Overview of the Air Carrier Access Act






Prepared for Members and Committees of Congress



The Air Carrier Access Act (ACAA), 49 U.S.C. § 41705, prohibits discrimination by air carriers
against individuals with disabilities. Public attention regarding an airplane passenger who
traveled while infected with Extensively Drug Resistant Tuberculosis (XDR-TB) in 2007 raised
questions regarding the ACAA’s requirements and guarantees. This report briefly discusses the
ACAA’s statutory provisions, accompanying regulations, relevant judicial opinions, legislation in thth
the 110 Congress, and possible considerations for the 111 Congress.






Backgr ound ..................................................................................................................................... 1
The Nondiscrimination Requirement and Exceptions.....................................................................1
Excepti ons ..................................................................................................................... .................. 3
Impacted Air Carriers......................................................................................................................3
Application in the Context of Communicable Diseases..................................................................4
Accessibility Requirements for Qualified Individuals....................................................................5
Aircraft Accessibility.......................................................................................................................5
Attendants, Equipment, and Service Animals.................................................................................5
Seat Assignments, Boarding and Deplaning Assistance, and Advance Notice...............................6
Security Screening...........................................................................................................................7
Enforcement .................................................................................................................................... 7
Legislation in the 110th Congress....................................................................................................8
Possible Considerations for the 111th Congress...............................................................................8
Author Contact Information............................................................................................................8
Acknowledgments ........................................................................................................................... 8






Congress passed the Air Carrier Access Act (ACAA) in 1986,1 with several goals. First, Congress
intended to address the “unique difficulties” faced by individuals with disabilities, who often had 2
no way to predict the extent of a given airline or flight crew’s accommodation. Second, Congress
intended the ACAA to overrule a Supreme Court case, Department of Transportation v. Paralyzed 3
Veterans of America (PVA), in which the Court held that certain nondiscrimination regulations 45
then in effect could not be enforced against commercial airlines. Finally, Congress also intended
to balance protecting individuals with disabilities from discrimination, on one hand, and the need 6
to ensure general passenger safety, on the other.
The inquiry regarding the extent of protections under the ACAA is timely given public concern in
2007 about a man infected with XDR-TB who traveled on several passenger airplanes before he
was placed in isolation. This report discusses ACAA requirements and regulations, including 7
regulations regarding airplane passengers with communicable diseases. It will also briefly thth
discuss S. 2554, 110 Congress, and H.R. 5129, 110 Congress, which proposed to amend the
ACAA to provide aggrieved individuals with a private right of action, attorneys’ fees, expert fees,
and the costs of the action.


The ACAA prohibits discrimination by air carriers against “otherwise qualified individual[s]” on 8
the basis of disability. The statutory language regarding the scope of “disability” was the same 9
under the ACAA as under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) prior to the enactment of 10
the Americans with Disabilities Amendment Act on September 25, 2008. Specifically, a person

1 Air Carrier Access Act of 1986, 100 Stat. 1080 (1986) (current version at 49 U.S.C. § 41705).
2 S.Rept. 99-400, at 2 (1986).
3 477 U.S. 597, 611 (1986).
4 In 1982, the predecessor to the Federal Aviation Administration promulgated regulations prohibiting discrimination
by air carriers against individuals with disabilities. 55 Fed. Reg. 8009. These regulations derived legal authority from
Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, 29 U.S.C. § 794, which the PVA Court interpreted as extending only to
entities directly receiving federal financial assistance. 477 U.S. at 604.
5 S. Rept. 99-400, at 1-2 (1986); see also 132 Cong. Rec. S11,784 (daily ed. Aug. 15, 1986) (statement of Sen. Dole)
(“The legislation ... overturns the recent Supreme Court decision in the case of [PVA].).
6 Id. (“[The ACAA] does not mandate any compromise of existing ... safety regulations.”)
7 For more information on XDR-TB and related legal and public health issues, see CRS Report RL34144, Extensively
Drug-Resistant Tuberculosis (XDR-TB): Emerging Public Health Threats and Quarantine and Isolation, by Kathleen
S. Swendiman and Nancy Lee Jones.
8 49 U.S.C. § 41705 (2008).
9 P.L. 110-325 (2008). For a more detailed discussion of the ADA Amendments Act, see CRS Report RL34691, The
ADA Amendments Act: P.L. 110-325, by Nancy Lee Jones.
10 42 U.S.C. §§ 12101 et seq. (2008). At least one court has used the same analysis for “disability under the ACAA as
the ADA case law provided prior to enactment of the Americans with Disabilities Amendments Act. Curtis Edmonds,
When Pigs Fly: Litigation Under the [ACAA], 78 N.D. L. Rev. 687, 698 (2002) (citing McIntyre v. City & County of
(continued...)





