The Transportation Security Administration's (TSA's) new Action Plan Programme (APP), which recently went into effect, details an alternative framework for addressing security compliance issues. Rather than relying on traditional, penalty-focused civil enforcement action, the APP focuses on achieving a universally desired outcome – namely, increased aviation security. While the APP could prove beneficial to both the TSA and industry, it raises some areas of concern for airlines and other regulated parties.
The US Treasury Department's Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) recently issued its Iran-Related Civil Aviation Industry Advisory. The advisory seeks to inform the civil aviation industry of potential exposure to US enforcement actions and economic sanctions for engaging in or supporting unauthorised exports to Iran or designated Iranian airlines. While no new restrictions have been announced, the advisory's publication could signal that the OFAC is taking a greater interest in the Iranian aviation sector.
The Department of Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) and the Department of Commerce's Bureau of Industry and Security recently announced rules designed to further restrict travel to Cuba, including eliminating a sub-category of authorised travel to Cuba entitled 'people-to-people educational travel'. These changes significantly restrict non-commercial aviation traffic to Cuba going forward for all persons subject to the OFAC's jurisdiction.
A software issue is suggested to have played a role in the two horrific crashes involving the new Boeing 737 MAX. With this in mind, what potential theories of civil liability could Boeing be subject to by passengers and airlines that have suffered significant losses as a result of what appears to be a design flaw in this software? Further, what theories allow for criminal liability?
The Department of Transportation (DOT) recently denied three petitions to initiate rulemakings on various consumer protection issues proposed by FlyersRights, a consumer advocacy group. The DOT's decision to refuse to propose new regulations is consistent with the Trump administration's efforts to reduce regulatory burdens on industry. Nonetheless, the DOT appeared to be sympathetic to consumer protection concerns raised by FlyersRights.
A recent decision from the Central District of California in Philadelphia Indemnity Insurance Company v Hollycal Production, Inc is somewhat groundbreaking in its significance, primarily because it is the first to address in a precedential context the long-held assumption that drones are, in fact, aircraft.
The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) is modernising its enforcement tools with the use of camera-equipped drones. OSHA requires each of the agency's 10 regions to designate a staff member as an unmanned aircraft programme manager to oversee training requirements and evaluate reports submitted by drone teams. It further requires that drone crews follow Federal Aviation Administration requirements.
In an interesting decision that may have significant repercussions for air carriers, a San Francisco federal judge recently dismissed a putative class action brought against Air France based on a limitations provision set out in Air France's General Conditions of Carriage and the pre-emption provisions of the Airline Deregulation Act.
The US Department of Transportation recently announced the reconstitution of the Aviation Consumer Protection Advisory Committee (ACPAC), including a new subcommittee: the National In-Flight Sexual Misconduct Task Force. The first ACPAC meeting will be held in January 2019 to discuss best practices and protocols for air carriers relating to sexual assault handling, reporting and data collection on board commercial aircraft.
The new Federal Aviation Administration Reauthorisation Act, signed into law by President Trump, will affect aviation-related consumer protection. The Department of Transportation must revise its existing regulations to clarify the laws regarding compensation, establish minimum dimensions for passenger seats that are necessary for passenger safety, prioritise boarding for pregnant women and refine airlines' practice involving pushchairs, among other issues.
The new Federal Aviation Administration Reauthorisation Act, signed into law by President Trump, will affect airlines' obligations to accommodate passengers with disabilities. The Department of Transportation must, among other things, develop an airline passengers with disabilities bill of rights to explain the protections afforded to passengers with disabilities during air travel and conduct a review of service animal requirements.
President Trump recently signed into law the Federal Aviation Administration Reauthorisation Act, which will have wide-ranging implications on the aviation industry. The new law will introduce changes to airline ancillary fee refunds, the forbidding airlines from imposing ridiculous fees provision and passenger facility charges.
The US House of Representatives recently passed the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Reauthorisation Act 2018, which provides funding for the FAA for the next five years. The bill contains three sections which bear watching: mobile phone use; passive finance party immunity from passenger state law tort claims; and airline seat size.
The House of Representatives Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure reported out to the floor of the House of Representatives for the consideration of the 21st Century Aviation Innovation, Reform and Reauthorisation Act. The act privatises US air traffic control, prevents the entry of 'flag of convenience carriers' into the United States and overturns the legal interpretations by the Departments of State, Justice and Transportation of the Air Transport Agreement.
In a recent case the US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit vacated a rule requiring individuals who fly small drones and other model aircraft for hobby or recreational purposes to register with the Federal Aviation Administration. The case serves as a reminder that, despite rapid advancements in drone technology, the regulators – and society – are still in the early stages of figuring out how to integrate these versatile devices into US airspace.
The Supreme Court recently denied a petition for writ of certiorari, leaving open the question of whether the Federal Aviation Act pre-empts state law standards governing design defects by aircraft and engine manufacturers. When the issue was presented on interlocutory appeal to the Court of Appeal for the Third Circuit, the court held that design defects were not the subject of field pre-emption. Further monitoring is necessary to determine whether other courts will find this approach persuasive.
The beginning of 2016 brought the arrival of 'Implementation Day' under the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action and its potential for business opportunities in Iran that had been shut off for decades. Subsequent months have shown that, even with the relaxation of US sanctions, the road to doing business with Iran is still complex and riddled with possible compliance faults.
The US Treasury Department Office of Foreign Assets Control recently introduced General Licence I to make it easier for US persons to enter into contingent contracts, negotiations and transactions relating to the sale of aircraft or related parts to Iran. However, the US-Iran trade relationship is tenuous and there are still many opportunities for US businesses to fall foul of US sanctions and export laws unwittingly.
Shortly after launching its flight-sharing services website, Flytenow requested a legal interpretation from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) regarding its business model's compliance with the Federal Aviation Act 1958. The FAA stated that under Flytenow's model, its pilots were operating as common carriers and needed to obtain Part 119 certification. The US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit recently declined to overrule the FAA's interpretation.
Under the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, the United States has agreed to lift certain sanctions targeting Iran, including sanctions on the sale and export of commercial passenger aircraft, parts, components and associated services to Iran. While this marks a potential step towards an opening of Iran's market, strict licence requirements are in place for those looking to take advantage of the new opportunities.