Well, it’s the topic that never dies. In a post just over a year ago, I shared the “final” rules that the Department of Transportation issued on traveling service and emotional support animals. My skepticism of the “final” part was well-placed. The DoT is proposing a new set of “final” rules.
These changes would bring the rules for air travel more in line with ADA laws governing public access, including recognizing psychiatric service animals.
The new rule would define a service animal as “a dog that is individually trained to do work or perform tasks for the benefit of a person with a disability,” echoing language from the ADA.
The most dramatic changes are limiting travel access to service animals — specifically, service dogs — and no longer requiring airlines to accept emotional support animals in the cabin or treat them differently from pets.
The proposed rules would also allow the DoT to create forms “attesting to a service animal’s good behavior, certifying the service animal’s good health, and if taking a long flight attesting that the service animal has the ability to either not relieve itself, or can relieve itself in a sanitary manner” — and allow airlines to require that passengers traveling with service animals complete these forms.
Other provisions include allowing airlines to:
Require that passengers traveling with service animals check in earlier than other passengers
Limit the number of service animals to two per passenger
Require that the service dog(s) fit within the passenger’s foot space in the cabin
Deny travel to animals showing aggression
Notably, airlines could not, as Delta has tried to do, deny access to dogs based on their breed.
The 60-day public comment period opened on February 5, 2020. To comment, go to the docket page, where you can also read the full proposal and other comments.
When I last looked at this, airlines were issuing strict new policies, and the DoT was taking public comment on changes it was considering. They received more than 4,500 comments, and have released their final (for now) policy.
Here’s a summary:
Airlines cannot categorically ban specific breeds of dogs. They also cannot categorically refuse to transport all animals that are not dogs, cats, or miniature horses. They can refuse reptiles, ferrets, rodents, and spiders. The “emotional support peacock,” and possibly the pig, however, appear to be cleared for takeoff.
Passengers may travel with a total of three service animals, including one ESA; the DoT will focus enforcement on passengers who’ve been prevented from traveling with up to 3 animals, but will not allow airlines to enforce a strict limit at all.
Airlines may not categorically ban animals over a specific weight, but they are allowed, on a case-by-case basis to refuse to allow an animal in the cabin if it is too large or heavy. That could mean weight- or size-related bans on certain smaller aircraft, but not, as some airlines have tried, across-the-board weight-based bans.
Airlines may ban “service” animals that are younger than 4 months, since “those animals would not be trained to behave properly in a public setting.” But the DoT does “not anticipate exercising our enforcement resources” in this area.
Airlines may not ban emotional support animals (ESAs) on flights longer than 8 hours. They can however require anyone traveling on longer flights with a service animal to provide documentation that the animal either “will not need to relieve itself on the flight or can do so in a way that does not create a health or sanitation issue on the flight.” There’s no hint as to how someone might document that. They may also require 48 hours’ notice that a passenger has a service animal and they may also require early check-in, in person, in addition to the documentation.
Note that the document uses “service animal” as a broad term that includes ADA service animals, emotional support animals (ESAs), and psychiatric service animals (PSAs). I believe that this will prove to be an enormous hassle for people traveling with, say, guide dogs or mobility service dogs, on long flights.
Airlines may request documentation from a medical professional from passengers seeking to travel with an ESA or PSA and can request but cannot require that passengers use a specific, airline-created form.
In addition, they may ask any passenger traveling with a service animal “limited questions” to determine the passenger’s need for the animal, regardless of whether the animal has a tag, vest, or other service dog paraphernalia. What these questions are is not stated.
Note that the ADA does not apply to air travel, so airline personnel are not limited to the ADA questions (whether it is a service animal and what task it does).
Airlines may not require people with disabilities using task-trained, non-ESA/PSA service animals to produce documentation in advance of travel. However, airlines may request documentation related to “vaccination, training, or behavior” if the airline reasonably believes the documentation would help assess whether the animal poses a “direct threat to the health or safety of others.”
There is no explanation of what form this documentation might take or how it might help make such a determination, so this point could be very problematic. They do not envision taking enforcement action against airlines asking for this documentation.
Airlines may require passengers traveling with ESAs or PSAs to check in, in person, in the airport lobby and present their documentation — prior to entering the “sterile” area (post-security check). They may also require these passengers to provide 48 hours’ notice that they are traveling with an ESA or PSA and require them to check in up to an hour earlier than other passengers. These requirements do not apply to non ESA/PSA service animals (which are not defined).