is an “individual with a disability” under the ACAA if the individual (1) “has a physical or mental
impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activities,” (2) “has a record of such 1112
an impairment,” or (3) “is regarded as having such an impairment.” Under the regulations,
such individuals are “qualified” individuals with disabilities if they (1) take steps to avail
themselves of services offered by air carriers, (2) make good faith efforts to obtain tickets for air
transportation, or (3) purchase or possess valid tickets for air transportation and meet reasonable 13
contracts of carriage. Prior to enactment of the ADA Amendments Act, courts typically found
that individuals met this “qualified” requirement if they also satisfied the “individual with a 14
disability” requirement.
The ACAA’s statutory language is brief, leaving implementation to the Department of
Transportation (DOT). The department originally promulgated regulations to implement the 15
ACAA on March 6, 1990. Under the regulatory framework, air carriers violate the ACAA’s
nondiscrimination provision if they discriminate against an individual with a disability, “by 16
reason of such disability, in the provision of air transportation.”
Additionally, air carriers may not require passengers to accept special services.17 DOT’s goal for
this provision was to ensure that individuals with disabilities are not treated differently than other 18
passengers. In Deterra v. America West Airlines, a federal district court noted that asking a
person utilizing a wheelchair to advance to the front of a ticket line when he had not requested 19
special service could constitute discriminatory conduct under the regulations.

(...continued)
S.F., No. C-01-1244-CRB, 2001 WL 1679154 at 3 (N.D. Cal. Oct. 9, 2001)). Note, however, that the regulatory
definition ofdisability under the ACAA includes individuals with merely temporary impairments. 14 C.F.R. § 382.5
(2008). (Starting on May 13, 2009, the language of this regulation will be found at 14 C.F.R. § 382.3.) This provision
was not included in the original definition ofdisability under the ADA, but the ADA Amendments Act of 2008
classifiedan impairment that is episodic or in remission” as a disabilityif it would substantially limit a major life
activity when active.” P.L. 110-325, § 4(a).
11 49 U.S.C. § 41705(a) (2008).
12 On May 13, 2008, the regulations were revised. See 73 Fed. Reg. 27614, 27655. These revisions become effective on
May 13, 2009. Many of the revisions retain the original language of the regulations but move the language to a
different subsection.
13 14 C.F.R. § 382.5 (2008). (Starting on May 13, 2009, the language of this regulation will be found at 14 C.F.R. §
382.3.)
14 See Curtis Edmonds, When Pigs Fly: Litigation Under the [ACAA], 78 N.D. L.Rev. 687, 698 (2002).
15 55 Fed. Reg. 8008.
16 14 C.F.R. § 382.7(a)(1) (2008). In the context of refusing service, note that carriers violate the ACAA if they deny
access “solely because the person’s disability results in appearance or involuntary behavior that may offend, annoy, or
inconvenience” others (14 C.F.R. §382.31(b) (2008)) or if they limit the number of individuals with disabilities allowed
on any given flight (14 C.F.R. § 382.31(c) (2008)). (Starting on May 13, 2009, the language of this regulation will be
found at 14 C.F.R. § 382.11(a)(1), 14 C.F.R. § 382.19(b), and 14 C.F.R. § 382.19(c), respectively.)
17 14 C.F.R. § 382.7(a)(2) (2008). (Starting on May 13, 2009, the language of this regulation will be found at 14 C.F.R.
§ 382.11(a)(2).)
18 55 Fed. Reg. 12336, 12337 (April 3, 1990).
19 226 F.Supp. 2d 298, 299 n.6 (D. Mass. 2002).






The regulations provide two major exceptions to the general nondiscrimination requirement. 20
First, carriers may refuse to serve individuals with disabilities “on the basis of safety.” Second,
carriers may refuse to serve individuals with disabilities when doing so would violate federal 21
aviation regulations. If a carrier denies service to an individual with a disability under either of 22
these exceptions, it must specify its reason in writing.

