying adult) and seats that 
are vacant but may not be available for seating a young child. For 
example, young children are not permitted to sit in certain seats on an 
aircraft. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) regulations on exit 
row seating prohibit a carrier from seating children under the age of 
15 in an exit row because they are unable to perform certain duties 
that a passenger seated in an exit row may be called upon to perform in 
an emergency.\55\ Thus, although these seats may be vacant and capable 
of assignment when a passenger makes a reservation for air 
transportation, a carrier would not be able to assign a young child to 
a seat in the exit row of an aircraft given the age requirements to sit 
in these seats. We note that, if exit row seats are the only vacant 
adjacent seats in the purchased class of service, we would consider 
family seating to be unavailable for purposes of this proposed rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \55\ See Exit Seating, 14 CFR 121.585(b)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed definition of ``available family seating'' would also 
not include seats that are in a different class of service or have 
already been assigned to other passengers. Specifying that the seat 
must be in the same class of service is consistent with the 2024 FAA 
Reauthorization Act prohibits fees ``to seat each young child adjacent 
to an accompanying adult within the same class of service.'' The 
Department also does not require carriers to move other passengers who 
have been assigned seats, some of whom have paid for the seats, as 
those passengers are entitled to the seats assigned to them. The 
Department seeks comment on the definition of available family seating 
as seats that are in the same class of service, are capable of 
assignment to a young child, and have not already been assigned to 
other passengers.

C. Assigned Seating Carriers

    Under this rulemaking, the specific requirements that U.S. and 
foreign air carriers would be required to follow to ensure a young 
child is seated adjacent to an accompanying adult differ depending on 
the carrier's seating method. There are different requirements for an 
open seating carrier and an assigned seating carrier. The Department is 
proposing that the following requirements apply to assigned seating 
carriers, which are carriers that assign seats or allow individuals to 
select seats on a flight, in advance of the date of departure of a 
flight.
1. Available Family Seating at Time of Booking
    When there is available family seating at the time of booking, 
assigned seating carriers would be required to make every reasonable 
effort to assign adjacent seats to a young child and accompanying adult 
at the time of booking the reservation, but no later than 48 hours 
after the tickets are purchased, at no additional cost, unless an 
exception applies. The proposed rule provides carriers up to 48 hours 
to assign family seating if the carrier is unable to assign the seats 
during the booking process (e.g., the carrier does not have an 
automated reservation system to assign seats, ticket was purchased 
through a ticket agent). The Department seeks comment on its proposal 
to require airlines to make every reasonable effort to assign adjacent 
seating assignments at the time of booking, and, if the airline is 
unable to assign the seats at the time of booking, to allow airlines up 
to 48 hours after a ticket has been issued to assign adjacent family 
seating. Specifically, is 48 hours too long for families to wait to 
receive an assigned seat if the carrier is unable to assign the seats 
during the booking process? Alternatively, should carriers be given 
more time to provide advance family seating assignments if the carrier 
is unable to assign the seats during the booking process? If so, how 
long, and based on what rationale? Should families be allowed to select 
their seats at no additional charge during the booking process? The 
Department also seeks comment on whether passengers would be able to 
determine that there is available family seating at booking by looking 
at a carrier's seat map or if carriers would block certain seats, 
including those a carrier may put aside for families with young 
children, as unavailable on its seat map.
2. No Available Family Seating at Booking
a. Options Provided by Carrier
    When there is no available family seating at the time of booking/
when the passenger purchases the reservation, the proposed rule would 
require assigned seating carriers to offer passengers the option to 
either: (1) obtain a refund, or (2) wait for adjacent seating to become 
available. The Department is proposing different time periods for 
assigned seating carriers to notify passengers of these options and for 
passengers to notify the carriers of their choice based on when the 
tickets were purchased. For tickets purchased two or more weeks prior 
to departure, the Department is proposing that assigned seating 
carriers contact the booking party within 48 hours after the tickets 
were purchased to offer passengers a choice between a full refund and 
waiting for available family seating on that flight. The booking party 
would then have a minimum of seven days to choose between the options. 
For tickets purchased less than two weeks prior to departure, the 
Department is

[[Page 65285]]

proposing that carriers contact the booking party as soon as practical 
after the tickets have been purchased and provide the booking party a 
reasonable amount of time to choose between receiving a full refund or 
waiting for available family seating on that flight. If the booking 
party fails to make a choice within the specified period, carriers 
would be able to proceed with the reservation as though the passenger 
chose to wait for available family seating on that flight.
    The Department seeks comment on whether providing passengers the 
choice between a refund or waiting for available family seating on that 
flight are sufficient options for carriers to provide to families if 
there is no available family seating at the time of booking. For 
example, should carriers be required to reserve a seating option that 
places the young child as close as possible to an accompanying adult, 
while a family waits for available family seating? If so, what should 
constitute ``as close as possible''? Must the carrier seat the young 
children and accompanying adult across the aisle from each other, or 
seat the young children directly in front of or directly behind the 
accompanying adult, or some other option?
    Under the proposal, if the family chooses to wait for adjacent 
seats to become available before the first passenger boards the 
aircraft, the carrier would not be required to offer the family an 
additional opportunity to receive a refund if adjacent seats do not 
become available later. Should carriers be obligated to disclose, 
before the passenger makes the choice between a refund and waiting for 
available family seating, that they may not have another opportunity to 
receive a refund? Further, should airlines be required to inform 
passengers about the probability of their obtaining available family 
seating before boarding based on historical data about previous similar 
flights? If so, what process, if any, should carriers be required to 
follow to make this disclosure?
    The Department also seeks comment on its proposal to give 
passengers a minimum of seven days to choose which option to accept for 
tickets purchased more than two weeks prior to departure as well as its 
proposal for airlines to determine what a reasonable time is for 
passengers to choose their preferred option when tickets are purchased 
less than two weeks prior to departure. Finally, in those situations 
where the booking party fails to decide whether to receive a refund or 
wait for available family seating within the specified timeframe, the 
Department seeks comment on whether the default option should be that 
the reservation stays in place and the carrier would proceed as though 
the booking party chose to wait for available family seating on that 
flight.
b. Choosing a Refund
    If there is no available family seating at the time of booking and 
the booking party chooses to receive a full refund for their 
reservation under the proposed rule, a carrier would be required to 
refund any ancillary service fees paid under that reservation, in 
addition to the fare. Furthermore, the proposed rule also specifies 
that each individual in the booking party has the option to receive a 
refund, or to travel on the reservation, regardless of whether the 
accompanying adult and young child choose to receive a refund. The 
Department seeks comment on its proposal to allow the entire booking 
party to receive a refund if there is no available family seating at 
booking. The Department also requests comment on its proposal to allow 
passengers to recoup the entire cost of the reservation, including any 
ancillary service fees that the passenger paid.
c. Choosing To Wait for Available Family Seating
    If the booking party chooses to wait for available family seating 
in lieu of a refund and adjacent seats become available before the 
first passenger boards the aircraft, the carrier would be required to 
notify the booking party and assign the adjacent seats to the young 
child and accompanying adult as soon as the seats become available. 
Conversely, if adjacent seating does not become available before the 
first passenger boards the aircraft, the proposed rule would require 
carriers to provide passengers the option to rebook seats on the next 
flight with available family seating at no additional cost, or to 
travel on their originally scheduled flight in non-adjacent seats. 
Under this proposal, passengers would not have the option to receive a 
refund at this point. The Department is of the tentative view that 
passengers chose to wait for available family seating in lieu of 
receiving a refund and carriers should not be required to provide a 
refund at this late date because they would not have sufficient time to 
sell the seats to other passengers.
    The Department seeks comment on its proposal not to require 
airlines to provide refunds to passengers who initially refused a 
refund and, instead, opted to wait for available family seating when 
there was no available family seating at booking. The Department also 
seeks comment on its proposal to require air carriers to offer 
passengers waiting for available family seating the option to either 
rebook on the next available flight with adjacent seats, or travel on 
their originally scheduled flight without adjacent seats.
    In addition, this proposed rulemaking is intended to avoid, as much 
as possible, last-minute scrambles for seats at the gate or carriers 
having to ask other passengers to give up their seat to allow a parent 
and child to sit together. The Department is of the tentative view that 
the proposed requirements would make it unnecessary for carriers to ask 
passengers in the cabin to shift seats to allow the child and 
accompanying adult to sit together or be in seats located as close 
together as possible. Nevertheless, should there be a requirement for 
carriers to make best efforts to seat families traveling with young 
children together even after passengers are on the aircraft? Why or why 
not?
    In the event that there is no available family seating by the time 
the first passenger boards the aircraft and the family chooses to 
continue travel in seats that are not adjacent, should carriers be 
required to provide a seating option that places the young child as 
close as possible to an accompanying adult? If so, what should 
constitute ``as close as possible''? Must the carrier seat the young 
children and accompanying adult across the aisle from each other, or 
seat the young children directly in front of or directly behind the 
accompanying adult, or some other option?
    The Department also recognizes that allowing passengers to wait for 
available family seating until the first passenger boards the aircraft 
may further complicate the boarding process on the day of travel for 
families and airlines. Airline gate agents may work various gates as 
needed and have many responsibilities including checking boarding 
passes, helping passengers onto the flight, accommodating late 
passengers and may not have sufficient time to adequately assist 
families at the gate before a flight. Allowing passengers to wait for 
available family seating until the first passenger boards the aircraft 
may also be problematic for passengers since passengers would be 
required to show up at the airport and wait for available family 
seating, which they may or not receive. As such, the Department seeks 
comment on whether it should require airlines to provide passengers 
with the option to wait for available family seating until 24 hours 
before the flight, as opposed to allowing passengers to wait until the 
first passenger boards the aircraft. DOT seeks comment on whether the 
Department