Airlines may require that service animals of all types be “contained” (including leashed), and complaints will be evaluated case-by-case. In general, requiring some means of tethering is allowed.
But … While airlines may make other requirements to ensure safety and to ensure that other passengers have use of their “foot space” — but they also have to allow the animal to provide emotional support or perform tasks. Translated, that means people may be permitted to remove their ESAs from crates (and we all know that people do so even when it’s not permitted).
Airlines cannot limit the total number of service animals on any flight (including ESAs and PSAs).
That’s a lot. It’s similar to the interim document that has been in force for a little over a year. But it certainly does not address the clear problems that triggered the new document, which included rampant fakes, non-domesticated animals with no training traveling in crowded planes, along with untrained, stressed, and sometimes aggressive dogs, and people with trained service dogs being hassled and worse.
Under the new policy, the documentation that airlines can require for non-ADA service animals is vaguely defined, and what they can ask of service dog users is not defined at all. Airlines still will rely on check-in personnel, who are not animal behavior experts, to evaluate whether an animal poses a risk. They’ll still face pressure to accommodate unsuitable animals. Lots of them. I’m imagining planes full of people with 3 “service” animals apiece, all outside their carriers.
Walking into the lobby of an airport is an unusual activity and would be stressful for an animal not trained for or used to public spaces. Since there are no laws that grant public access to people with ESAs, and no training is required, this describes most ESA.
But that’s just the beginning; an untrained staffer might not notice that an animal is stressed at this early stage. Airline personnel have no expertise or way of evaluating whether an animal will remain calm under stress or whether the person can safely handle the animal during travel. Many handlers wouldn’t notice or be aware of signs of stress. The animal’s stress level is likely to rise as new, weird experiences pile up: TSA check; maybe riding on a tram of some sort; sitting in a crowded gate with loud noises and anxious people; being stuffed under a tiny seat, hemmed in by strangers; more loud noises and weird smells … Under increasing stress, it’s likely that more animals will react quite naturally — and people will get hurt. And when the untrained, stressed-out dog stuffed under the middle seat bites the passenger in the window seat, that poor person is still trapped in a tiny space with no way out.
The DoT’s mission was to protect the safety of all travelers, the rights of people who are legitimate service animal users, and the safety of traveling service and support animals. The new regulations were intended to address a tsunami of fake service and emotional support animals on airplanes, traveling with people ill-prepared to handle them safely. I don’t think that this document comes close to accomplishing any of those goals. In fact, the new policies might invite even more abuse than the old rules.
Not only are airlines tightening up their rules on which of our furred, feathered, and scaled friends may board, the Department of Transportation is considering changing sections of the Air Carrier Access Act (ACAA), the law governing air travel with service and emotional support animals.
The root of the problem is that federal laws governing access for assistance animals are vague, different laws allow for different things in different spaces (public businesses, housing, and air travel), and it’s easy to exploit loopholes or deliberate omissions in these laws. The result, as far as air travel is concerned, is a mess.
In a nutshell, the ACAA allows people to travel with service animals or with emotional support animals (ESAs). The ACAA definition of a service animal is different from the more familiar ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act) definition; the ACAA definition of ESA is loose indeed. For one thing, no training is required; for another, passengers are not required to crate or otherwise contain the animals during the flight.
Problems include threats to (and harm to) the safety of other passengers, interference with legitimate service animals working with their partners, and undue stress on the animals themselves, who generally have had no public access training and should not have to endure a strange, noisy, smelly, stressful, cramped, terrifying experience (air travel is all of that and more for me, and I am used to it!).
The DOT is soliciting comments by July 9, 2018 specifically in these areas:
Psychiatric service animals; ADA treats (some) PSAs as any other service animal, while the current ACAA groups them together with ESAs
Whether to maintain the distinction between ESAs and service animals
Whether ESAs should be crated or otherwise confined / restrained throughout the flight; similarly, they are soliciting comments on whether service / ESAs should be required to be leashed or tethered
Whether to limit what species of animals would be permitted to fly as service and/or ESAs; ADA allows only service dogs and a limited number of miniature horses
Whether and how to limit the number of service / ESAs a passenger may travel with; currently neither the ACAA nor the ADA limits the number of animals
Whether to require that passengers with a service or ESA should be required to attest (sign a statement declaring) that the animal has been trained for public access
Safety concerns regarding travel with “large” (undefined) service animals and suggestions for addressing those concerns
Whether airlines should be allowed to require a veterinary health form or immunization record from any or all service animal users
Issues with airlines denying / allowing passengers to board with ESAs / service animals on foreign airlines’ code-share flights