The ACAA impacts nearly all air carriers, or people who “undertak[e], whether directly or 23
indirectly ... to engage in air transportation,” that transport passengers. It is clear from the 2425
ACAA’s legislative history, and from the text of its accompanying regulations, that the ACAA
applies to both government and commercial air carriers. Additionally, in Bower v. FedEx, the
Sixth Circuit held that the ACAA applied to a company that routinely allowed employees to ride 26
as passengers in its cargo planes.
Except for a minor reporting provision,27 ACAA regulations exempt foreign air carriers.28
However, in 2000, Congress passed a law amending the ACAA such that it now applies to foreign 2930
air carriers. On May 13, 2008, the regulations were revised to include foreign air carriers. The 31
new provisions will go into effect on May 13, 2009.

20 14 C.F.R. §382.31(d) (2008) (On May 13, 2009, this regulation will be revised, and language similar to this provision
will be found at 14 C.F.R. § 382.19(c).)
21 Id. (On May 13, 2009, this regulation will be revised, and language similar to this provision will be found at 14
C.F.R. § 382.19(c). This language will allow carriers to refuse service to individuals with disabilities when doing so
would violateFAA or TSA requirements or applicable requirements of a foreign government.”) Also, persons with
communicable diseases who “pose a serious threat to the public” have been listed on the public health Do Not Board
list that is managed by the Center for Disease Control and the U.S. Department of Homeland Security. See Morbidity
and Mortality Weekly Report, Center for Disease Control and Prevention, Federal Air Travel Restrictions for Public
Health Purposes – United States, June 2007-May 2008 (2008), http://www.cdc.gov/MMWR/preview/mmwrhtml/
mm5737a1.htm
22 14 C.F.R. §382.31(e) (2008). (On May 13, 2009, this regulation will be revised, and language similar to this
provision will be found at 14 C.F.R. § 382.19(d).)
23 14 C.F.R. § 382.5 (2008). (On May 13, 2009, this regulation will be revised, and language similar to this provision
will be found at 14 C.F.R. §382.3 This new regulation will define “carriers” to include both U.S. and foreign carriers.)
24 See, e.g., S.Rept. 99-400, at 1-2 (1986) (referring to the ACAAs purpose as extending to air carriers as a whole,
distinct from the small subset of carriers that receive direct federal financial assistance).
25 14 C.F.R. § 382.3(a) (2008) (providing that the regulations apply to “all air carriers providing air transportation,”
with limited exceptions). (On May 13, 2009, this regulation will be revised, and language similar to this provision will
be found at 14 C.F.R. § 382.7.)
26 96 F.3d 200, 204 (6th Cir. 1996) (interpreting the definition of “air carrier” to include carriers who transport property
by aircraft across state lines).
27 14 C.F.R. § 382.70 mandates complaint reporting. It applies to foreign air carriers “with respect to disability-related
complaints associated with any flight segment originating or terminating in the United States.” 14 C.F.R. § 382.70 (b)
(2008). (Starting on May 13, 2009, the language of this regulation will be found at 14 C.F.R. § 382.157(b).)
28 14 C.F.R. § 382.3(c) (2008). (On May 13, 2009, this regulation will be revised, and language similar to this provision
will be found at 14 C.F.R. § 382.7.)
29 Wendell H. Ford Aviation Investment and Reform Act for the 21st Century, P.L. 106-181, § 707(a)(2), 114 Stat. 61
(continued...)







The ACAA contains no statutory reference to communicable diseases. However, the regulatory
text generally treats individuals with communicable diseases as falling within the definition of 32
“individual with a disability.” Similarly, courts generally accept communicable diseases as
falling within the scope of “disability” under the ADA if the diseases meet the same parameters 33
that other physical or mental impairments must satisfy. Although no federal court has reached
the issue, it follows that courts would likely reach similar conclusions under the ACAA.
The regulations prohibit various actions by carriers against individuals with communicable
diseases. Namely, a carrier may not “(1) [r]efuse to provide transportation to the person; (2)
[r]equire the person to provide a medical certificate; or (3) [i]mpose on the person any condition, 34
restriction, or requirement not imposed on other passengers.” However, an exception applies 35
when an individual “poses a direct threat to the health or safety of others.” The regulations
define “direct threat” as “a significant risk to the health or safety of others that cannot be
eliminated by a modification of policies, practices, or procedures, or by the provision of auxiliary 36
aids or services.”
Carriers have discretion in determining whether a given passenger poses a “direct threat.” The
carrier must make an “individualized assessment, based on reasonable judgment ... to ascertain:
the nature, duration, and severity of the risk; that the potential harm to the health and safety of
others will actually occur; and whether reasonable modifications of policies, practices, or 37
procedures will mitigate the risk.” However, note that within the scope of their discretion, 38
carriers must choose the “least restrictive alternative” from the passenger’s point of view. For