[[Page 65286]]

should alternatively require airlines to provide passengers with a 
refund or the option to travel on the flight in seats that are not 
adjacent when family seating is not available, instead of giving 
passengers the option to wait for available family seating for any 
duration.
d. Disclosure of Family Seating Policies for Assigned Seating Carriers
    The Department is proposing to require assigned seating carriers to 
disclose to consumers that the carriers will provide available family 
seating at no additional cost. This disclosure would be required to be 
displayed clearly and conspicuously on carriers' online platforms and 
the carrier must notify customers of these disclosures when the 
customers call the carrier's reservation center to inquire about a fare 
or seating or to book a ticket. Under this proposal, carriers would be 
required to ask customers if they are traveling with young children, 
and would only be required to provide family seating information to 
those customers who indicate they are or might be. The airline would 
also be required to disclose any exceptions to the airline's family 
seating policy permitted under the rule, including carrier requirements 
for check-in or boarding. The Department seeks comment on its proposal 
to require airlines to disclose their family seating policy on their 
online platform and on the telephone and whether there are additional 
ways for assigned seating carriers to provide information to passengers 
about their family seating policy.

E. Open Seating Carriers

1. General Requirement for Open Seating Carriers
    The Department's proposed family seating rule also proposes 
requirements for open seating carriers, or carriers that do not assign 
or allow individuals to select seats on a flight in advance of the day 
of departure. For open seating carriers, the Department proposes to 
require that passengers be boarded in a manner that allows passengers 
to secure family seating at no additional cost, subject to specified 
exceptions. While open seating carriers do not charge fees for advance 
seat assignments or fees to book seats in a higher class of service to 
ensure family seating, families traveling on open seating carriers may 
be advised to pay a fee to board the aircraft early to ensure family 
seating.
    The Department understands that there is concern that any potential 
family seating requirements imposed on open seating carriers would 
impact the boarding and open seating models that have been employed by 
these carriers for several years. The Department has also been made 
aware of concerns that a regulatory proposal that would require open 
seating carriers to preboard families or provide early boarding to 
families for free may have a disproportionately negative impact on open 
seating carriers in comparison to assigned seating carriers because 
assigned seating carriers would have no obligation to seat families 
together if there is no available family seating at the time of 
booking, but an open seating carrier would still have an obligation to 
provide family seating on a full flight. There also appears to be 
concern that a family seating requirement could diminish the incentive 
for non-families to travel on open seating carriers since they would be 
forced to board the aircraft after families and the available seating 
options for individuals traveling without young children would be 
limited.
    To address the concerns expressed about the potential negative 
impacts of a family seating regulation on open seating carriers, the 
Department proposes a generalized requirement that open seating 
carriers board passengers in a manner that allows passengers to secure 
family seating at no additional cost. This broad requirement is 
designed to provide open seating carriers with the flexibility to 
determine a way for families to be seated together without impacting 
the long-standing open seating model. An airline may consider adopting 
various options that would fulfill this proposed requirement. For 
instance, carriers could section off a block of seats in a specific 
section of the aircraft that would be dedicated to passengers traveling 
with families because the carrier would already be aware of how many 
families with young children would be traveling on the flight. The 
carriers could also require that families be present at the gate at a 
certain time in advance of boarding and board them first. The 
Department notes that the proposed rule includes as an exception to the 
proposed family seating requirement for the failure by passengers to 
comply with carriers' check-in and boarding policies, provided that 
those polices do not create unreasonably burdensome processes for 
individuals traveling with young children. The Department seeks comment 
on whether the proposed requirement for open seating carriers to board 
families in a manner that allows passengers to secure adjacent family 
seating at no additional cost is flexible enough to allow open seating 
carriers to fulfill the requirements while preserving traditional open 
seating models.
2. Disclosure of Family Seating Policies for Open Seating Carriers
    The Department proposes to require open seating carriers to 
disclose to consumers that they will board passengers in a manner that 
will allow a young child and an accompanying adult to secure adjacent 
seats at no additional cost. All other aspects of the disclosure would 
mirror the disclosure that assigned seating carriers would be required 
to provide to consumers. The Department seeks comment on the disclosure 
proposal and whether there are additional ways for open seating 
carriers to provide information to passengers about their family 
seating policies.

