[NAGDU] Public Comment on Service Animal ANPRM, The Seeing Eye

[Ginger Kutsch]

Public Comment on Service Animal ANPRM, The Seeing Eye

URL: https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=DOT-OST-2018-0068-2342

To: The U.S. Department of Transportation 

From: The Seeing Eye, Inc. 

Re: DOT-OST-2018-0068, RIN No. 2105-AE63 

Traveling by Air with Service Animals 

The Seeing Eye has been providing specially bred and trained guide dogs for
people who are blind or have low vision since 1929. Since that time, The
Seeing

Eye has worked tirelessly to advocate for the rights of guide dog users to
have equal access to all modes of transportation including air travel. At
present,

there are over 1,700 active Seeing Eye graduates in North America and many
of those people are regular air travelers. As Senior Advocacy Specialist and

a guide dog handler myself, I am submitting the below comments on behalf of
The Seeing Eye. I commend DOT's efforts to amend and clarify its ACAA
regulations

to ensure safe and equal access to air travel for people who work with
service animals. The Seeing Eye's position on the questions posed in the
ANPRM is

as follows: 

Question 1: Whether psychiatric service animals should be treated similarly
to other service animals; 

Question 2: Whether there should be a distinction between emotional support
animals and other service animals; 

Comments to questions 1 and 2: Service animals should be defined as those
that are 1) individually trained to do work or perform tasks for a person
with

a disability and 2) public access trained. Animals that do not meet both of
these criteria should be designated as a separate and distinct category from

service animals. 

Question 3: whether emotional support animals should be required to travel
in pet carriers for the duration of the flight; 

Comment: Animals should be permitted to travel in the cabin without being
crated as long as they meet the criteria in the definition of service animal

proposed in comments 1 and 2. 

Question 4: Whether the species of service animals and emotional support
animals that airlines are required to transport should be limited; 

Comment: With respect to the species of service animals, the amended DOT
regulations should be consistent with the Department of Justice regulations
implementing

the Americans 

with Disabilities Act. The result would be that the species of service
animals would be limited to dogs and in some narrow circumstances, miniature
horses.

 

Question 5: whether the number of service animals/emotional support animals
should be limited per passenger; 

Comment: The Seeing Eye is concerned that as the number of service animals
traveling with a handler increases, the likelihood that the handler will be

able to effectively control the animals decreases. 

Question 6: Whether an attestation should be required from all service
animal and emotional support animal users that their animal has been trained
to

behave in a public setting; 

Comment: No. An attestation would have no value because passengers could
provide assurances that the animal is trained to behave appropriately in
public

regardless of the animal's actual behavior and there would be no way to
determine the veracity of these statements. Existing guidelines allow
airlines

to refuse to transport service animals that are engaging in disruptive or
threatening behavior such as excessive barking, biting, growling, jumping,
eliminating

in the terminal or aircraft, etc. Furthermore, if the definition of service
animal is limited to those that are trained to perform work or tasks and
public

access trained, and all other animals were required to be in pet carriers,
airlines would be far less likely to have problems with unruly or aggressive

animals. 

Question 7: Whether service animals and emotional support animals should be
harnessed, leashed, or otherwise tethered; 

Comment: Service animals should be leashed or otherwise under the handler's
control at all times. There are times during air travel when it may be
appropriate

for a passenger using a guide dog to remove its harness for the comfort and
safety of the dog. However, the guide dog handler still has control over the

dog in these limited circumstances because the leash is the means of
control. 

Question 8: Whether there are safety concerns with transporting large
service animals and if so, how to address them; 

Comment: If DOT adopts the definition of service animal proposed in comments
1 and 2, these safety concerns would be greatly decreased. On page 34, The

ANPRM states in part that 

"Airlines have . expressed safety concerns about large service animals in
the cabin, particularly large emotional support animals that have not
received

 

disability-mitigation training. . While the Department previously concluded
that a service animal's reasonable use of a portion of an adjacent seat's
foot

space does not deny another passenger effective use of the space for his or
her feet and is not an adequate reason for the carrier to refuse to permit

the animal to accompany its user at his or her seat, some airlines have
indicated that passengers feel pressured to agree to such an arrangement and
have

later expressed to airline personnel their dissatisfaction at having to
share their foot space." 

If DOT requires air carriers to transport only dogs that are trained to
mitigate a disability and behave appropriately in public, it will be easier
for

air carriers to simultaneously accommodate passengers using service animals
and assuage the potential concerns of passengers who are being asked to help

make that accommodation possible. 

Question 9: whether airlines should be prohibited from requiring a
veterinary health form or immunization record from service animal users
without an individualized

assessment that the animal would pose a direct threat to the health or
safety of others or would cause a significant disruption in the aircraft
cabin;

 

Comment: Yes. Airlines should be prohibited from requiring a veterinary
health form or immunization record from service animal users in advance of
travel.

This requirement would place burdens and restrictions on service animal
users that are not placed on other passengers. For example, the requirement
could

prevent service animal users from traveling on short notice or checking in
on line or at curb side. Moreover, once an air carrier has made an
individualized

assessment that a service animal would pose a direct threat or cause a
significant disruption in an aircraft cabin, veterinary records do nothing
to mitigate

the threat the animal potentially poses and DOT regulations do not obligate
air carriers to transport the animal under those circumstances. 

In closing, The Seeing Eye expresses its appreciation to DOT for the
opportunity to participate in the advanced rule making process on an issue
that is

of paramount importance to our organization as a whole and our graduates as
individuals. If The Seeing Eye can provide any further assistance or
information

on issues raised in this ANPRM given our areas of expertise, please feel
free to contact us. 

Melissa R. Allman, Esq. 

Senior Specialist, Advocacy and Government Relations 

The Seeing Eye, Inc. 

P.O. Box 375, Morristown, NJ 07963-0375 (mail) 

10 Washington Valley Road, Morristown, NJ 07960-3412 (deliveries) 

973-539-4425 ext. 1724, Fax: 973-525-1081 advocacy at SeeingEye.org