(...continued)
(2000).
30 See 73 Fed. Reg. 27614, 27645.
31 Id.
32 See, e.g., 14 C.F.R. § 382.51(c) (2008) (referring to “qualified individual with a disability with a communicable
disease). (Starting on May 13, 2009, the revised regulations about communicable diseases will be found at 14 C.F.R. §
382.21.)
33 See Bragdon v. Abbott, 524 U.S. 624, 631-42 (1998) (analyzing the plaintiffs HIV infection under the same
framework as applies to other physical and mental conditions; holding that the plaintiffs HIV infection constituted a
disability under the ADA because it is a physical impairment affecting a major life activity). For more information
regarding judicial treatment of communicable diseases under the ADA, see CRS Report RS22219, The Americans with
Disabilities Act (ADA) Coverage of Contagious Diseases, by Nancy Lee Jones.
34 14 C.F.R. § 382.51(a) (2008). (On May 13, 2009, this regulation will be revised to also prohibit delaying a
passenger’s transportation based on the passenger’s communicable disease. The language will be found at 14 C.F.R. §
382.21(a).)
35 14 C.F.R. § 382.51(b)(1) (2008). (On May 13, 2009, this regulation will be revised, and similar language will be
found at 14 C.F.R. § 382.21(a).)
36 14 C.F.R. § 382.51(b)(2) (2008). (Starting on May 13, 2009, the language of this regulation will be found at 14
C.F.R. § 382.3.)
37 14 C.F.R. § 382.51(b)(3) (2008). (Starting on May 13, 2009, the language of this regulation will be found at 14
C.F.R. § 382.19(c)(1).)
38 14 C.F.R. § 382.51(b)(4) (2008). (Starting on May 13, 2009, the language of this regulation will be found at 14
C.F.R. § 382.19(c)(2).)





example, a carrier should not “refuse to provide transportation to an individual if provision of a
medical certificate or reasonable modifications to practices, policies, or procedures will mitigate
the risk of communication of the disease to others to an extent that would permit the individual to 39
travel.”


The Department of Transportation regulations require most air carriers40 to take specific actions in
order to fulfill the ACAA’s broad nondiscrimination requirement. Note that these requirements
are minimum standards only.

Aircraft must conform to multiple accessibility requirements under the regulations. First, on
“[a]ircraft with 30 or more passenger seats on which passenger aisle seats have armrests,” at least 41
half of the aisle armrests must be “movable.” Second, each aircraft with 100 or more passenger 42
seats must offer priority space in its cabin for storing at least one folding wheelchair. Third,
aircraft with “more than one aisle in which lavatories are provided” must provide at least one 43
accessible lavatory. Finally, aircraft with more than 60 passenger seats providing one or more 44
accessible lavatories must provide an “operable on-board wheelchair” for passengers’ use.

Generally, air carriers may not require that an individual with a disability travel with an 45
attendant. However, a carrier may require that an individual travel with an attendant if one of
the following applies and the carrier determines that an attendant’s assistance is “essential for
safety”: (1) the passenger will travel in a stretcher or incubator; (2) the passenger is unable to

39 Id. (The revised regulations that go into effect on May 13, 2009, contain different examples that are comparable to
the current regulatory provision.)
40 The requirements in this section do not apply to “indirect air carriers, 14 C.F.R. § 382.3(b) (2008), where an
“indirect” carrier is a “person not directly involved in the operation of an aircraft who sells air transportation services to
the general public other than as an authorized agent of an air carrier.” 14 C.F.R. § 382.5 (2008). (Starting on May 13,
2009, the language of these provisions will be found at 14 C.F.R. § 382.7(f) and 14 C.F.R. § 382.3, respectively.)
41 14 C.F.R. § 382.21(a)(1) (2008). (Starting on May 13, 2009, regulatory provisions regarding moveable aisle armrests
will be found at 14 C.F.R. § 382.61.)
42 14 C.F.R. § 382.21(a)(2) (2008). (Starting on May 13, 2009, regulatory provisions regarding wheelchair storage will
be found at 14 C.F.R. § 382.67.)
43 14 C.F.R. § 382.21(a)(3) (2008). (Starting on May 13, 2009, regulatory provisions regarding accessible lavatories
will be found at 14 C.F.R. § 382.63.)
44 14 C.F.R. § 382.21(a)(4) (2008). (Starting on May 13, 2009, regulatory provisions regarding on-board wheelchairs
will be found at 14 C.F.R. § 382.65.)
45 14 C.F.R. § 382.35 (2008). (Starting on May 13, 2009, the regulation will be revised, and comparable language will
be found at 14 C.F.R. § 382.29.)