F. Exceptions to the Family Seating Requirements

    In this NPRM, the Department proposes four exceptions to the 
proposed family seating requirements that apply to both assigned 
seating carriers and open seating carriers. These exceptions define how 
carriers can provide family seating, as proposed, to the maximum extent 
practicable.
    The first exception would apply when a young child is not traveling 
with an accompanying adult. If a young child is traveling alone, the 
young child would be traveling as an unaccompanied minor, and the 
family seating provisions in this proposed rule would not apply.
    The second exception would apply when a booking party declines to 
accept the family seating provided by the carrier or selects a seat for 
the young child that is not adjacent to an accompanying adult traveling 
on the flight reservation or the aircraft. If the family intentionally 
chooses seats on the aircraft that are not adjacent, the airline would 
not be responsible for providing family seating. The Department 
solicits comment on whether a young child should ever be seated 
separately from an accompanying adult even if a family does not wish to 
sit in the adjacent seats assigned by the airline.
    The third exception would apply when the number of young children 
traveling under a reservation or the seating configuration makes it 
impossible for the carrier to provide family seating based on the seat 
layout of the aircraft. For example, if one accompanying adult is 
traveling with three young children, it may not be possible for the 
carrier to provide seats adjacent to one another with no aisle 
separating the seats. Further, the family's chosen cabin class may not

[[Page 65287]]

contain two adjacent seats that are not separated by an aisle. In these 
situations, the carrier should provide adjacent seating for the maximum 
possible number of children and seat the accompanying adult and any 
other young children on the reservation across the aisle from, or 
directly in front of or directly behind the accompanying adult. The 
Department requests comment on whether it should impose such an 
additional requirement. Also, are there any other seating arrangements 
that the Department should consider when adjacent seating is 
impossible?
    The fourth exception would apply if the young child and 
accompanying adult do not comply with the carrier's applicable check-in 
or boarding process requirements. Carriers require passengers to check 
in at a certain time before the scheduled departure time of the flight. 
Additionally, carriers require passengers to be at the gate and ready 
to board at a specified time. These airline requirements apply to all 
passengers, including families traveling with young children. 
Passengers who fail to meet the minimum check-in time or boarding 
requirements, including families traveling with young children, may 
have their seats reassigned or may not be able to fly. However, 
carriers would not be permitted to create specific check-in or boarding 
process requirements that are unreasonably burdensome for families. 
This rulemaking would not impact airlines' ability to set their own 
check-in and boarding process requirement for all passengers, including 
for families with young children.
    The Department seeks comments on the proposed four exceptions to 
its family seating requirements. The Department also seeks comment on 
whether there should be any other exceptions. For example, the 
Department is of the tentative view that carriers should still be 
obligated to provide adjacent family seating, as proposed, when a 
larger aircraft is substituted for a smaller aircraft. The Department's 
Family Seating Dashboard, however, allows carriers to condition their 
family seating guarantee on a larger aircraft not being substituted for 
a smaller aircraft. The Department seeks comment on whether it should 
include substitution of a larger aircraft for a smaller aircraft as an 
exception in this rulemaking. Regardless of whether aircraft 
substitution is included as an exception to the family seating 
requirements, what procedures, if any, should carriers follow to ensure 
that young children are seated adjacent to an accompanying adult or as 
close as possible to an accompanying adult?

G. Mitigating Passenger Harm

    Under this proposed rule, carriers would be required to take 
certain steps to mitigate passenger harm if they fail to provide family 
seating at no additional cost as required by the proposed rule. 
Specifically, carriers would be obligated to offer the booking party 
and/or the accompanying adult(s) a choice between free rebooking on the 
next available flight with adjacent seats, continuing travel without 
adjacent seats, or receiving a refund.
    In the event that a passenger elects to continue travel on the 
flight without available family seating, the Department seeks comment 
on whether airlines should be required to provide a seating option that 
places a young child as close as possible to an accompanying adult. If 
so, what should constitute ``as close as possible''? Must the carrier 
seat the young children and accompanying adult across the aisle from 
each other, seat the young children directly in front of or directly 
behind the accompanying adult, or some other option?
    Under this proposal, the choice to rebook at no additional cost 
would be available to every individual on the reservation with the 
young child if the young child and accompanying adult decide to rebook. 
This way, a family that wishes to travel together would be able to do 
so. At the same time, if a young child and an accompanying adult choose 
to be rebooked, but the other passengers on the reservation choose to 
remain on the flight, the carrier would be required to accommodate this 
choice. The Department believes that it is important for the 
individuals on the reservation to have the freedom to decide whether to 
travel on their original scheduled flight without adjacent seats or 
rebook on the next available flight with available family seating when 
the child and accompanying adult chose to be rebooked. The Department 
seeks comment on allowing every individual on the reservation to make 
this choice.
    A carrier that fails to comply with the proposed family seating 
requirements must also offer the young child and an accompanying adult 
the option to travel on their original flight in seats that are not 
adjacent. Although this option may not be preferred, the Department is 
of the tentative view that families should be able to decide the choice 
that best meets their needs even if that choice is to continue on a 
flight without adjacent seats. For example, a parent traveling with a 
12-year-old child may decide the best option is to continue on the 
flight even though adjacent seats are not available because the child 
is seated near the parent and the reason for travel is time sensitive 
such as a wedding or funeral. However, if this option is chosen, all 
passengers on the reservation would remain on their originally ticketed 
flight segment. The Department seeks comment on whether carriers should 
be encouraged or required to make best efforts to seat families with 
young children together even after boarding by asking other passengers 
to switch seats. Although the Department intends for this rulemaking to 
prevent last-minute scrambles for seats at the gate or carriers having 
to ask other passengers to give up their seat to allow a parent and 
child to sit together, are there times when it is beneficial to do so?
    Additionally, if the carrier fails to follow the family 
requirements as proposed, the carrier would also be required to offer 
every individual on the reservation the option to receive a refund of 
the airline ticket and any unused ancillary service fees, e.g., baggage 
fees, lounge access. Furthermore, if a young child and an accompanying 
adult choose to receive a refund, but the other passengers on the 
reservation choose to remain on the flight, the carrier would be 
required to accommodate this choice.
    The refund requirement would apply to the entire cost of the 
reservation if a family is unable to receive family seating on any 
outbound leg of a trip or a family is informed about the unavailability 
of family seating before the start of travel. For example, if a mother 
books a roundtrip flight from Richmond, Virginia to Los Angeles, 
California with a connection in Chicago, Illinois for her and her young 
child and the mother is informed that family seating is available from 
Richmond to Chicago but not from Chicago to California, then the mother 
would be entitled to a refund for the entire reservation if she decides 
not to travel with her child. Similarly, if prior to beginning travel, 
the mother is informed that family seating is available on the outbound 
but not inbound flights, the mother would be entitled to a refund for 
the entire reservation if she decides not to travel with her child. 
However, on a direct return flight, or a return flight with a 
connection, the carrier would only be required to refund the cost of 
the unused portion of the return trip; the carrier would not need to 
refund the outbound portion of the ticket if the family already 
traveled on this portion of the reservation. For instance, if the 
mother and her young child traveled to Los Angeles but adjacent seating 
was not available on their return, then the mother would be entitled to 
a refund for

[[Page 65288]]

the return trip and not the entire reservation. If a carrier fails to 
comply with the family seating requirements as proposed, and a family 
is impacted at a connecting airport while on the outbound portion of 
their trip, and the family chooses to no longer travel, the carrier 
would also be required to provide return transportation to the family's 
origination airport, in addition to providing the refund.
    The Department seeks comment on its proposal that carriers provide 
a full refund of the cost of the reservation to passengers who choose 
this option if family seating is not available on any portion of the 
outbound trip, and a refund for the cost of the unused portion of the 
return flight if family seating is not provided on any leg of the 
return reservation. The Department also seeks comment on its proposal 
to require carriers to provide return transportation to the family's 
origination airport if family seating is not provided on the outbound 
trip at a connecting airport.

H. Removal or Reseating of Passengers for Safety or Operational Reasons

    Under this proposed rule, carriers would not be prohibited from 
removing passengers from the aircraft or reseating passengers, 
including a young child and an accompanying adult, for safety reasons 
or if failing to do so would be in violation of operational 
requirements. The proposal seeks to specify that removal in such cases 
must be non-discriminatory. For example, the airline would select the 
last passenger to check in for the flight to be removed from the 
aircraft.
    The Department seeks comment on its proposal to allow airlines to 
remove or reseat a young child and their accompanying adult for 
aircraft safety or operational issues. The Department also seeks 
comments on whether, and if so, what remedies for, or mitigations of 
harms to, impacted passengers should be required in the event that 
airlines remove or reseat a young child and their accompanying adult 
for aircraft safety or operational issues.

I. Customer Service Plans

    This NPRM also proposes to amend 14 CFR 259.5 to require carriers 
to address family seating in their customer service plans. 
Specifically, the rule would require carriers to update their customer 
service plans to include a commitment to notify passengers that the 
carrier will provide adjacent seats to a young child and an 
accompanying adult at no additional cost. The Department believes young 
children being able to sit adjacent to an accompanying adult is a basic 
service that all carriers should provide at no additional cost beyond 
the fare. Carriers notifying passengers that family seating is provided 
at no additional cost in their customer service plans would reduce the 
chance of customer confusion and better ensure that parents traveling 
with young children are able to sit together at no additional cost. We 
seek comment on the proposed requirement that carriers must include a 
family seating provision in their customer service plans.

J. Civil Penalties

    In this NPRM, the Department proposes to include a provision 
notifying airlines that violations of the Department's family-seating 
requirements subject an airline to civil penalties. The Department 
proposes that a carrier's failure to provide family seating as required 
by the proposal would subject it to civil penalties on a per passenger 
(child) basis. Further, if the carrier imposes fees for family seating, 
the carrier would be subject it to civil penalties for each fee 
imposed.
    The Department's Office of Aviation Consumer Protection (OACP), a 
unit within the Office of the General Counsel, has the authority to 
assess civil penalties against airlines and travel agents up to $40,272 
per violation pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 46301 and 14 CFR 383.2. Further, 
the statute provides that ``a separate violation occurs under this 
subsection for each day the violation . . . continues or, if 
applicable, for each flight involving the violation. . . .'' When OACP 
has evidence of systemic violations, or a single or a few egregious 
violations, it will take enforcement action.
    The Department seeks comment in its proposal to include a provision 
in the regulation that notifies airlines that they are subject to civil 
penalties for violating any requirement in the family seating rule. The 
Department also seeks comment on its proposal that a violation exists 
each time a young child and accompanying adult do not have the 
opportunity to secure adjacent seats. For example, if two parents are 
traveling with three young children and only one parent is provided the 
opportunity to be seated adjacent to one of the young children, but a 
parent is not provided the opportunity to be seated adjacent to either 
of the other two children, should there be two violations? The 
Department also seeks comments on whether the accompanying adult 
suffers a separate violation when denied the opportunity to sit 
adjacent to a young child. As noted above, accompanying adults may 
suffer significant stress and anxiety when they are not seated adjacent 
to a young child.

K. Inclusion of Fees for Basic Services in Advertised Fare

    The Department is examining whether fees for basic airline services 
such as booking a ticket \56\ should be required to be included in the 
advertised fare. The Airline Deregulation Act of 1978 (ADA), which 
preempted State regulation of airlines, removed Federal authority to 
set airline fares and fees and ended most regulation of airline rates, 
routes, and services. Under the ADA, DOT must consider as being in the 
public interest, among other things, having an air transportation 
system that relies on competition to determine the price of air 
transportation services. The ADA maintained the Department's statutory 
authority to prohibit unfair and deceptive practices. DOT continues to 
regulate and enforce consumer protections for airline passengers under 
its authority to prohibit unfair and deceptive practices. DOT also has 
the authority to ensure U.S. carriers provide safe and adequate 
interstate air transportation. The Department is relying on these and 
other authorities in issuing this rulemaking proposing to require U.S. 
and foreign air carriers to seat young children adjacent to at least 
one accompanying adult at no additional cost beyond the fare subject to 
limited exceptions. The Department is also considering whether, like 
family seating, it would be an unfair and deceptive practice to charge 
fees beyond the fare for other basic airline services.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \56\ See https://www.spirit.com/optional-services (displays a 
``passenger usage fee'' of $3.99 to $22.99 per segment for consumers 
who book online and a ``Reservations Center Booking'' fee of $35 per 
booking for consumers who book over the phone).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Over the years, airlines have developed a variety of ways to charge 
passengers fees for air transportation-related services that were once 
included in the ticket price. The airline industry has unbundled 
services that traditionally came with a ticket, such as checked bags 
and seat reservations. The Department has noticed that the unbundling 
of service has continued to expand, with some airlines now charging for 
carry-on bags, printing boarding passes \57\ at the airport,

[[Page 65289]]