comprehend or respond appropriately to safety instructions; (3) the passenger has a “mobility
impairment so severe that the person is unable to assist in his or her own evacuation of the
aircraft”; or (4) the passenger has severe hearing and vision impairments and “cannot establish 46
some means of communication with carrier personnel.”
Air carriers must allow individuals with disabilities to travel with service animals.47 In addition,
carriers must “permit a service animal to accompany a qualified individual with a disability in
any seat in which the person sits, unless the animal obstructs ... [an] area that must remain 48
unobstructed.” Also, carriers must accept service animal identification cards, tags, and even
“credible verbal assurances” from qualified individuals as proof that a given animal is a “service 49
animal.”
Similarly, airlines must allow qualified individuals with disabilities to bring ventilator or 50
respirator equipment into the airplane cabin and use those devices during flights. Additionally,
airlines must permit qualified individuals “to stow canes and other assistive devices ... in close 51
proximity to their seats” and to stow wheelchairs “in overhead compartments and under seats, 52
consistent with the requirements of FAA safety regulations for carry-on items.”


The regulations require all carriers to assist individuals with disabilities with boarding and
deplaning if either the individual has requested such service or the carrier has offered such service 53
and the individual agreed to receive it. Also, carriers may not require individuals with
disabilities to sit in particular seats or refuse to seat them in exit or other rows on the basis of

46 Id.
47 14 C.F.R. § 382.55(a) (2008). (Starting on May 13, 2009, this regulatory provision will be found at 14 C.F.R. §
382.117(a).) Proposed ADA regulations define service animal asany dog or other common domestic animal
individually trained to do work or perform tasks for the benefit of a qualified individual with a disability.... ” Proposed
28 C.F.R. §§ 35.104, 36.104. DOJ has specifically recognized “that there are situations not governed exclusively by the
[ADA] title II and title III regulations, particularly in the context of residential settings and employment, where there
may be compelling reasons to permit the use of animals whose presence provides emotional support to a person with a
disability.” 73 FED. REG. 34473, 34516 (June 17, 2008). For a more detailed discussion of the proposed ADA
regulations regarding service animals, see CRS Report RS22930, The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Proposed
Regulations, by Nancy Lee Jones.
48 14 C.F.R. § 382.55(a)(2) (2008). (Starting on May 13, 2009, this regulatory provision will be found at 14 C.F.R. §
382.117(b).)
49 14 C.F.R. § 382.55(a)(1) (2008). (Starting on May 13, 2009, this regulatory provision will be found at 14 C.F.R. §
382.117(d).)
50 14 C.F.R. § 382.41(b) (2008). (On May 13, 2009, this regulation will be revised, and comparable language will be
found at 14 C.F.R. § 382.133.)
51 14 C.F.R. § 382.41(c) (2008). (On May 13, 2009, this regulation will be revised, and comparable language will be
found at 14 C.F.R. § 382.121.)
52 14 C.F.R. § 382.41(e)(1) (2008). (On May 13, 2009, this regulation will be revised, and comparable language will be
found at 14 C.F.R. § 382.121.)
53 14 C.F.R. § 382.39(a) (2008). (Starting on May 13 2009, this regulatory provision will be found at 14 C.F.R. §
382.95(a).)





disability.54 However, a narrow exception applies when refusing to accommodate a passenger in a 55
particular seat is necessary in order for the carrier to comply with federal aviation regulations.
Carriers generally may not require individuals with disabilities to provide advance notice of their 56
disability as a condition for flying. However, various exceptions apply. Specifically, a carrier
may require up to 48 hours of advance notice of a passenger’s disability if that passenger plans to
carry or utilize certain equipment on the flight or seeks certain accommodations enumerated in 57
the regulations.

The regulations require that individuals with disabilities be required to undergo no more security 58
screening procedures than individuals without disabilities. Likewise, security personnel must
conduct screening of individuals with disabilities in the same manner in which they conduct 59
screening of individuals without disabilities. However, they may examine an assistive device 60
that might, “in their judgment,” conceal a weapon or other prohibited item.