receiving a paper ticket or a receipt, using a credit card to make a 
ticket purchase,\58\ or redeeming, transferring, or redepositing 
rewards earned by the customer. Additionally, while most airlines still 
provide complimentary water along with other non-alcoholic drinks and 
snacks to passengers, some airlines today charge passengers to receive 
water \59\ on the aircraft. The Department has also noticed that 
carriers are adding charges like a ``carrier interface charge,'' 
``passenger interface charge,'' ``electronic carrier usage charge,'' 
``ticketing fee,'' or a ``technology development charge,'' for booking 
online or over the phone, and the fees are avoidable only if customers 
purchase the ticket in person. Other airlines charge a ticketing fee 
for purchasing the ticket at the airport. The Department is concerned 
that this unbundling of services will continue to the detriment of 
consumers and seeks comment on this issue.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \57\ See https://www.spirit.com/optional-services (displays a 
fee of $25 per boarding pass printed), https://www.allegiantair.com/popup/taxes-and-fees (states that a '' $5.00 per boarding pass fee 
will apply to passengers who choose to have a boarding pass printed 
out at select domestic airport locations.'') https://help.ryanair.com/hc/en-us/articles/12889667116433-What-if-I-do-not-have-access-to-a-printer-to-print-my-boarding-pass- (explains that 
consumers will be charged for airline printing boarding pass for 
them at the check-in desk).
    \58\ Various European carriers charge fees for paying for 
airline tickets with credit cards if you commence your journey in 
certain countries and your credit card was issued outside the 
European Economic Area. E.g., https://www.lufthansa.com/ge/en/opc, 
https://www.austrian.com/us/en/service-charges.
    \59\ https://content.spirit.com/Shared/en-us/Documents/InFlightMenu_033020.pdf (no complimentary beverage or snack service 
on Spirit flights--$4.49 for bottled water).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Department proposes to define ``basic service'' as a service 
that is essential for a carrier to provide adequate air transportation 
to a passenger as determined by the Department after notice and 
comment. The Department is of the tentative view that seating a young 
child adjacent to an accompanying adult is a basic service.
    This NPRM is seeking comment on fees charged by airlines for basic 
services that used to be included in the ticket price, as well as 
prospective fees that airlines may charge passengers that the airlines 
currently include in the ticket price. For instance, carriers currently 
do not charge passengers for the use of lavatories onboard the 
aircraft, nor do they charge passengers to carry a small purse or 
laptop onto the aircraft, but the Department or the public cannot be 
assured that carriers would not do so in the future. Carriers also do 
not generally charge for customer service assistance should there be a 
flight disruption, though at least one airline charges passengers if 
they choose to receive assistance from airport agents when checking in. 
Neither the Department nor the public can be assured that airlines 
would not charge for all types of customer service assistance in the 
future.
    The Department seeks comment on its proposed definition of basic 
service, and whether seating a young child adjacent to an accompanying 
adult is a basic service. What, if any, other services beyond adjacent 
family seating should be considered a basic service? Should services 
related to the consumers' physical well-being such as access to the 
lavatory and the availability of drinking water upon request be 
considered basic services? Should services necessary for air 
transportation such as booking or paying for a ticket, checking in 
online, printing a boarding pass for those unable to do so themselves, 
or receiving customer service be considered basic services? Are there 
other types or categories of services that should be considered basic 
beyond those mentioned? The Department is considering prohibiting 
carriers from unbundling and charging passengers separately for basic 
services. The information provided by stakeholders--airlines, ticket 
agents, consumers, and other affected parties--will assist the 
Department in determining what, if any, additional services should be 
considered basic services that carriers and ticket agents must include 
as part of the fare to avoid engaging in an unfair or deceptive 
practice and to ensure safe and adequate service is being provided.

B. Regulatory Analysis and Notices

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

    Executive Orders 12866 (``Regulatory Planning and Review'') and 
13563 (``Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review'') require agencies 
to regulate in the ``most cost-effective manner,'' to make a ``reasoned 
determination that the benefits of the intended regulation justify its 
costs,'' and to develop regulations that ``impose the least burden on 
society.'' The Office of Management and Budget has determined that this 
proposed rulemaking is a significant regulatory action as defined in 
section (3)(f)(1) of Executive Order (E.O.) 12866, as amended by E. O. 
14094, ``Modernizing Regulatory Review.'' Accordingly, the Department 
has prepared an RIA for the proposed rule, summarized in this section 
and available in the docket. Table 1 below provides a summary of the 
costs and benefits of this proposed rulemaking.

                                Table 1--Summary of Economic Impacts, First Year
                                            [2022 Dollars, millions]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Benefits (+):                                                                   Benefits (+).
    Reduced disutility to passengers      Unquantified........................
     from separation of families
     traveling by air.
Costs (-):                                                                      Costs (-):
    Implementation costs................  $5-21...............................     Implementation costs.
Net societal benefits (costs):..........  Not applicable......................  Net societal benefits (costs).
Transfers (0):                                                                  Transfers (0):
    Increase in consumer surplus from     $910................................     Increase in consumer surplus
     elimination of seating fees for                                                from elimination of seating
     families (airlines to families).                                               fees for families (airlines
                                                                                    to families).
    Decrease in consumer surplus for      $760................................
     solo air passengers (solo
     passengers to airlines).
    Decrease in consumer surplus for      $51.................................     Decrease in consumer surplus
     families who do not pay for seat                                               for families who do not pay
     reservations in the baseline                                                   for seat reservations in the
     (families to airlines).                                                        baseline (families to
                                                                                    airlines).
    Airline revenue loss (airlines to     $85.................................     Airline revenue loss
     consumers).                                                                    (airlines to consumers).
Benefits (+):                                                                   Benefits (+):
    Reduced disutility to passengers      Unquantified........................     Reduced disutility to
     from separation of families                                                    passengers from separation
     traveling by air.                                                              of families traveling by
                                                                                    air.
Costs (-):                                                                      Costs (-):
    Implementation costs................  $5-21...............................     Implementation costs.
Net societal benefits (costs)...........  Not applicable......................  Net societal benefits (costs).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


[[Page 65290]]

    This rulemaking would require U.S. and foreign air carriers to seat 
children aged 13 and under adjacent to at least one accompanying adult 
without a separate charge. Benefits of the proposed rule, which we did 
not quantify, are due to the reduction in disutility to passengers from 
separation of families traveling by air. Families can be reassured that 
they will be seated together during air travel. Some families could 
experience a reduction in stress and anxiety associated with air 
travel. Passengers who do not travel with children will no longer be 
burdened with being seated next to children who are separated from 
their parents and will no longer fear being relocated from their seat 
to accommodate families. Airlines will incur implementation costs, 
which are quantified. Because benefits are not quantified, it is not 
possible to estimate net benefits.
    Most quantifiable economic impacts are transfers, which are 
benefits and costs that have exactly offsetting effects and do not 
contribute to the net benefits calculation. The total price of air 
travel for families who currently purchase seat reservations will 
decrease, which creates a transfer of consumer surplus to them. The 
elimination of seating fees for families encourages additional travel, 
and airfares will increase. Solo passengers and families who do not 
currently purchase seat reservations will lose consumer surplus due to 
the airfare increase. The increase in in airfare offsets the increase 
in consumer surplus to families who pay for seat reservation in the 
baseline, but the effect is small. Airlines initially will incur 
revenue losses as well.
    An important determinant of the quantifiable impacts is the 
percentage of passengers who purchase seat assignments in the baseline. 
This percentage is not known with certainty, and we apply market 
research that suggests about 37 percent of consumers might be willing 
to pay for a seat reservation. The 37 percent is applied to the 
estimated 9.7 percent of passengers who travel as families as well as 
the remaining 90.3 percent of passengers who travel solo.

B. 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.) For information on DOT's compliance with 
the Privacy Act, please visit https://www.transportation.gov/privacy.

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

E. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) requires an 
agency to conduct an initial regulatory flexibility analysis (IRFA) to 
assess the impact of a proposed rule 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. The 
Department has conducted an IRFA for this rulemaking as required by 5 
U.S.C. 603 and provides a summary of that analysis in the paragraphs 
that follow. A description of the reasons the agency is considering the 
action and a statement of the objectives and legal basis of the rule 
are described elsewhere in the preamble for this proposed rule and not 
repeated here.
1. A Description and Estimate of the Number of Small Entities to Which 
the Rule Will Apply (or an Explanation of Why No Such Estimate Is 
Available)
    A carrier is a small entity if it provides air transportation 
exclusively with small aircraft, defined as any aircraft originally 
designed to have a maximum passenger capacity of 60 seats or less or a 
maximum payload capacity of 18,000 pounds or less, as described in 14 
CFR 399.73. In 2020, 28 carriers meeting these criteria reported 
passenger traffic data to the Bureau of Transportation Statistics.\60\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \60\ Bureau of Transportation Statistics No date. ``T1: U.S. Air 
Carrier Traffic and Capacity Summary by Service Class.'' https://transtats.bts.gov/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. A Description of the Compliance Requirements of the Rule and Their 
Costs
    The proposed rule would require that airlines distinguish families 
from other passengers in assessing seating fees, which will involve 
some upfront costs. A system to ensure family seating would identify 
bookings with children under 14 and accompanying adults and allow those 
individuals to reserve seats together in advance with no separate 
charge. Airlines would need to personalize the pricing of seats based 
on the ages of the individuals in a reservation. Once this capability 
is implemented, there should not be other ongoing costs.
    The RIA for the proposed rule presented an upper bound cost 
estimate for making the necessary changes to ticketing systems as 10 
percent of $2.02 per passenger. The analysis also reports that revenue 
per passenger, or ticket price, is $248.64 for a domestic fare. Average 
ticket prices for small carriers tend to be higher than the market 
average and thus, $248.64 underestimates revenue per passenger for 
small carriers. From this information, implementation costs as a 
percent of revenue amount to 0.008 percent (0.10 * $2.02/$248.64), 
which is much smaller than the one percent threshold that the 
Department generally applies for determining significant economic 
impact. This cost estimate is based upon the assumption that small 
airlines will make IT adjustments to automate family seating. However, 
given the small size of the affected aircraft, automation might not be 
needed. The Department requests comment on the costs to small airlines.
3. A Description of Relevant Federal Rules, if Any, That May Duplicate, 
Overlap, or Conflict With the Proposed Rule
    The Department is not aware of any other Federal rules that 
duplicate, overlap, or conflict with the proposed rule to prohibit 
airlines from charging family seating fees.

[[Page 65291]]

4. A Description of Any Significant Alternatives to the Proposed Rule 
That Would Accomplish the Stated Objectives of the Rule While 
Minimizing Any Significant Economic Impact of the Proposed Rule on 
Small Entities
    The Department considered continuing to rely on current industry 
voluntary efforts. As discussed elsewhere in the preamble, on July 8, 
2022, the Department issued a notice that urged airlines ``to do 
everything in their power to ensure that children who are age 13 or 
younger are seated next to an accompanying adult with no additional 
charge.'' The Department launched the Family Seating Dashboard on March 
6, 2023. The Dashboard currently shows four airlines (Alaska, American, 
and Frontier, and JetBlue) as having committed to guaranteeing family 
seating without a separate fee. As outlined above, all other large 
domestic carriers have policies to do their best to seat families 
together, but they stop short of guaranteeing it.
    Given that six of the ten large airlines have chosen not to 
guarantee family seating despite the Department's efforts to encourage 
the practice and calls from consumer advocacy groups,\61\ it is 
unlikely that they would issue such guarantees in the absence of 
additional pressure from the market or the government. The four 
airlines with family seating policies in line with the proposed rule 
could change their policies at any time. The experience with checked 
baggage fees shows that airlines adopted baggage fees at a time when 
they were under financial pressure and when competition from low-cost 
carriers pushed them to unbundle their services and advertise lower 
ticket prices. It is possible that airlines would re-consider family 
seating policies in the future in times of financial or competitive 
pressure. Thus, the no action alternative would not meet the objectives 
of the proposed rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \61\ See Airlines: Kids should sit with their parents! 
(consumerreports.org), accessed on 10/27/2023.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A second alternative would be to adopt the requirement for airlines 
to guarantee family seating but to not impose a requirement that the 
airlines eliminate seating fees for families. Airlines would still 
incur implementation costs. Families who currently pay seating fees 
because they believe that the only way to assure being seated together 
is to pay a seating fee could simply stop paying the fees and still be 
guaranteed seats together. In general, this alternative would yield the 
same result as the proposed rule. The Department did not propose this 
option, however, because as described in the proposed rule, the 
Department believes that charging families to sit together is an unfair 
practice, and if a ban on family seating is adopted in final then it 
would also be an unfair and deceptive practice, as described elsewhere 
in the preamble, not to disclose that paying additional fees or 
purchasing a higher fare ticket to secure adjacent seating for a young 
child and accompanying adult is unnecessary.
    The Department invites comment on its analysis and the potential 
economic impact of this rulemaking on small entities.

F. Paperwork Reduction Act

    This NPRM does not propose any new collections of information that 
would require approval by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) 
under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-13, 49 U.S.C. 
3501 et seq.).

G. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) requires, at 2 
U.S.C. 1532, that agencies prepare an assessment of anticipated costs 
and benefits before issuing any rule that may result in the expenditure 
by State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the 
private sector, of $100 million or more (adjusted annually for 
inflation) in any one year. While this proposed rule would not have 
such an effect on State, local, and tribal governments, this proposed 
rule is estimated to have an annual cost of over 100 million dollars. 
Agencies may include the assessment required by UMRA in conjunction 
with other assessments, and the Department has prepared RIA that 
provides the anticipated cost and benefits of the NPRM.

H. 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). 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.'' Because this rulemaking relates to 
ensuring that families traveling with children are seated together, 
this rulemaking is a consumer protection rulemaking. The Department 
does not anticipate any environmental impacts, and there are no 
extraordinary circumstances present in connection with this rulemaking.

I. Executive Order 12988, ``Civil Justice Reform''

    With respect to the review of existing regulations and the 
promulgation of new regulations, section 3(a) of Executive Order 12988, 
``Civil Justice Reform,'' 61 FR 4729 (February 7, 1996), imposes on 
Federal agencies the general duty to adhere to the following 
requirements: (1) eliminate drafting errors and ambiguity; (2) write 
regulations to minimize litigation; and (3) provide a clear legal 
standard for affected conduct rather than a general standard and 
promote simplification and burden reduction. Section 3(b) of Executive 
Order 12988 specifically requires that Executive agencies make every 
reasonable effort to ensure that the regulation: (1) clearly specifies 
the preemptive effect, if any; (2) clearly specifies any effect on 
existing Federal law or regulation; (3) provides a clear legal standard 
for affected conduct while promoting simplification and burden 
reduction; (4) specifies the retroactive effect, if any; (5) adequately 
defines key terms; and (6) addresses other important issues affecting 
clarity and general draftsmanship under any guidelines issued by the 
Attorney General. Section 3(c) of Executive Order 12988 requires 
Executive agencies to review regulations in light of applicable 
standards in section 3(a) and section 3(b) to determine whether they 
are met or it is unreasonable to meet one or more of them. DOT has 
completed the required review and determined that, to the extent 
permitted by law, this final rule meets the relevant standards of 
Executive Order 12988.

J. Short Summary of the Rule Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(4)

    As required by 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(4), a summary of this rule can be 
found at the entry for RIN 2105-AF15 in the Department's portion of the 
Unified Agenda, available at https://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/eAgendaViewRule?pubId=202310&RIN=2105-AF15.