In the most recent cases, two federal circuits have held that private individuals have no ability to 61
sue airlines for discrimination under the ACAA. Instead, those courts have suggested that the
ACAA merely gives individuals the ability to complain to the Department of Transportation and
then to file petitions for review with federal circuit courts if DOT fails to investigate individual 62
complaints. These holdings limit individuals’ ability to enforce the ACAA through the federal

54 14 C.F.R. § 382.37 (2008). (On May 13, 2009, this regulation will be revised, and comparable language will be
found at 14 C.F.R. § 382.87(a).)
55 Id.
56 14 C.F.R. § 382.33(a) (2008). (On May 13, 2009, this regulation will be revised, and comparable language will be
found at 14 C.F.R. § 382.25 and 14 C.F.R. § 382.27(a).)
57 Specific equipment includes medical oxygen, incubators, electrical respirator hook-ups, stretchers, electric
wheelchairs (if the aircraft has fewer than 60 seats) and hazardous materials packaging for a battery to be used in an
assistive device. 14 C.F.R. § 382.33(b) (2008). Specific accommodations include seating for 10 or more individuals
with disabilities who travel as a group or provision of an on-board wheelchair in an aircraft that lacks an accessible
lavatory. Id. (Starting on May 13, 2009, this regulatory provision will be found at 14 C.F.R. § 382.27(c).)
58 14 C.F.R. § 382.49 (2008). (On May 13, 2009, this regulation will be revised, and comparable language will be
found at 14 C.F.R. § 382.55(b)(1).)
59 Id.
60 Id. (On May 13, 2009, this regulation will be revised, and comparable language will be found at 14 C.F.R. §
382.55(b)(2)(i).)
61 See Love v. Delta Airlines, 310 F.3d 1347, 1359 (11th Cir. 2002) (holding thatCongress did not intend to create a
private right of action in a federal district court to vindicate the ACAAs prohibition against disability-based th
discrimination on the part of air carriers) and Boswell v. Skywest Airlines, Inc., 361 F.3d 1263, 1265 (10 Cir. 2004)
(stating the court’s conclusion thatACAA establishes certain administrative remedies but not a private right of th
action”). Although prior cases, see, e.g., Tallarico v. Trans World Airlines, Inc., 881 F.2d 566 (8 Cir. 1989), had held
that the ACAA creates a private right of action, cases since the Supreme Court decision in Alexander v. Sandoval, 532
U.S. 275 (2001), have reached the opposite conclusion.
62 See, e.g., Love, 310 F.3d at 1356.





courts. Instead, individuals often must rely on DOT to enforce complaints against air carriers.
Furthermore, some experts have argued that DOT’s enforcement ability is relatively weak, in part
because it handles enforcement through its enforcement office rather than through its office of 63
civil rights. DOT has indicated that it has investigated numerous ACAA complaints, sometimes 64
seeking millions of dollars in civil penalties as a result of ACAA violations.

The Civil Rights Act of 2008, S. 2554 and H.R. 5129, was introduced in the 110th Congress and
proposed, in part, to amend the ACAA to provide for a private right of action. As noted
previously, judicial decisions under the act have held that individuals have no ability to sue the
airlines individually but must rely on the DOT to enforce complaints. The bills indicated that
Congress disagreed with the judicial interpretations and noted that “[t]he absence of a private
right of action leaves enforcement of the ACAA solely in the hands of the Department of
Transportation, which is overburdened and lacks the resources to investigate, prosecute violators
for, and remediate all of the violations of the rights of travelers who are individuals with 65th
disabilities.” Although both S. 2554 and H.R. 5129 were referred to committee, the 110
Congress did not enact this legislation.

Legislation similar to that introduced in the 110th Congress may possibly be introduced in the thth
111 Congress. Additionally, the 111 Congress will continue oversight on the ADA, including
the proposed regulations on service animals. The final ADA regulatory language may differ from
that in the ACAA final regulations and may be the subject of oversight activities.


Carol J. Toland
Legislative Attorney
ctoland@crs.loc.gov, 7-4659

This report originally was prepared by Anna C. Henning, Law Clerk.



63 See, e.g., National Council on Disability, Enforcing the Civil Rights of Air Travelers with Disabilities:
Recommendations for the Department of Transportation and Congress (1999), http://www.ncd.gov/newsroom/
publications/1999/acaa.htm.
64 See, e.g., News Release, U.S. Department of Transportation, DOT Enforcement Office Charges Northwest Airlines
With Discrimination Against Passengers With Disabilities (2001), http://www.dot.gov/affairs/dot9001.htm.
65 S. 2554, § 401, 110th Cong.; H.R. 5129, § 401, 110th Cong.