[[Page 65292]]

K. Pay-As-You-Go Act of 2023 (Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2023, Pub. 
L. 118-5, Div. B, Title III)

    In accordance with Compliance with Pay-As-You-Go Act of 2023 
(Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2023, Pub. L. 118-5, div. B, title III) 
and OMB Memorandum (M-23-21) dated September 1, 2023, the Department 
has determined that this final rule is not subject to the Pay-As-You-Go 
Act of 2023 because it will not increase direct spending beyond 
specified thresholds.

List of Subjects

14 CFR Part 259

    Air Carriers, Consumer Protection, Reporting and Recordkeeping 
Requirements.

14 CFR Part 261

    Air Carriers, Consumer Protection.

    For the reasons stated in the preamble, DOT proposes to amend 14 
CFR part 259 and add part 261 as follows:

PART 259--ENHANCED PROTECTIONS FOR AIRLINE PASSENGERS

0
1. The authority citation for part 259 is revised to read as follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 40101(a)(4), 40101(a)(9), 40113(a), 41702, 
41708, 41712, 42301, and FAA Reauthorization Act of 2024, Pub. L. 
118-63, 516, 138 Stat. 1025, 1197-1198 (2024).

0
2. Amend Sec.  259.5 by revising paragraph (b) introductory text and 
adding paragraph (b)(16) to read as follows:


Sec.  259.5  Customer Service Plan.

* * * * *
    (b) Contents of Plan. Each Customer Service Plan shall address the 
following subjects and comply with the minimum standards set forth:
* * * * *
    (16) Disclosing clearly and conspicuously on the carrier's online 
platform that the carrier will seat a young child adjacent to an 
accompanying adult at no additional cost, as required by 14 CFR Part 
261. Requiring carriers to ask whether the customer is traveling with a 
young child when the customer calls the carrier's reservation center to 
inquire about a fare or seating or to book a ticket, and disclosing to 
a customer who answers affirmatively that the carrier will seat a young 
child adjacent to an accompanying adult at no additional cost, as 
required by 14 CFR Part 261.
* * * * *

PART 261--FAMILY SEATING

0
3. Add part 261 to read as follows:

Sec.
261.1 Purpose.
261.2 Applicability.
261.3 Definitions.
261.4 Assigned Seating Carriers.
261.5 Open Seating Carriers.
261.6 Exceptions to Family Seating Requirements for Assigned Seating 
and Open Seating Carriers.
261.7 Traveling with Multiple Children.
261.8 Class of Service.
261.9 Mitigating Passenger Harm.
261.10 Removal or Reseating of Passengers for Safety or Operational 
Reasons.
261.11 Violations and Civil Penalties.

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 41702 and 41712, and the FAA 
Reauthorization Act of 2024, Pub. L. 118-63, 516, 138 Stat. 1025, 
1197-1198 (2024).


Sec.  261.1  Purpose.

    The purpose of this Part is to ensure that U.S. and foreign air 
carriers allow young children to be seated adjacent to an accompanying 
adult on a flight at no additional cost. This Part clarifies seating a 
young child adjacent to an accompanying adult is a basic service that 
must be included in the advertised fare.


Sec.  261.2  Applicability.

    This Part applies to all U.S. and foreign air carriers that operate 
and market scheduled passenger flights to or from a U.S. airport using 
at least one aircraft that has a designed capacity of 30 or more 
passenger seats.


Sec.  261.3  Definitions.

    Accompanying Adult means an individual age 14 or over on the date 
of the scheduled departure who is traveling with a young child or young 
children on the same reservation record.
    Adjacent Seats mean two or more seats positioned next to each other 
in the same row of the aircraft and not separated by an aisle.
    Ancillary Service Fee means a fee charged for any optional service 
that a carrier provides beyond passenger air transportation. Such fees 
may include, but are not limited to, charges for checked or carry-on 
baggage, canceling or changing a reservation, advance seat selection, 
in-flight beverages, snacks and meals, lounge access, bedding or other 
amenities, or seat upgrades so long as the fees are not for basic 
services.
    Assigned Seating Carrier means a carrier that assigns seats, or 
allows individuals to select seats on a flight, in advance of the date 
of departure of a flight.
    Available Family Seating means two or more adjacent seats located 
in the purchased class of service that have not been assigned to other 
passengers and to which a young child or children and an accompanying 
adult may be assigned.
    Basic Service means a service that is essential for a carrier to 
provide adequate air transportation to a passenger as determined by the 
Department after notice and comment.
    Booking Party means the person who booked the reservation for air 
travel. The booking party may or may not also be an accompanying adult.
    Class of Service means seating in the same cabin class such as 
First, Business, Premium Economy, or Economy class, based on seat 
location in the aircraft and seat characteristics such as pitch size, 
features, or amount of legroom.
    Fare means the price paid for air transportation including all 
basic services and all mandatory government taxes and carrier-imposed 
fees. It does not include ancillary service fees for optional services 
that have been determined by the Department not to be basic services.
    No Additional Cost means no added charge for a seat beyond the 
fare.
    Online platform means any interactive electronic medium, including, 
but not limited to, websites and mobile applications, that allow the 
consumer to search for or purchase air transportation from a carrier or 
ticket agent.
    Open Seating Carrier means a carrier that does not assign seats or 
allow individuals to select seats on a flight in advance of the date of 
departure of the flight.
    Young Child or Young Children means individual(s) age 13 or under 
on the date of scheduled departure of the purchased flight.


Sec.  261.4  Assigned Seating Carriers.

    (a) Available family seating at booking. An assigned seating 
carrier must make every reasonable effort to assign available family 
seating to a young child and an accompanying adult at the time of 
booking a reservation for air transportation on each flight segment of 
the reservation at no additional cost, unless an exception in Sec.  
261.6 applies. If the carrier is unable to assign available family 
seating at the time of booking the reservation and no exceptions in 
Sec.  261.6 apply, the carrier must assign available family seating no 
later than 48 hours after the tickets are purchased.
    (b) When there is no available family seating at booking. For 
tickets purchased two or more weeks prior to a flight's departure, an 
assigned seating carrier must contact the booking party within 48 hours 
after the ticket for air transportation has been purchased and

[[Page 65293]]

provide the booking party a minimum of seven days to choose between the 
options in paragraphs (b)(1) and (b)(2) of this section. For tickets 
purchased less than two weeks prior to a flight's departure, an 
assigned seating carrier must contact the booking party as soon as is 
practical after the ticket for air transportation has been purchased 
and provide the booking party a reasonable amount of time based on the 
circumstances to choose between the options in paragraphs (b)(1) and 
(b)(2) of this section.
    (1) A full refund to the booking party within the timeframe 
required in 14 CFR parts 259, 260 and 399 of the airline ticket and any 
ancillary service fees paid for the young child and accompanying adult 
as well as any other person on the same reservation who chooses not to 
fly; or
    (2) The option to wait for the possibility of available family 
seating on the flight before the first passenger boards the aircraft. 
If the booking party chooses to wait as specified in this paragraph, an 
assigned seating carrier must comply with paragraph (i) or (ii) of this 
paragraph, whichever is applicable.
    (i) Available family seating before first passenger boards 
aircraft. An assigned seating carrier must assign adjacent seats to a 
young child and an accompanying adult if the seats are available before 
the first passenger boards the aircraft and must notify the booking 
party and/or the accompanying adult of the new seat assignments as soon 
as the seats are assigned.
    (ii) No available family seating before first passenger boards 
aircraft. An assigned seating carrier must offer the booking party and/
or an accompanying adult the choice between the following options:
    (A) Rebooking the young child and accompanying adult as well as any 
other person on the same reservation who chooses to fly on the next 
flight with available family seating to the same destination at no 
additional cost; or
    (B) Transporting the young child and accompanying adult as well as 
any other person on the same reservation on their original ticketed 
flight in seats that are not adjacent.
    (c) Family Seating Policy Notifications. (1) Online Platform 
Disclosure. An assigned seating carrier must disclose clearly and 
conspicuously on its public-facing online platforms that markets air 
transportation to the general public in the United States:
    (i) That the carrier will provide available family seating at no 
additional cost, as required by this Part, and
    (ii) Any exceptions permitted by Sec.  261.6, including any carrier 
check-in or boarding requirement that may impact the ability to secure 
adjacent seats for the young child and accompanying adult.
    (2) Oral Disclosure. When a customer calls the carrier's 
reservation center to inquire about a fare, seating, or to book a 
ticket, an assigned seating carrier must ask whether the customer is 
traveling with a young child. If the customer answers affirmatively, 
the carrier must disclose:
    (i) That it will provide available family seating at no additional 
cost, as required by this Part, and
    (ii) Any exceptions permitted by Sec.  261.6 that would apply to 
that consumer, including any carrier check-in or boarding requirement 
that may impact the ability to secure adjacent seats for the young 
child and accompanying adult.


Sec.  261.5  Open Seating Carriers.

    (a) Boarding. Open seating carriers must board passengers in a 
manner that allows a young child and an accompanying adult to secure 
adjacent seats on the flight at no additional cost, unless an exception 
in Sec.  261.6 applies.
    (b) Family Seating Policy Notifications. (1) Online Platform 
Disclosure. An open seating carrier must disclose clearly and 
conspicuously on its public-facing online platforms that markets air 
transportation to the general public in the United States:
    (i) That the carrier will board passengers in a manner that will 
allow a young child and an accompanying adult to secure adjacent seats 
at no additional cost as required by this Part, and
    (ii) Any exceptions permitted by Sec.  261.6, including any carrier 
check-in or boarding requirement that may impact the ability to secure 
adjacent seats for the young child and accompanying adult.
    (1) Oral Disclosure. When a customer calls the carrier's 
reservation center to inquire about a fare, seating, or to book a 
ticket, an open seating carrier must ask whether the customer is 
traveling with a young child. If the customer answers affirmatively, 
the carrier must disclose:
    (i) That it will board the passengers in a manner that will allow a 
young child to be seated adjacent to an accompanying adult at no 
additional cost as required by this Part, and
    (ii) Any exceptions permitted by Sec.  261.6 that would apply to 
that consumer, including any carrier check-in or boarding requirement 
that may impact the ability to secure adjacent seats for the young 
child and accompanying adult.


Sec.  261.6  Exceptions to Family Seating Requirements for Assigned 
Seating and Open Seating Carriers.

    The family seating requirements in sections Sec.  261.4 and Sec.  
261.5 do not apply if:
    (a) The young child is not traveling with an accompanying adult;
    (b) The booking party declines to accept the adjacent seats for the 
young child and accompanying adult offered by the carrier or selects a 
seat for the young child that is not adjacent to any accompanying adult 
traveling on the flight reservation;
    (c) The number of young children traveling under the reservation or 
an aircraft seating configuration makes it impossible for the carrier 
to provide adjacent seats to young children and the accompanying adult 
based on the seat layout of the aircraft; or
    (d) The young child and/or accompanying adult do not comply with 
the carrier's applicable check-in or boarding requirements, provided 
that these requirements do not impose unreasonably burdensome 
requirements on families traveling with young children.


Sec.  261.7  Traveling with Multiple Children.

    In situations where the number of young children traveling under 
the reservation make it impossible for the carrier to provide adjacent 
seats to the young children and the accompanying adult as provided in 
Sec.  261.6(c), carriers must seat the young children and accompanying 
adult across the aisle from each other, or seat the young children 
directly in front of, or directly behind the accompanying adult.


Sec.  261.8  Class of Service.

    A carrier must provide adjacent seats to a young child and 
accompanying adult in the same class of service as the tickets 
purchased. A carrier may not construct its classes of service in such a 
way that would unreasonably limit the availability of adjacent seats 
for a young child and an accompanying adult.


Sec.  261.9  Mitigating Passenger Harm.

    (a) A carrier that fails to meet the family seating requirements in 
Sec.  261.4 or Sec.  261.5 or that reseats a young child and an 
accompanying adult in seats that are not adjacent for aircraft safety 
or operational reasons under Sec.  261.10 must, unless an exception in 
Sec.  261.6 applies, provide the booking party and/or the accompanying 
adult the choice between the following options:
    (1) Rebooking the young child and accompanying adult as well as any 
other

[[Page 65294]]

person on the same reservation who chooses to fly on the next flight 
with available family seating to the same destination at no additional 
cost;
    (2) Transporting the young child and accompanying adult as well as 
any other person on the same reservation on their original ticketed 
flight segment in seats that are not adjacent; or
    (3) Refunding the booking party within the timeframe required in 14 
CFR parts 259 and 399 as follows:
    (i) The entire cost of the ticket and ancillary service fees paid 
if a young child and an accompanying adult as well as any other person 
on the same reservation chooses not to travel on any portion of an 
outbound trip.
    (ii) The cost of the unused portion of the ticket and ancillary 
service fees paid if a young child and an accompanying adult as well as 
any other person on the same reservation chooses not to travel on any 
portion of a return trip.
    (b) If the carrier fails to meet the family seating requirements in 
Sec.  261.4 or Sec.  261.5 or reseats a young child and an accompanying 
adult in seats that are not adjacent under Sec.  261.10, absent an 
exception in Sec.  261.6, and it impacts a young child and an 
accompanying adult as well as any other person on the same reservation 
at a connecting airport on the outbound trip and they choose to no 
longer travel, then the carrier must provide return transportation to 
the origination airport at no cost.


Sec.  261.10  Removal or Reseating of Passengers for Safety or 
Operational Reasons.

    Nothing in this Part prohibits a carrier from removing passengers 
from the aircraft or reseating passengers, including a young child and 
an accompanying adult, for safety reasons or if failing to do so would 
be in violation of operational requirements. Removal in such cases must 
be non-discriminatory.


Sec.  261.11  Violations and Civil Penalties.

    A carrier that violates any requirement in this Part is subject to 
civil penalties as set forth in 49 U.S.C. 46301. In instances when a 
young child and an accompanying adult do not have the opportunity to 
secure adjacent seats as required in this Part, a separate violation 
occurs for each child. In instances when a fee beyond the fare is 
imposed to secure adjacent family seating, a separate violation occurs 
for each fee imposed.

    Issued July 31, 2024, in Washington, DC.
Peter Paul Montgomery Buttigieg,
Secretary of Transportation.
[FR Doc. 2024-17323 Filed 8-8-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-9X-P